Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

We need a general tweet of the day thread

1935936937938939941»

Comments

  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 36,767 Standard Supporter
  • WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,205 Standard Supporter

    Boy, they just cut the State Department to the bone. How will we be able to do what ever the fuck the State Department is supposed to do. Don't expect the Tug leftards to read this as it contains numbers and shit.

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/07/state-dept-layoffs.php

    State Dept. layoffs

    From The Hill newspaper,

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio began mass firings at the State Department on Monday, part of a reorganization plan to form a leaner foreign policy force that, he argues, will allow the United States to respond more nimbly by removing layers of bureaucracy.

    The department sent reduction in force (RIF) notices Friday morning to about 1,100 civil servants and 250 foreign service officers stationed in the U.S., with plans to cut its workforce further.

    The Hill continues,

    The move prompted heavy pushback from Democrats and former diplomats who contended that by downsizing its diplomatic footprint the administration is putting national security at risk.

    To paraphrase Oscar Wilde describing the death scene of Little Nell in Dickens’ The Old Curiosity Shop, it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.

    Byron York points out on Twitter (X) that the Dept.’s bureaucratic bloat has become extra heavy in recent years,

    Looking at State Department documents, it appears the department went from 57,340 total employees in 2007 to 72,895 in 2015 to 80,214 in 2024. So it grew by nearly 23,000 employees before the ‘devastating’ cut of 1,300.

  • WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,205 Standard Supporter

    Morally indefensible. It's like common sense has been stripped from the leftards' minds during some software update. Geezus.

    https://instapundit.com/

    image.png

    But don’t try to build a treehouse on your own property in L.A., as Adam Carolla mentioned in a podcast interview a few months ago. (Full disclosure, this is a YouTube transcript of the interview that was cleaned up and reformatted by ChatGPT and lightly edited by me):

    Carolla: The city’s in the process of tearing down a beautiful treehouse that was in the front of a home—the Simpsons guy—in Sherman Oaks. And they’re tearing that down. Meanwhile, you go two blocks over and people are building homes—homeless people—out of plywood and yield signs and Visqueen [plastic sheeting], under the freeway, on the sidewalk, so moms pushing strollers have to walk in the street.

    The city has no interest in these guys building illegal homes on the sidewalk, but they have a grand interest in people building treehouses for the neighborhood kids on their [own] property.

    Interviewer 1: Did you see this story?

    Interviewer 2: No, the treehouse story?

    Interviewer 1: It is insane. This guy—like 30, 40 years ago—was one of the guys from The Simpsons. He made this beautiful treehouse in a tree, and it’s been there, I think, since the 1980s? ’70s?

    Carolla: No, I think it’s about 20 years.

    Interviewer 1: So it’s been there, but the city now says he needs to comply with zoning regulations for the treehouse. He has to pull permits, he needs to do ground structural testing of the treehouse. He’s spent $50,000 defending this in court, and it’s about to go to a jury.

    And he says, “You know what? I give up. I don’t want to spend another $50,000 defending myself in a jury trial just to have a chance at keeping the treehouse.”

    Interviewer 2: That’s incredible.

    Interviewer 1: It’s a treehouse. There it is, right there.

    Interviewer 2: Yeah, I see it. That’s beautiful.

    It’s known as a landmark in the area. In fact, we could drive by it.

    I would love to see it.

    Yeah, we could film some. My friend has a house in a really nice part of Los Angeles. Right next to his house is a two-story tent. He’s lived in that house now for a couple of years. Every single time I drive to his house, you have this massive, like, tent mansion—which, don’t hate me—but it looks really nice.

    And the person there is very aggressive. Every time I drive by—well, not every time, but quite a few times—they’ll come out of their tent and start yelling things. I’ve seen them yelling at pedestrians on the sidewalk—obscenities. It’s not a good situation. But this person—no one stops them from living there.

    And it’s, like I said, a full-on massive house.

    Carolla: Well, so what we just did is sort of illustrate—with the treehouse, which the city is very vigorous about and says needs to come down—versus the shanty house, which they have no interest in, because that guy’s an empty bag. He has no money to give them.

    Now, my feeling is: you have to pick a lane as a city. Here’s optimal, and then unacceptable.

    Optimal is: places where you take down the shanty town that’s built under the freeway overpass or built on the freeway or in the LA River. Optimal is that the city would enforce that and take down those dangerous structures where people deal drugs and insane people live.

    All right, take those down. And their policy toward a guy who built a treehouse on his own property would be: the guy’s paying taxes, people seem to like it, and it looks good from here. He’s an American. Leave him alone. It’s his property. Okay? That’s optimal.

    Middle ground is: look, we’re going to let that guy in his Visqueen plywood house build on a sidewalk. But if you want to build a treehouse, I guess that’s your business. At least we’re consistent. He’ll build something, you’ll build something—we won’t get involved.

    L.A. is the worst, which is: not going to do anything about the plywood house on the sidewalk; full weight of the law on the homeowner and taxpayer.

    That’s why people leave. And they don’t get it. And they somehow think it’s progress or something. But the blue-est cities are the toughest on taxpayers and the easiest on criminals.

    Interviewer 1: So, if you were governor, what would you change?

    Carolla: The first thing would be the regulatory system. You can’t make it impossible to build or start a business or whatever because of the regulations. It’s so overregulated that people just physically leave. That would be number one.

    In the meantime, gooder and harder, California.

  • RoadTripRoadTrip Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,110 Founders Club
  • WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,205 Standard Supporter

    Looks like the dem messaging still needs a little massaging. Definitely no Happy Ending. Apparently, Mayor Bass used up all the frequent flyer miles to Africa so Newscum was left with South Carolina.

    image.png
Sign In or Register to comment.