HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » cyclonefence » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »

cyclonefence

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Dec 5, 2016, 05:05 PM
Number of posts: 1,031

Journal Archives

Who would be a Republican having to vote on this health-care bill?

What a bind they're in, the craven slimeballs. On the one hand, campaign promises, Trump, major donors who want a tax break. On the other, the majority of their constituents, who don't want this bill passed. On the first hand, don't renege on campaign promises, or you won't be re-elected; on the second, voting against your constituents' wishes won't get you re-elected, either, plus Trump is so unpopular that his support is unlikely to be helpful to you. So the question is, which is more important? Getting major bucks from wealthy donors who want an end to ACA, or serving the people you were elected to serve--and who have the power to refuse to re-elect you, no matter how much money you have.

I pray to glob that this bill goes nowhere. I am enjoying contemplating the pain these creeps must be experiencing right now, and if the bill passes, my joy will come to naught.

Do you get to keep campaign contributions if you don't get elected? If so, that must offer them some comfort.

Abuser of girls "gifted" by their ex-Amish parents sentenced to prison

Lee Kaplan spent at least eight years sexually assaulting six underage sisters, starting with the oldest and taking each of them in succession as his “wives.”

For that, a Bucks County judge ruled Wednesday, Kaplan will spend 30 to 87 years in prison. <snip>

Beyond working in machinery and construction, Kaplan had studied aerospace engineering at Pennsylvania State University. He’d been a math and science tutor. And he’d spent “most of his life” working with children and college-aged people, including as a youth minister.
<snip>

Kaplan was convicted in June on 17 counts of child sexual assault for abusing the six oldest daughters of Daniel and Savilla Stoltzfus, a formerly Amish couple from Quarryville, Lancaster County. The incidents began in 2008, according to trial testimony, and continued until June 2016, when a neighbor’s tip to the state child-abuse hotline led child-welfare workers and police to knock on Kaplan’s door. <snip>

Kaplan had taken all six girls as his “wives,” teaching them that it was a wife’s duty to have sexual relations with her husband. He had two children by the oldest daughter, now 19, who first gave birth at 14. <snip>

The Stoltzfuses, who have 14 children in total and allowed all 10 of their daughters except one to move in with Kaplan, were both sentenced to up to seven years in prison in July for child endangerment. Daniel Stoltzfus, 44, pleaded no contest. His wife, Savilla, 43, pleaded guilty and testified at Kaplan’s trial after also persuading her children, who had at first denied that Kaplan had sex with them, to tell authorities about their life in Kaplan’s home. The couple met Kaplan in 2002, and he aided them over the years as they left their Amish community, faced financial troubles, and lost their home. <snip>

When officials showed up at Kaplan’s home in June 2016, the windows were covered or nailed shut, the rooms sparsely furnished — Kaplan had the only bed — and the house filled with food and supplies. Kaplan and the Stoltzfus girls grew crops, raised catfish and bees, ran Kaplan’s model-train business — and never needed to leave the home. And Kaplan regularly brought the girls into his bedroom, in turns, and told them not to tell anyone.

The girls did not have any toiletries in the home and did not know how to wash their hair. They had been extensively educated by Kaplan, their mother, and with books and the internet; they all know how to play musical instruments.

Although they testified about the abuse, the girls also said at the trial they loved Kaplan and had been happy in his home.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/crime/lee-kaplan-abuser-of-sisters-to-be-sentenced-wed-afternoon-20170920.html

Keeping creatures out of a raised bed garden

I have a big (16 x 4) raised-bed (I mean *really* raised--it's about 3 feet tall) garden in my back yard, and every year by this time it has been overrun with weeds and unharvested green beans, and the reason is that the fence made it too hard for me to get into the dirt. We have a lot of wildlife--deer and groundhogs, especially--and we felt we needed a fence to protect our plants.

The fence we had was made of posts hung with sections of metal open-net wire fencing; it was in sections for easier removal and replacement.

This year I told my dear husband that I just couldn't work with a fence any more, and I wanted to see what would happen if we left the fence off. We grow a lot of tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, green beans, herbs of various kinds, and flowers.

After the plants were established, I noticed that one pepper plant had been nibbled on. Otherwise, I was delighted with the no-fence garden. I was able to stay on top of it, and it was beautiful.

I went online for non-fence tips to keep animals out of the garden and found one that suggested shredding highly aromatic soap, like Irish Spring, onto the ground around your plants. The strong odor, it said, would repel animals. Problem was, you'd have to keep re-applying it, and I generally water my garden daily.

At Lowes I saw a shelf of really ugly citronella (mosquito-repelling) plants. They're actually scented geraniums, I think, but they are strongly scented. I bought six of them and planted them up and down the center of my garden, and guess what? I've had *no* animal depredations since!

I also have had very little--almost no--insect ravaging, either, and this bothers me a little because I notice there aren't any butterflies visiting the garden. But there are plenty of butterflies elsewhere in my yard, so I guess it's OK.

We are totally organic, using only our own home-made compost on the bed.

Anyhow, I thought I'd share this in the hope it might help someone else.

Question submitted by cyclonefence

The text of this question will be publicly available after it has been reviewed and answered by a DU Administrator. Please be aware that sometimes messages are not answered immediately. Thank you for your patience. --The DU Administrators

I don't know where else to post this gardening tip

I have a big (16 x 4) raised-bed (I mean *really* raised--it's about 3 feet tall) garden in my back yard, and every year by this time it has been overrun with weeds and unharvested green beans, and the reason is that the fence made it too hard for me to get into the dirt. We have a lot of wildlife--deer and groundhogs, especially--and we felt we needed a fence to protect our plants.

The fence we had was made of posts hung with sections of metal open-net wire fencing; it was in sections for easier removal and replacement.

This year I told my dear husband that I just couldn't work with a fence any more, and I wanted to see what would happen if we left the fence off. We grow a lot of tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, green beans, herbs of various kinds, and flowers.

After the plants were established, I noticed that one pepper plant had been nibbled on. Otherwise, I was delighted with the no-fence garden. I was able to stay on top of it, and it was beautiful.

I went online for non-fence tips to keep animals out of the garden and found one that suggested shredding highly aromatic soap, like Irish Spring, onto the ground around your plants. The strong odor, it said, would repel animals. Problem was, you'd have to keep re-applying it, and I generally water my garden daily.

At Lowes I saw a shelf of really ugly citronella (mosquito-repelling) plants. They're actually scented geraniums, I think, but they are strongly scented. I bought six of them and planted them up and down the center of my garden, and guess what? I've had *no* animal depredations since!

I also have had very little--almost no--insect ravaging, either, and this bothers me a little because I notice there aren't any butterflies visiting the garden. But there are plenty of butterflies elsewhere in my yard, so I guess it's OK.

Anyhow, I thought I'd share this in the hope it might help someone else.

I don't want to buy an online subscription to WaPo and NYT

but I want to be able to read the articles posters mention here. Posters are generally good about posting the gist of the story when they refer to an article from one of these papers, not just posting the link, but I often am left wanting to know more. I am assuming most people here, like me, do not have online subscriptions.

I wonder if we could all chip in somehow and buy DU a subscription to WaPo and NYT? We could share the passwords and thus be able to participate better in discussions that arise from stuff printed in these papers.

Maybe it could be a benefit of the star membership, or maybe a "star-plus" membership?

About those cotton bolls

I was engaged in arguing with a bunch of people yesterday over Hobby Lobby's cotton bolls. I was under the impression--from material posted here--that the bolls in question were in a display window (I've never seen a Hobby Lobby store, so I don't know what kind of windows they have; I know other craft stores don't have small display windows, but as I say from what I read here, the bolls were in a display window), and right up to the end, *nobody* pointed out to me "Hey dummy--it's not about a display window. It's about what they sell in the store."

Now I have an excuse--I was engaged in a solitary drinking game during Trump's UN speech (I don't know how to find the number of the post, but it's titled "A Drinking Game (yes, at 9:30 in the morning)) and I think could be excused for misunderstanding in the first place.

The people who responded to me, though--especially those who were intemperate--never corrected my misconception, although I typed repeatedly about "fucking sticks in the fucking window" and made many other references to the cotton being on public display visible outside the store. I wrote a "for example" about someone displaying primitive art in a living room window, visible from the sidewalk and being unwilling to move it farther inside after a neighbor's complaint. So I think it was pretty clear what I believed the situation to be.

Here's my problem--and it's one I've had before, though not as dramatically evident as in this case: either the responders to my posts did not read the actual words I wrote, or they were under the same misapprehension as I was and believed Hobby Lobby should not remove a display that offended at least one person in a window visible from outside the store.

I am guilty of responding without reading carefully. I think it's easy to do, especially if you've already made up your mind on the topic, and even more especially if you believe the title of the post is the actual nub of the poster's point. (Nub of a point? Interesting)

This is lazy and sloppy, and it truly does a disservice to the group. It is impossible to have exchange of ideas without really understanding what the person you're talking to is saying. I'm going to try hard not to do this in the future. I'm going to force myself to read a post twice before I respond to it.

The other reaction, apparently believing as I did that it was a matter of a display window, is actually pretty amusing to me. I was told more than once that mine was not a popular reaction, that there was "no movement" to redress this wrong--by people who *may* have thought redressing the wrong involved removing the fucking sticks from the fucking window.

He's getting red in the face

and oh my glob he called him "Rocket Man." Sweet Jeebus. We're all dead. It's been real, folks.

A drinking game (yes, at 9:30 in the morning) for Donald Trump's address to the UN

I've got my special glass and a new bottle of Redbreast (which is only one of the many wonderful things I've learned about here on DU), and I'm going to take a drink every time DT goes off-script, which as we know will be easy to detect because he'll throw in some asinine repetition or a meaningless modifier.

If I'm drunk by the end of his speech, so much the better.

Where the hell does he get off thinking he has any authority, moral or otherwise, to tell the rest of the world how to behave?

This is going to be real good.

Edited to add:

And if he starts giving a campaign speech.

Bottoms up!

Edited again to add:

If he says "a lot of people don't know this"

Edited again to add:

"Beautiful" when not used to describe a woman or a landscape
(I have some catching up to do on this one)

Edited again to add:

This is just globawful. Now I have a reason to drink regardless of what he says--he just got in a "believe me."

Anybody watching "Get Shorty" on Epix?

This is a really great show, based loosely on Elmore Leonard's novel, starring Chris O'Dowd (drool) and a magnificent supporting cast, including of all people Ray Romano--even the little kid is wonderful. It's not getting much attention that I can see, and I'm worried that there won't be a season 2. It's really, really worth a look.

It's a dark comedy about horrible criminals who you want to win--sort of like Breaking Bad, but funny as hell. The plot is intriguing, with nice twists, and it's very well-written.

You can watch all 7 episodes (so far) On Demand.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »