I'm pretty sure that one company made a nasty NYC smell perfume.
You know, that one company?
Looks like civilization finally caught up with us.
Mal ,'Bushwhacked'
Natter 65: Speed Limit Enforced by Aircraft
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, pandas, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Jesse - Apr 27, 2010 6:27:02 pm PDT #25710 of 30001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Kat - Apr 27, 2010 6:31:19 pm PDT #25711 of 30001
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
Jesse, did they ever figure out what the maple smell was in NYC?
Sue - Apr 27, 2010 6:33:27 pm PDT #25712 of 30001
hip deep in pie
It was coming from New Jersey, wasn't it?
Hil R. - Apr 27, 2010 6:34:24 pm PDT #25713 of 30001
Sometimes I think I might just move up to Vermont, open a bookstore or a vegan restaurant. Adam Schlesinger, z''l
Yeah, a factory processing tamarind, or something like that.
Kat - Apr 27, 2010 6:35:24 pm PDT #25714 of 30001
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
or was it fenugreek, which actually does smell mapley.
Hil R. - Apr 27, 2010 6:35:59 pm PDT #25715 of 30001
Sometimes I think I might just move up to Vermont, open a bookstore or a vegan restaurant. Adam Schlesinger, z''l
Fenugreek sounds right.
Strix - Apr 27, 2010 6:38:08 pm PDT #25716 of 30001
A dress should be tight enough to show you're a woman but loose enough to flee from zombies. — Ginger
Jesse - Apr 27, 2010 6:47:20 pm PDT #25717 of 30001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
billytea - Apr 27, 2010 6:50:47 pm PDT #25718 of 30001
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.
Billytea, yes - and to do that you have to have enforced/enforceable laws/policies.
Quite so, and part of my point. Though my use of the term 'manage' rather than, say, 'control' or 'enforce' was deliberate.
However, no one in this conversation, nor in the wider political discourse, is proposing the abolition of immigration (explicitly or de facto), so that's a minor point at best. The more important point is that immigration law should be based on the same principles as the rest of the legal system. More important questions include, is the current law just? Is it discriminatory? Does it deny due process? Does it violate human rights? Does it violate international treaties? Is it proportional to the offence? (More controversially, I remain interested too in its degree of compassion, its social implications and its economic implications.
The AZ law, IMO, is bad law on these considerations. But my point is that the significant elements in both our countries that demonise illegal immigrants make such rational discourse and analysis of the situation difficult at best. We wind up with law and law enforcement that violates the principles on which our countries were founded and are detrimental to our countries' interests.
The alienating (so to speak) rhetoric is IMO the element that most threatens effective management of immigration policy. And while I can't speak for the US on this point, it's been immensely damaging to Australian values. Immigration itself has not. Australia is a far more open and confident member of the international community thanks to our immigrants. The current environment threatens exactly that.
Strix - Apr 27, 2010 6:54:16 pm PDT #25719 of 30001
A dress should be tight enough to show you're a woman but loose enough to flee from zombies. — Ginger
Billytea, you most logically stated several points that I completely agree with, as do I agree with (More controversially, I remain interested too in whether it's compassionate, its social implications and its economic implications.