Day By Day

Comments

  • formwiz

    Often becomes a civil war.

  • Pamela

    It will not be amicable and the custody battle will be epic.

  • Fox2!

    Isn’t Jan’s surname littered with “y” and “de la …” .”..?

  • Stephanie Osborn

    Fox2!, it may well be that Jan’s surname is structured such. But in Spanish, “y” means “and,” whereas “de la” means “of the,” and was used to denote origination. This is the equivalent, in historical British English, of e.g., “Baron Wake OF Liddel, Earl OF Kent AND Duke OF Surrey.”

    It does not have anything to do with hyphenations, which often have to do with combining surnames upon marriage. (E.g. see “House of Windsor” for that sort of thing.) That said, occasionally those attached titles descend through both sides (though that’s historically unlikely, since generally they only descended through the males), but in general even when that happened, it was the eldest male descendant that got the benefit of both titles, rather than either member of the married couple.

    • JackDeth 72

      So, it’s kind of like “Sir Loin Of Beef”. “Duke Of Paducah”, The “Earl Of Worchestershire” and “Duke Ellington?”

      *Apologies to Bugs Bunny*

      • MasterDiver

        Don’t forget “Quarter of Ten”!

        Zar Belk!

        • eon

          Hey, what about “Earl of Hines”, “Cab of Calloway”, and “Satchmo of Armstrong”?

          😉

          cheers

          eon

          • JackDeth 72

            *What big horny toads they have around here.”

            *Bugs Bunny*

        • Delilah T.

          Duke of Earl??

        • Doggo

          …and Earl of Cloves

      • Bob in Houston-Vast Right Wing Basket of deplorable!

        The Ayatolla of Rock and Rolla?

        • JackDeth 72

          *’Mario Van Peebles: Heartbreak Ridge’*

    • Hey, Stephanie. I should have realized you’d be here, too. Actually, you might even have been the person who introduced me to DBD…

      It’s good to see you around.

  • Yeah, depends on the why of the hyphenation.

  • Halley

    The Left actually divorcing from the Right? Improbable, but only for one reason: despite their talk, the mental cases of the Left know they’re dependent on the Right’s know-how, wealth-creation, and most of all, defense capability. Their core motivation is, instead, to steal these goodies then punish and destroy (with gulags and/or mass murder as options) their creators. A death cult that eventually kills everyone. Scratch their surface far enough and you might even get 1 out of 10,000 to admit it to themselves.

    • Bill G

      The Takers do not acknowledge any debt to the Makers; instead they claim we in in their debt for their attempts to show us how to get on the correct side of history.
      The ones at the top who are not complete loony-tunes know the score, but they expect to stay on top and don’t care. Many, I suspect, actually want to see the peasants in grinding poverty, to better show of their own exalted condition.

    • GWB

      It’s an abusive relationship.

    • eon

      Exactly. You are dealing with people who are convinced of their own “fitness to rule”. More ominously, they believe they have a right to rule, independent of a God most of them don’t even believe in. (Those who do believe in a deity are more likely to worship Allah, Satan, or themselves.)

      When confronted with “slaves” who wish to be free of them, or at least want to have a voice in the way things are run, expect them to react with savagery that will make Tienanmen Square look like a block party.

      And before you say, “they don’t have the ability”, consider the combination of;

      1. Federal LEO that will obey them (BATFET, EPA, etc.);

      2. Military units commanded by their chosen minions (something The One spent eight years creating):

      3. Government bureaucrats at all levels that share their worldview;

      4. Corporate “citizens of the World” who will bankroll their dreams of Utopia (just as they have done for decades);

      5. Gangs, cartels, and NGOs ranging from drug runners to coyoteros to political terrorists to BLM, who will kill and destroy on their request, command, or just when the opportunity presents itself. Either for turf-building, their inherent racism, and/or just for the sheer Hell of it. (And don’t count out the deep-ecos; “Death to the enemies of Holy Mother Gaia!” is their motto, after all.)

      and

      6. Foreign state actors who will come to their aid, either overtly or by threat. Like Red China. Yes, I would expect them to exert “nuclear persuasion” in such a scenario. France, too, for that matter, and yes, they do have strategic nuclear weapons.

      You may think they are effete snobs. And in many ways, they are. They’ve gotten by with a smirk and a “Fuck You” as they’ve committed outrages for so many decades, that their leadership thinks that nothing more is needed.

      But push them to the wall, and they will turn rabid. And they have plenty of jackals to hearken to their howl.

      Do not expect them to be agreeable. Or even rational.

      clear ether

      eon

      • pool dog

        What he said…….

    • Kafiroon

      No one can “steal” my knowledge, skill and abilities. They might not pay me, so then I will not work. They might then decide to try to kill me, but then they will find my ability to defend myself.
      Also old farts do not plan to live forever and will take a number of whomever with.

  • Keith

    I’ve often wondered what would happen if two people with hyphenated names were to marry. What would happen to any child they produced? Let’s say, Robert Smith-Jones married Mary Dawson-Green. Would a child have the name “Susan Smith-Jones-Dawson-Green? And that is with just short names. The usual hyphenated names are both long and difficult to pronounce.

    • eon

      You just described half of the noble families of Europe. Like “Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach”.

      And that’s not even including the royal families, which can have as many as six to eight “ands” tacked on due to centuries of intermarriage. And a lot of drooling due to the resultant inbreeding.

      The Duke of Clarence (properly, “Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale [Albert Victor Christian Edward; 8 January 1864 – 14 January 1892]) being a case in point of the latter. The reason the rumors that he was “Jack the Ripper” were never quashed was that they provided a convenient excuse to keep him off the throne until his death.

      Not because he was the “Ripper” (who was in fact a journalistic hoax), but because he was (a) homosexual, and the King was also the head of the Church of England (something the bishopric wasn’t going to stand for), and (b) he was at least as batshit crazy as his illustrious forebear, George III. Who, BTW, was a scion of the German House of Hanover.

      Hunter S. Thompson once observed that “if you breed two horses who are fast, but also a bit twitchy, together, the result is liable to be a horse that is very fast but also extremely twitchy”. (NB; He was from Louisville, KY, and grew up around horse-breeders.)

      This principle tends to work with people, as well.

      clear ether

      eon

      • NotYetInACamp

        Jimmy the Greek was crucified for saying things like that. Those people likely would crucify the monk Gregor Mendel if he were still alive. You must not believe in science stating things like that. (Antifa post modern critical theory comment)
        There just aint no sense in so many alleged people/humans.

  • Keith: IIRC the surnames are restructured to show the actual families so the Smith-Jones marrying Dawson-Green becomes Jones-Green. However, each culture is different and has different rules.

    • GWB

      If you’re the progressive feminist sort, each will keep their hyphenated name, then the poor kids will be divvied up between them. (Oh yes, I’ve seen it.)

  • Epador

    Guys should pre-nup no – for their future wife, and future ex.

  • Eon, don’t read Schlichter so close to bed time We sons of Martha may labor in our “world without end, reprieve, or rest.” But when it is gelding season we hold the knife. I’ve spent my whole adult life in uniform or gubmint service (my father G~d rest him would often snark that I should be the democrat and he the republican since he lived capitalism and I socialism. My answer was generally that I saw it from inside and that mollified his judges mind.) But I think that the truth is that much of our military police Leo and gubmint drones are, like me, sons of Martha. Kurt managed a relatively happy ending after all.

    • eon

      Actually, I rarely read Schlichter or anybody else at TH. My assessment is based on having spent my adult life in government service, after being raised in a family of Dems who were convinced that they were inherently smarter than everybody else.

      The surest way to make them go ballistic was to simply say not even “no”, but “are you sure that will work?”

      cheers

      eon

  • Jim Smith

    Chris, you may have just created an extraordinary new meme: “Alt-Right versus Ctrl-Left”. That is, the Alternative Right is an “alternative” to the pervasive power-lust of the Left, which desires “control” over every other value. The Alternative Right, by contrast, offers diversity-through-freedom, meaning that many “alternative” life choices and many “alternative” opinions are to flourish and contend in the marketplace of life and ideas.

    Alt-Right vs. Control-Left. One is for freedom, the other demands Control. Fuck the power-mad controllers of the Left!

    • Wish I had, but that’s been out there for awhile

  • JTC

    Shotgun wedding + irreconcilable differences = acrimonious divorce.

    Long time coming.

  • gruundehn

    If a lawful rebellion happens, and there are conditions for such, then any order to suppress it will be obeyed if it gets past the Joint Chiefs. Anyone lower will get court-martialed and convicted for disobeying a lawful order. And they will get convicted because no court-martial is going to declare the chain-of-command, including the President, to be war criminals.

    “But the military won’t fire on their family and friends” is the cry. They won’t be firing on their family and friends, they will be firing on the enemy. The military rotates military members about every three years or so, depending upon overseas needs. Most people do not make deep friends in three years. And a military member is unlikely to ever be stationed at or near their hometown. The Guard and Reserve are so stationed but they will be sent elsewhere to kill strangers.

    The militia is (with certain exceptions and additions) every male citizen in good health over the age of 18 and up through the age of 45 (10USC Ch. 13). The States are required to train the militia and ensure that they are armed. Any guesses why that does not happen? And the militia is the frontline against government oppression.