What kinda phone you got?

I assume no one's really that surprised by this.  I mean, it's been in the works since the previous administration when the republicans thought it was a good idea.  It's to keep up safe, remember.  Duh.  Terrorists!

Actual Photo of Osama.  I'm pretty sure.

Still, it was driven home to me this week how ready the Feds and, more terrifyingly, the locals are to implement martial law.  Ready, hell.  More like eager.  I was in a class called MGT 312.  Our scenario, as befits a hospital, was preparing for a case of pandemic flu.  During the first part of the project, before the flu was even in the United States, we had people jumping over themselves to say, "We have to close all roads into our county, and we need to call Washington for the national guard."

Never mind that we'd actually call Gov. Perry for the guard.  Details.  Not important.

Shutting down access to the only veteran's hospital within hundreds of miles, because there was a flu in Mexico was the first answer. Not preparing to serve the potential influx of sick, not working with the locals to figure out what resources they need and whether we had or could get them, but jumping down a hole, pulling it in after us, and shooting anyone who tried to get in.

When I asked what our legal justification was for closing the roads, the answer FROM THE GUYS FROM FEMA was "we've already got that."

"WE'VE ALREADY GOT THAT."

That's it folks.  We're fucking done.  It's going to be an interesting few years coming up.

Shuffling toward disaster

What possible incentive would there be for young men to get married anymore?  Not only will the courts take half of your shit, no matter what, now you can be punished for deciding the harridan you married wasn't mom material after all.  That is apparently worth multimple thousands of dollars in your stolen money, gents...

That’s the hope of a 38-year-old woman who is a client of Ronald G. Lieberman, a family law attorney in Haddonfield, N.J. Mr. Lieberman is asking his client’s soon-to-be-former husband of eight years to pay $20,000 to cover her egg-freezing procedure, medication costs and several years of egg storage. “When they got married, the expectation was they would start a family,” he told me. “Now she might not have the chance much longer.”

Seem's fair, right?  I mean, surely she can't be held responsible for any part of the marriage's failure.  It's obviously his fault.  I mean, Patriarchy, amiright?

How do you think this will help with the "man up and marry that slut" virus sweeping the nation?  Will the endorsers of the "Purity Bear" accept this for what it is (the end game for feminist-churchianity and marrying bad women)?  My guess is "no."

Because, what good is freedom, if you don't have freedom from consequence?

Here, though, is the (ahem) money shot*:

In the New Jersey couple’s case, they decided to divorce after undergoing several failed attempts at in vitro fertilization. Mr. Lieberman’s argument is that since fertility treatments were part of the marriage, they should be considered part of the marital lifestyle, which should be maintained as much as possible post-divorce. The only difference is, in the future, she’ll use another man’s sperm. (emphasis mine)

So, he's going to pay for her to have another man's child? That seems fair, right?

So, kids, here's the lesson: DON'T GET MARRIED. 







*HA - Triple meaning pun!  I win the internet!