Americans hate the Federal Government more than ever

[B-Man]

 

 

300 Hours Training Required to Shampoo Hair In Tennessee.

 

The Beacon Center of Tennessee is trying to change this. The libertarian-leaning think tank is suing the

state cosmetology board over its onerous occupational-licensing requirements for people who want to wash hair

. At present, obtaining a government permission to shampoo hair requires taking two exams, at a cost of $140, plus a $50 annual fee. On top of that, someone must take

300 hours of training

“on the theory and practice of shampooing,” at a cost of upwards of

$3,000

for the tuition.

 

“Tennessee is one of only five states that require a license to wash hair, and this is just one of the many senseless licensing laws that the Volunteer State currently has on the books,” Beacon Center states on its website.

 

But—surprise!—nowhere in the state even offers “shampoo tech” classes at present. So even someone prepared to put in the time and money to become a pro hair-washer right now can’t.

Their only options would be a) to go through the more rigorous and expensive process (1,500 hours and tens of thousands of dollars in tuition) of obtaining a cosmetology license, or b) to wash hair illegally.

 

 

 

Insane.

[B-Man]

Quote

David Burge‏ @iowahawkblog Dec 15

Thanks, government! 1886 federal law still keeping Dubuque free of Viking invaders

 

 

There will be No Viking Longboats Cruising the Mississippi, Thanks to Hard-Headed U S Protectionism

http://reason.com/blog/2017/12/15/there-will-be-no-viking-longboats-cruisi

Edited December 16, 2017 by B-Man

[Nanker]

Oddly enough, Viking runs cruise ships on the Yangtze River in China. The boat and crew are all Chinese. Viking simply leases a Chinese-made vessel and the crew operating the ship are all Chinese nationals. 

[Koko78]

2 hours ago, Nanker said:

Oddly enough, Viking runs cruise ships on the Yangtze River in China. The boat and crew are all Chinese. Viking simply leases a Chinese-made vessel and the crew operating the ship are all Chinese nationals. 

 

All that, and only 13 villages and monasteries pillaged this past summer!

 

Chinese Vikings must not be that greedy.

Edited December 17, 2017 by Koko78

[3rdnlng]

24 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

All that, and only 13 villages and monasteries pillaged this past summer!

 

Chinese Vikings must not be that greedy.

They're at a disadvantage history-wise.. They have taken all those Viking horn helmets and ground the horn up to make themselves better in bed. Since they are so good in bed they don't need to steal so much to bring presents back to their woman in order to get laid.

[B-Man]

HMM: Judge declares mistrial in Bundy Ranch standoff case. 

 

“A federal judge has declared a mistrial in the case against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, saying U.S. prosecutors willfully withheld critical and ‘potentially exculpatory’ evidence from the defense.”

 

That’s serious misconduct. 

 

 

.

[Nanker]

But the Obama DOJ was Lilly white in their motives.

[Tiberius]

12 hours ago, B-Man said:

HMM: Judge declares mistrial in Bundy Ranch standoff case. 

 

“A federal judge has declared a mistrial in the case against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, saying U.S. prosecutors willfully withheld critical and ‘potentially exculpatory’ evidence from the defense.”

 

That’s serious misconduct. 

 

 

.

Ummmm.....what? They didn't seize federal lands? Ok! 

 

If they were black you guys would be screaming like maniacs 

[Albwan]

On 1/27/2016 at 2:47 AM, Deranged Rhino said:

I just ran across this article tonight. The contents aren't surprising considering how the past 16 years have unfolded. We're being spied on, lied to, and taken advantage of on a daily basis by a government that's supposed to work for us.

 

 

 

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/americans-hate-the-u-s-government-more-than-ever/

 

Reading this reminded me of some of Carlin's best work:

 

 

 

This is why those 3 letter agencies with billions of dollars of unaccountable black op funding

are at war with the american people, to gain complete control. 

See 'community stalking/gangstalking'. This is one of many test programs run by these agencies to tighten

their control over regular Americans. It's real people,  its in beta now, but soon this kind of thing 

will be unleashed on all Americans, once they take all the guns away.

 

Wake up people, before it's too late.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Albwan

[3rdnlng]

This may not be the federal government but it's still !@#$ed up:

 

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/elgin-greg-schiller-slumber-parties-homeless-cold-467714563.html

 

A suburban Chicago resident who was offering up “slumber parties” in his basement for homeless people in his neighborhood during dangerously cold weather says city officials have given him an ultimatum.

Stop the “slumber parties” or the house will be condemned.

Greg Schiller, of Elgin, said he began letting a group of homeless people sleep in his unfinished basement last month during brutally cold nights, offering them food, warm beverages and a cot to sleep on while watching movies.

“I would stay up all night with them and give them coffee and stuff and feed them,” he said, adding that no drugs or alcohol were allowed inside his residence during the evening events.

[DC Tom]

3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

This may not be the federal government but it's still !@#$ed up:

 

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/elgin-greg-schiller-slumber-parties-homeless-cold-467714563.html

 

A suburban Chicago resident who was offering up “slumber parties” in his basement for homeless people in his neighborhood during dangerously cold weather says city officials have given him an ultimatum.

Stop the “slumber parties” or the house will be condemned.

Greg Schiller, of Elgin, said he began letting a group of homeless people sleep in his unfinished basement last month during brutally cold nights, offering them food, warm beverages and a cot to sleep on while watching movies.

“I would stay up all night with them and give them coffee and stuff and feed them,” he said, adding that no drugs or alcohol were allowed inside his residence during the evening events.

 

Well...if you think about it, this guy is, in providing shelter to the homeless himself, inhibiting the city's ability to provide services to the homeless.  So really, he's stealing from the government, and should go to jail.

[3rdnlng]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Well...if you think about it, this guy is, in providing shelter to the homeless himself, inhibiting the city's ability to provide services to the homeless.  So really, he's stealing from the government, and should go to jail.

This is one of the instances that code violations are (wink, wink) confusing and the slumber parties are allowed to continue.

[Azalin]

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Well...if you think about it, this guy is, in providing shelter to the homeless himself, inhibiting the city's ability to provide services to the homeless.  So really, he's stealing from the government, and should go to jail.

 

It's frightening that you can explain that as eloquently as you do, tongue in cheek or no.

 

[B-Man]

Time to resurrect this thread.

 

 

Feds spending $350K to see if lesbians are using the right contraception

 

Wait… what?

 

 

The NIH is spending nearly $350K on a study to follow the habits of a number of women (in various categories) to find out what methods of contraception are “sexually acceptable” to them. That’s not really the startling part. Apparently, there are reports of significant numbers of women who are switching or even discontinuing the use of birth control because they find it to be unsatisfying in some fashion. If that’s the case you’d clearly want to correct that I suppose. Having birth control pills you don’t take seems to be on par with keeping an unloaded gun in your house.

 

But the details of the study aren’t that cut and dried. Reading into the fine print, the coordinator of the project wants to make sure that she’s reaching all women… including lesbians. 

 

The leading researcher on the project is Jenny Higgins, an associate professor in the Gender and Women’s Studies Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Higgins specializes in “mixed-methods research on sexuality, gender, and reproductive health—especially people’s use of condoms and other contraceptive methods.”

Higgins is also currently involved with research into sexual minority women, or “people who identify as lesbian, bisexual and queer (among many other things).” She claims 20 percent of the female population in the United States are lesbians or bisexual.

“The overwhelming majority of SMW [sexual minority women] will engage penile-vaginal intercourse at least occasionally,” according to the researcher’s website. “New research suggests that SMW women have an increased risk of unintended pregnancy compared to their heterosexual peers.”

The study is examining “unique barriers” lesbians and bisexuals have to “adequate contraceptive care.”

You know, I’ve always wondered what went on in those “Gender and Women’s Studies Departments” at universities. This may be a glimpse into it. But with all due respect to Professor Higgins, the taxpayers funding this project might have a couple of questions.

 

First of all, you’re saying that twenty percent of the women in America are gay? Granted, that might make me feel a bit better by explaining my success rate in asking girls out when I was younger, but somehow that just doesn’t sound right. If one in five women are gay, our birthrate should really be a lot lower, shouldn’t it?

 

But let’s just say they are. Remind me again why you would study the contraception use of lesbians? Oh, wait… that’s right. You said that “The overwhelming majority of sexual minority women will engage penile-vaginal intercourse at least occasionally.” If they’re bisexual, sure. I’m with you so far. But the lesbians? I’m far from an expert in this field, but I was rather under the impression that actual lesbians weren’t the biggest fans of “penile-vaginal intercourse.” I mean, isn’t that sort of what makes them lesbians? And if they actually are doing that, are they really lesbians?

 

The 21st century is turning out to be far more confusing than I’d ever imagined. We have politicians telling us that young girls in school should get used to the idea of showering with women who have penises. Social critics are saying if men don’t date such women we must be transphobic. Other “women with penises” are fighting women without penises in MMA matches and nearly killing them. And now lesbians are having sex with men and using the wrong contraception.

 

More at the link:

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

8 hours ago, B-Man said:

Time to resurrect this thread.

 

 

Feds spending $350K to see if lesbians are using the right contraception

 

Wait… what?

 

 

The NIH is spending nearly $350K on a study to follow the habits of a number of women (in various categories) to find out what methods of contraception are “sexually acceptable” to them. That’s not really the startling part. Apparently, there are reports of significant numbers of women who are switching or even discontinuing the use of birth control because they find it to be unsatisfying in some fashion. If that’s the case you’d clearly want to correct that I suppose. Having birth control pills you don’t take seems to be on par with keeping an unloaded gun in your house.

 

But the details of the study aren’t that cut and dried. Reading into the fine print, the coordinator of the project wants to make sure that she’s reaching all women… including lesbians. 

 

The leading researcher on the project is Jenny Higgins, an associate professor in the Gender and Women’s Studies Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Higgins specializes in “mixed-methods research on sexuality, gender, and reproductive health—especially people’s use of condoms and other contraceptive methods.”

Higgins is also currently involved with research into sexual minority women, or “people who identify as lesbian, bisexual and queer (among many other things).” She claims 20 percent of the female population in the United States are lesbians or bisexual.

“The overwhelming majority of SMW [sexual minority women] will engage penile-vaginal intercourse at least occasionally,” according to the researcher’s website. “New research suggests that SMW women have an increased risk of unintended pregnancy compared to their heterosexual peers.”

The study is examining “unique barriers” lesbians and bisexuals have to “adequate contraceptive care.”

You know, I’ve always wondered what went on in those “Gender and Women’s Studies Departments” at universities. This may be a glimpse into it. But with all due respect to Professor Higgins, the taxpayers funding this project might have a couple of questions.

 

First of all, you’re saying that twenty percent of the women in America are gay? Granted, that might make me feel a bit better by explaining my success rate in asking girls out when I was younger, but somehow that just doesn’t sound right. If one in five women are gay, our birthrate should really be a lot lower, shouldn’t it?

 

But let’s just say they are. Remind me again why you would study the contraception use of lesbians? Oh, wait… that’s right. You said that “The overwhelming majority of sexual minority women will engage penile-vaginal intercourse at least occasionally.” If they’re bisexual, sure. I’m with you so far. But the lesbians? I’m far from an expert in this field, but I was rather under the impression that actual lesbians weren’t the biggest fans of “penile-vaginal intercourse.” I mean, isn’t that sort of what makes them lesbians? And if they actually are doing that, are they really lesbians?

 

The 21st century is turning out to be far more confusing than I’d ever imagined. We have politicians telling us that young girls in school should get used to the idea of showering with women who have penises. Social critics are saying if men don’t date such women we must be transphobic. Other “women with penises” are fighting women without penises in MMA matches and nearly killing them. And now lesbians are having sex with men and using the wrong contraception.

 

More at the link:

 

Lol what? 

[Happy]

Time to slash the NIH budget.  There, of course, will be a huge collective liberal pant load, but any rational person will see that this is yet another example of how big, bloated government wastes money.

[DC Tom]

18 hours ago, B-Man said:

“New research suggests that SMW women have an increased risk of unintended pregnancy compared to their heterosexual peers.”

 

  

 

[/dev/null]

20 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Feds spending $350K to see if lesbians are using the right contraception

 

 

[DrW]

22 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

Feds spending $350K to see if lesbians are using the right contraception

 

 

OK, I was skeptical, and I went back to original sources, the CV of the lady (available on her web site) and the NIH Reporter, which gives you access to information about all NIH grants, such as the abstract of the grant and "project terms", i.e. keywords for search engines. The result: the title of the write-up in "Hot Air" linked by B-man and its message is a gross misrepresentation of the project actually funded by the NIH. The source of the "Hot Air" piece in the Washington Free Beacon actually gets it about right, only the "Hot Air" writer manages to turn it into, well, hot air.

 

As many researchers, the PI (Principal Investigator) has actually several projects she is working on. The NIH grant (with $350,000 so far)  is for a project entitled "SEXUAL ACCEPTABILITY'S ROLE IN WOMEN'S CONTRACEPTIVE PREFERENCE AND BEHAVIOR". The relevance of the project, according to the abstract: "Many effective contraceptives are available today, but half of women discontinue use within a year due to dissatisfaction with available methods. Women have requested oral contraception to be used immediately in advance of infrequent intercourse. This proposed “On Demand” Contraceptive Center is focused on the development of effective, safe, acceptable contraceptives for women which block ovulation to prevent pregnancy." While we can argue if this research is appropriate for funding by the NIH, nowhere in the abstract and in the more than 200 keywords you will find the term "lesbian".

 

Beyond that, she is Co-PI on a collaborative project on "Understanding Family Planning Disparities among Sexual Minority Women: A Critical First Step for Improving Contraceptive Care", which indeed addresses contraceptive use by lesbians. However, this research is not funded by the NIH, but by a $75,000 grant from the "Society of Family Planning", a private agency.   

 

Conclusion: At least in regard of the case discussed here, the claim the NIH would spend "$350K to see if lesbians are using the right contraception", is wrong.

Edited June 7, 2018 by DrW

[DC Tom]

3 hours ago, DrW said:

 

OK, I was skeptical, and I went back to original sources, the CV of the lady (available on her web site) and the NIH Reporter, which gives you access to information about all NIH grants, such as the abstract of the grant and "project terms", i.e. keywords for search engines. The result: the title of the write-up in "Hot Air" linked by B-man and its message is a gross misrepresentation of the project actually funded by the NIH. The source of the "Hot Air" piece in the Washington Free Beacon actually gets it about right, only the "Hot Air" writer manages to turn it into, well, hot air.

 

As many researchers, the PI (Principal Investigator) has actually several projects she is working on. The NIH grant (with $350,000 so far)  is for a project entitled "SEXUAL ACCEPTABILITY'S ROLE IN WOMEN'S CONTRACEPTIVE PREFERENCE AND BEHAVIOR". The relevance of the project, according to the abstract: "Many effective contraceptives are available today, but half of women discontinue use within a year due to dissatisfaction with available methods. Women have requested oral contraception to be used immediately in advance of infrequent intercourse. This proposed “On Demand” Contraceptive Center is focused on the development of effective, safe, acceptable contraceptives for women which block ovulation to prevent pregnancy." While we can argue if this research is appropriate for funding by the NIH, nowhere in the abstract and in the more than 200 keywords you will find the term "lesbian".

 

Beyond that, she is Co-PI on a collaborative project on "Understanding Family Planning Disparities among Sexual Minority Women: A Critical First Step for Improving Contraceptive Care", which indeed addresses contraceptive use by lesbians. However, this research is not funded by the NIH, but by a $75,000 grant from the "Society of Family Planning", a private agency.   

 

Conclusion: At least in regard of the case discussed here, the claim the NIH would spend "$350K to see if lesbians are using the right contraception", is wrong.

 

You won't find the word "lesbian" because the researcher uses the term "sexual minority women."

 

Yes, I read the grant proposal too.  The story was exaggerated, but "lesbian contraception" is a not insignificant part of the research.