Thomas A said (May 23, 2019):

The quotation before the article starts reminds me of the kings of old. All the game belonged to the king and no one could hunt without the king’s permission. Thus, his noblemen and favorites could hunt, but the serfs and everyone else could not. Hence, today a license is required to hunt. We have not advanced very far have with.

JG said (May 23, 2019):

Washington has to shut off all these erroneous anarchy rooted organizations that operate under the guise of fictitious names like these. They shouldn't be allowed within 100 square miles of the halls of Congress or the Office of the Presidency. They have no constitutional right to plot the future or change laws that take away the power and sovereignty of the American public.
The American Constitution was never designed to become a special interest democracy to override the will of the majority of its citizens.
This is all part of the war on the constitutional nation states. It's subversion from and by alien entities that are hostile to the desires and will of the ruling and residing majority.
Another trivial bill was passed by Congress last Friday which the MSM silently and intentionally gave no attention to. It basically protects all different forms of self contrived sexual identity under the umbrella of existing civil rights laws. This was and is not the will of the American people. This is the will of the .001 per cent of the population if that. No one really cares what these "ITS" do or think behind closed doors. And, this is why they want to make it an " in your face" law. They hope it will give honour and dignity to the undignified. It won't pass the Senate but to even consider it is beyond the realm of all conventional and non-conventional wisdom. It's insanity on steroids at best.

Until we have some "profiles in courage" by our elected officials in Washington America's identity will be lost under their watch.

Gerry said (May 23, 2019):

Guess what popped up in the local newspaper, The Province, but a story headlined, ‘It’s been a pleasure’ Jamie Oliver’s bankrupt restaurant empire marinated in red ink.

LOL, not even celebrities can catch a break and why any celebrity would want to open a restaurant is beyond me. Jamie however, won’t be suffering with apparently a 400 - million fortune?

And as much as I understand his bankruptcy I’m still trying to get over the news in same paper of rents for a 2 bedroom apartment going for 3000 dollars a month here in Vancouver? Tell me really who can afford such and imagine this isn’t commercial? This whole sticking shite is going to collapse and sooner than anyone realizes!

David C said (May 22, 2019):

I moved to Portland (OR) to attend the Western Culinary Institute, because I always loved cooking, and thought it would be a good career for me.

After I got a job working in a resteraunt for awhile, however, that changed my mind. Cooking for other people, using set recipes, took all the fun out of it, plus it's hard work. Executive chefs at expensive restaurants make good money, but they also work their butts off, and those jobs are very difficult to get.

I rarely eat out anymore, but prefer an open kitchen when I do. It's fun watching the food get prepared, and you can appreciate how hard they work. We have many "pod" food businesses now, clusters of food pods, which offer a variety of options, which seems to be a phenomena in most large cities.

Unfortunately the food usually isn't very good, but usually not bad either. I like restaurants that offer recipes I don't usually cook myself, and we have plenty of variety here in Portland, possibly the highest proportion of restaurants per capita. Then too we have some food businesses that are thriving, for reasons I can't fathom. "Voodoo Donuts" (supposedly owned by pedophiles) often has huge lines outside, like it's a social scene to wait in line for designer donuts here now - wtf?

I enjoy cooking for my dog now, who eats the same food as me, except he gets some meat I wouldn't eat, and raw bones. Cooking for your dog or cat is actually less expensive, and much healthier for them, plus it saves on vet bills. I've developed a repetroir of doggie dishes, approved by Renji-sama, my faithful service dog, spirit guide, guardian angel, and doggie jitsu master. I'm considering making a website specializing in cooking for dogs and cats, because the food in pet stores is getting VERY expensive, and it's mostly low-quality food. Our beloved fur babies deserve to eat the same quality food as their service humans eat. Food is the most important medicine! "Let food be thy medicine, and medicine be thy food" ~ Hippocrates (father of holistic medicine).

Paul said (May 22, 2019):

The main reason I don't go to restaurants is that as a minimum-wage earner, I'm not going to tip a server (and there goes my refills). So I go to the counters such as Subway, Tim Horton's, McDonalds, etc. I hate it though because I'm supporting big companies that get massive tax breaks but I can trust the portions and the hours and most of those that work in chain restaurants get benefits that match other corporate places. I honestly don't know how independent restaurants do it but the following are reasons that people do get into the restaurant business:

1) In owning one's own business there are tax breaks people can take advantage of.

2) One can be creative on many different levels.

3) The compliments one can receive for good service and presentation can be rewarding.

4) If they cater to the niche they themselves are a part of, the owners now are surrounded by a group of friends.

5) On the off-chance something clicks, millions might be made.

That said, restaurants are hellholes and only the insane last but are often lifelong addicts of one kind or another.

When I was young I worked in restaurants because they reinforced my view that life was totally out of control. Now I avoid working in them or giving them my money.

Chad said (May 22, 2019):

I would definitely eat out more, if more restaurants had organic and non-GMO selections. That’s unfortunately, unfeasible for most establishments, given the cost of these foods.

John said (April 6, 2018):

Been eating at particular restaurant for more than 17 years plus in South Bay and surrounded by four hotels they have always been busy for breakfast and lunch meals. Have seen plenty of waitresses come and go. They even have another restaurant just north several miles with same the menu. The problem with Diner's is they have the same thing repeatedly as pointed out in this article. I particularly target restaurant for one or two items on the menu and that is it and do the same for the rest of eateries that are visited. In the end you have to eat somewhere beside at home. Occasionally, food poisoning issues occur. It is thankless job at times but someone has to do.

Robert K said (April 5, 2018):

Overall only one in ten businesses survive ten years. They are fighting an economic environment designed by puritanical economists according to the principle that economics is the study of “the use of scarce resources”. And the primary resource in short supply is non-debt money—a situation that drives people into the thrall of banker-created debt.

Imagine the waste involved in the effort to build viable businesses in an inherently adverse financial environment. Sisyphus would understand!

M said (April 5, 2018):

This is why Chinese restaurants employ their entire family and keep slaves (either other Asians or illegal Mexicans) in the kitchens and pay off health inspectors. They grew up in a communist county and know how the corrupt 'system' works.

It's the same in the USA and "Immigration" or whatever they call them now usually turn a blind eye due to kickbacks. It's almost impossible for an independent restauranteur to "play by the rules" and survive. If you don't bribe the health inspector and every other government leech, you won't last long.

Duane said (April 5, 2018):

The only thing MORE dumb than opening a restaurant is FREQUENTING them....

Carleton said (May 22, 2019):

Have been reading your essays (and just finished “Illuminati: The Cult That Hijacked The World") for a while now, but found your recent “Feminism Tricked Women Into Giving Up Their Power” to be one of the most bone-chilling and truthful summations of the current state of affairs regarding marriage and the family that I’ve yet read. Truly depressing, but exactly the fact of the matter now.

As a Christian who has a certain degree of wisdom and understanding of this issue, I lay the blame for this ruinous state of marital affairs squarely on the Church, which is to say the Body of Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. What?! How can I say such a thing? Easily. When the Church just stood back and allowed treasonous governmental heathen to lawlessly enact “laws” that stripped the headship of the man as being the head of the family, —meaning so-called “statutes” governing marriage; divorce; the status of who has authority over the children; and naturally who owns what under the legal fiction called “community property” within marriage— it was guaranteed then that marriage would be completely destroyed, which is exactly what has been accomplished. As such, it should be no surprise that evil filth like a Helen Gurley Brown, Betty Friedan, etc., would then subsequently materialize to push that destruction right along.

It can easily be viewed now that the respective efforts of Hugh Hefner and Helen Gurley Brown merely constituted two sides of the same wicked coin.

Thank you for your excellent work. I only hope that yours and the work of others like you will prove to be enough.

JJ said (May 22, 2019):

Many truths escape the notice of stupid feminists including the obvious one right at the beginning of this whole charade. Feminists cried foul because a bunch of men were outside of their homes having loads of fun committing adultery - so now it was their turn. Do not feminists understand that for every man committing adultery there was also a woman, often a secretary? And that those women were pathetic, depressed, nonfunctioning women not to be envied and that the men were also to be pitied? What feminism basically did was double the amount of female adulterers so now it was 2/1 women to men.

Over and over again I have entered into a conversation with a woman who is divorced assuming that the man was the sex-hungry pig who broke down the fence and ran away only to discover that it was the woman who wanted sexual freedom - not the man. And over and over again I've spoken with men who wanted a home but the woman insisted on making her own money and her own decisions and ruining the unity of the marriage.

Feminists always complain that men are not committed to loving them unconditionally but why is a man supposed to simply just love and not ask for anything in return including cooperation and submission? Is a man supposed to follow a woman all over the countryside while she fulfills her career dreams and parties with the gals every weekend?

What also escapes the notice of stupid feminists is that many a righteous woman has put her foot down and said to a man that he chose either the bar scene or her scene and he chose her!

Pedro said (May 22, 2019):

Jew or not Jew? I don't know but in 5 minutes following her paternal line I got through the Norris's to the Norreys and Le Norey's, who "are thought to have come to England shortly after the Norman invasions". In the Miles Mathis school, that means Jewish.

I'd bet what little I have of a farm that she was of 'noble' birth and fulfilling her role as whore (Shiksa) maker same as Margaret Mead was making out that the virgin inclined girls of the Samoas were all whoring it out on the beach with the boys, which they were not, and Meade herself was.*

Ita Buttrose , Cleo founder and currently head of the ABC, was the Australian equivalent. I gather that was not her real name. ahh, I see her mother was Rosenthal. Father line had changed their name from Butter. Not a bad landing for one of the 0.4% of the population

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyOD-qNaiL0

(mind you the commenter there has Mead as a he, but that is understandable - Gilad Atzmon's definition of a Jewish Mother - just like a Jewish father, but with balls). If not Jewish then working on their long term project and more often than not marrying them as professional collaborators.

Karen said (May 21, 2019):

The tale is as old as time. Did you forget?

https://www.usnews.com/news/religion/articles/2008/01/25/bathsheba-is-one-of-the-most-beguiling-characters-in-the-bible

LT said (February 11, 2018):

I really enjoyed the article on Helen Gurley-Brown. I grew up on Cosmopolitan magazine. Subscribed to Ms. Magazine at age 14, and quite frankly did not like men!

What a travesty! She was a bad woman. Teaching us all to be sluts. Thank God I did not go the slut route, but I was really, really angry at men! Ruined a lot of my relationships upon reflection.
I cannot believe I survived the 70's and 80s.

I feel very duped to be honest. I fell for the Communist b.s. I was only 13 when I started to dislike men.

I remember being in my dear grandmother's kitchen in England. I was a girl at the tender age of 11. She taught me a lot about cooking. She said to me, "so now you know how to make your future husband a good cooked dinner". My reply: "he can make his own damn dinner!"

It makes me sad Henry. So sad.

TWH said (February 9, 2018):

I used to see this when I worked for a major Canadian bank. Women would use their feminine features to get ahead in the company. If you didn't have something said women needed, they essentially ignored you (except to perhaps gossip about you).

This is something that I see in greater society a lot now. Women around my area of the country look for two things first and foremost. They try to latch onto men who either have good looks or the appearance of wealth or influence (usually an expensive car). All else is far down the list. Because of this, I haven't trusted women for a long time and I generally don't engage them (while still keeping a watchful eye on their manipulative antics). When they're not deploying their sexuality in an attempt to use you, they're gossiping about you and trying to destroy your career or some other aspect of your life.

I'm a man and, as such, can stand alone quite well without some modern-day Jezebel trying to toss a wrench into the works. Who needs the aggravation for the sake of an orgasm? I'm not some overgrown adolescent like the majority of men seem to be, who thinks he needs a woman. Let's be clear. Sex is not one of our vital needs in life, despite what the mass media pushes onto us.

I'll even go so far as to say I think far fewer women should be in the workforce. Most of them just turn office environments into a soap opera set while emasculated men play right along and even adopt some of the reprehensible behavior.

Diane said (February 9, 2018):

I love the Helen Gurley Brown article. Nothing is sadder than going to my old workplace and seeing all the girls who came to work so fresh and pretty in their 20s, now in their late 30s or early 40s, past their prime and having lost their luster of youth. Not married. No kids. So sad. That was me but I was lucky enough to still get married and have kids. My mission is to try to warn young women about the perils of Feminism--it only benefits men.

I hope you are doing well. Thanks for being a source of light in a troubling world.

Robert said (August 15, 2012):

Brown effectively became a prostitute because "I tried to do whatever you needed to do to survive,"
and she seems to want to convey this message to other women.

The scandal is that people are still in a position of having to "sell themselves" in diverse ways in order to "survive" in the midst of the greatest potential for producing material wealth ever known. We are now in a position where most of the repetitive work, and even much of the creativity, can be consigned to robots.

The result is not that freedom and leisure fill our lives, but instead that poverty and insecurity increase to keep us submissive to the dictates of an elite class.

If ever there was proof that a diabolical power has its grip on the throat of humanity, it is provided by the fact that people are denied participation by right in the abundance naturally accruing from technology (a common heritage) applied to natural resources (a common property). The choke point is the monopolistic financial system.

If we took seriously Jesus's commandment to love one another, rather than heeding those who would have us hate each other, then we would have hope of reconfiguring this corrupting system, to throw off the chains of illusion and "release reality".