In the hopes of encouraging a more civil, and illuminating, discourse, here is another episode of William F. Buckley, Jr.’s “Firing Line”.
From Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for All” proposal to calls to repeal not just Obamacare, but many other Federal regulations, the question of healthcare and government policy is not a new one, as Mr. Buckley and guests at a healthcare mini-debate can show. Here is Part III.
Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.
The focus this time: Crazy Gideon hardest hit.
First, a little mood music:
Carrying on…
The Dutch Supreme Court, being Dutch, thinks that killing people who actively fight against being put down like a dog it totes spiffy.
“More than 20 years ago, the Dutch Supreme Court approved the assisted suicide of a woman in despair because her children had died. So we shouldn’t be surprised that it has now explicitly approved the forced euthanasia of patients with dementia if they asked to be killed before becoming incompetent. From Reuters:
“‘The Dutch Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that doctors could legally carry out euthanasia on people with advanced dementia who had earlier put their wishes in writing even if they could no longer confirm them because of their illness.’
“…
“What the Reuters story failed to mention — and apparently the Supreme Court found to be irrelevant — is that the case in question involved a woman who fought against being killed. Nor does the story mention that the doctor had drugged the woman before starting to euthanize her, and that the doctor instructed the family to hold the struggling woman down so that she could administer the lethal injection. Moreover, the patient had also stated in her instructions that she wanted to decide ‘when’ the time for death had come — which she never did. The termination ‘choice’ was made by the doctor and/or family in violation of the patient’s advance directive.”
It’s just as hard to prove that election fraud doesn’t happen as it is to prove that it does, particularly when it becomes so easy to do. We are seeing this being unfurled in Nevada.
“Red flags are being raised about the all-mail voting system being used in Nevada’s most populous county ahead of the state’s June 9 primary election amid reports that thousands of ballots are being sent to inactive voters — fueling concerns about the possibility of voter fraud and ballot harvesting.
“Thousands of ballots have been sent out by the Clark County Election Department to inactive voters – those who have not voted in recent elections, a roster that can include people who either have moved or are deceased – and the envelopes are piling up in post office trays, outside apartment complexes and on community bulletin boards in and around Las Vegas.
“The excess ballots have drawn complaints from local residents, who worry that anyone could pick up a ballot off the street and cast a fraudulent vote, as well as from Republican Party officials in the state who see a nefarious motive behind the vote-by-mail system being employed by the Democrat-dominated Clark County Commission.”
Pictured: Democratic politics as usual in Nevada.
Inactive voters are likely those who are dead or have moved. And no, not sending ballots automatically to inactive voters isn’t disenfranchisement.
“Mailing ballots to inactive voters is of greater concern. It’s worth noting that “inactive” voters aren’t just those who didn’t vote in the most recent election. At the start of every federal election year, the Election Department mails voters a new registration card to help determine if they may have moved. If a card is returned because it is undeliverable or the recipient no longer resides at that address, the Election Department sends a forwardable postcard asking the voter to provide the new address. The voter is deemed inactive only if he or she doesn’t respond within 30 days.
“Inactive voters are inactive because they no longer live where the county has now agreed to send a ballot. ‘Based on past experience, at least 90 percent of (ballots mailed to inactive voters) will come back undeliverable,’ Loreno Portillo, Clark County’s assistant registrar of voters, said in a late April affidavit.”
The state is rife with talk about backroom deals with the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party controlled Clark County (home of Las Vegas and ⅔ of the states voters) to allow all this and more.
It is amusing when someone belittles credentialed experts then turns around then preaches pseudo-science in authoritative tones. It is sad when this results in two fiskings within one month. Specifically, author Sarah A. Hoyt’s piece against the masks of the derpy death.
A fisking! A fisking!
“Over and over, everywhere, they’re out in force. ‘I wear a mask because I care.’
“The fact this phrase is always used tells me it’s not original. They heard it somewhere, and it sounded good to them and they’re going to use it buckle and tongue whenever anyone challenges the UTILITY — or the sanity — of their wearing a mask.
“In fact their wearing a mask is tying a yellow ribbon in their front yard during the Iran hostage crisis. It is flying the flag after 9/11. It’s a way of showing their feelings, their emotions. It’s also a way of feeling part of a crowd. (Yes, I flew the flag after 9/11. But my dears, I fly the flag all the time, up to and including when I get a wild hair.)
“They don’t even TRY to argue it does something useful. They just view it as a symbol to tie to their faces, to show they ‘care.’”
Even if this was just about solidarity and social cohesion (which it isn’t), that is nonetheless an important thing, even to the echo chamber of rugged individualists who have to virtue signal their opposition to the acquiescence to tyranny reasonable behavior.
“The problem is that it isn’t a gesture without a cost.
“Flying the flag or tying the ribbon, or wearing the AIDs ribbon also did bloody nothing, except perhaps lend comfort to other people in the same situation. Like your neighbors who wanted the hostages back already and wanted life back to normal. Or your friends who wanted a cure for AIDS. Or other people grossly infuriated by the attack on the twin towers, who wanted to do something when there was nothing they could do.
“Yes, I DO understand the need for solidarity and a psychological feeling of doing something, even if it doesn’t mean much in the real world. I’m a writer. I deal in symbols. Of course I understand.”
…Or the people who want to feel that good ole “normalcy” but, because they can’t do anything about Corona-chan, end up blaming tyrants, conspiracies, and scientific expertiese.
Corona-chan cares…
News of the Week for May 17th, 2020
In the hopes of encouraging a more civil, and illuminating, discourse, here is another episode of William F. Buckley, Jr.’s “Firing Line”.
From Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for All” proposal to calls to repeal not just Obamacare, but many other Federal regulations, the question of healthcare and government policy is not a new one, as Mr. Buckley and guests at a healthcare mini-debate can show. Here is Part II.
Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.
The focus this time: Can’t let a pandemic get in the way of death!
First, a little mood music:
Carrying on…
“Compared to Planned Parenthood, I’m an amateur!”
Requiring testing for Coronavirus before a major surgery can be undertaken seems like a reasonable requirement. The ACLU’s obsession with abortion, however, runs contrary to this.
“The latest effort from abortion providers to stop states from restricting abortion during the COVID-19 outbreak is an especially troubling one: In Arkansas, the American Civil Liberties Union and the state’s lone abortion clinic have sued to block a policy that would require women to obtain a negative coronavirus test before getting an abortion.
“…
“The previous week, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals had upheld the Arkansas policy that included elective abortions among the non-essential procedures that the state limited during the COVID-19 response in order to prevent the spread of disease and conserve medical equipment.”
As it has been shown before, abnormality is legitimized by stealing names and words, which simultaneously strips natural and normal things of existence in people’s conscious minds. That this conflicts with reality and will not long stand is beside the point that destruction will nonetheless be wrought.
The term “gender”, for example, was declared to be separate and distinct from “sex”, and terms like “man” or pronouns like “her” were appropriated. And now a judge has declared, in court, that in a case involving discrimination on the basis of sex, one must refer to biological males as “transgender females”. Quoth the judge:
“What I’m saying is you must refer to them as ‘transgender females’ rather than as ‘males.’ Again, that’s the more accurate terminology, and I think that it fully protects your client’s legitimate interests. Referring to these individuals as ‘transgender females’ is consistent with science, common practice and perhaps human decency. To refer to them as ‘males,’ period, is not accurate, certainly not as accurate, and I think it’s needlessly provocative. I don’t think that you surrender any legitimate interest or position if you refer to them as transgender females. That is what the case is about. This isn’t a case involving males who have decided that they want to run in girls’ events. This is a case about girls who say that transgender girls should not be allowed to run in girls’ events. So going forward, we will not refer to the proposed intervenors as ‘males’; understood?”
Coming to us from, of course, Tumblr, is a sexuality for the very special… Rabies.
Most of this is parody of the original Tumblr post, though at best that one was a perfect example of Poe’s Law.
News of the Week for May 10th, 2020
E-mail me!
