JP Morgan announced today that they will pay for employees to get abortions in a state where it is legal. Also, my state of Oregon, approved something like $55M to pay for people to travel here to get abortions if they can't get them in their state. We can't suspend our ridiculous gas tax, but can pay for abortion tourism? Got it. What I'm saying is, if you want an abortion you certainly can still get an abortion. The ruling today changes nothing.
The last two rulings from SCOTUS did give the Dem's something to run on, tho.
Let them run on all of it. BigFedGov did the right thing this week several times.
First and foremost is to leave as many rights as possible amongst the unenumerated.
Federalism means that, if the Constitution doesn't say it, the states can go all enumerating all they want and people will make changes, either via migration or the ballot box. People won't stand for Lillian's "deflection and luxury causes" for long.
We agree about unenumerated rights. It's the one thing I disagree with Alito on. Our personal liberties are the core of our freedoms. Not that I'm looking for Ninth Amendment jurisprudence, but our core liberties should be expanded and protected.
I've always felt that the Trans movement, as it currently is in the USA, and this whole pronoun BS is just a battle in the war on objective reality.
Prove this duck wrong.
I was thinking about this the other day, as I was out on a ride doing some zone 3 interval work on the old bicycle, about how what sex you are is used to describe someone. Like, "the suspect is a white male in his early 30's" or something like that. Are we going to be all "the suspect is a person" because we can't know if they are male or female, and age is just a number y'all, YOLO. And if you get arrested for some shit, could you go to court and say "the police said that a male about 6"4' shot the store clerk. But clearly I'm a non-binary foxkin who uses xi/xir pronouns, so you must aquit." Because that don't make shit for sense, but then again... nothing does.
Now, if you will excuse me, I should probably get some work done.
I'm pretty sure I've shared this here so One Kilopardon if you've heard this already.
The whole freaking point of pronouns is so that you don't have to be specific once you've already made the reference. It's purposely ambiguous in an effort to make communication more succinct, simple.
We don't say, "That Pi Guy is a really hoopy frood. Pi Guy really knows where Pi Guy's towel is." because we already know we're talking about Pi Guy in the second sentence. So we say - because, mind you, you don't need to know much other than the disposition of the other's doodads - "That Pi Guy is a really hoopy Frood. He really knows where his towel is."
No one has their own pronouns because purposely not stating something specific about the pre-referenced should not require special, advanced knowledge.
And frankly, even if I do know, No. Just, No. I refuse. As The Treacher notes - you're not a plural. Neither are you Kittensexual, you damned freak.
"That goes for everybody who’s jumping onto this bandwagon. I will not use your pronouns. I will not enable this mass delusion. I’m not interested in this fad. You can call yourself whatever you want, but I refuse to comply."
Exactly. I don't care if people want to indulge their delusions as long as they don't expect me to participate. Trying to read anything that uses the they/their pronouns is impossible. It makes the English language incomprehensible.
Boy, was I late to the party! I've been busy finishing Bruen (the Second Amendment) case and I recommend the concurrences therein. Then Becerra v. Empire Health. Then went through Dobbs and I haven't read the dissent yet. (The Supreme Court's website locked up.)
On overturning Roe: Alito writes much better. He's not the lively writer that Scalia was, but the decision isn't plodding. (Clarence's writing in Bruen was a bit of a slog.) It was thorough. I think his intent to cabin his reasoning to abortion only was shown up by Justice Thomas' concurrence, which does indeed put other cases into play. True, the majority limits the decision to abortion, but that may be difficult to do.
To backstop Ms. Gajewski, this came about because of Blackface Klansman Gov. Northam who, in 2019, talked about infanticide. Rather than resign as Biden urged him to do, he held on. Other states, like NY under Cuomo, passed abortion laws that would have been ILLEGAL (think italics here) under Roe's trimester framework. That set the stage for Mississippi's law.
Strategic Error: As Alito notes in his opinion, both sides stipulated that either Roe goes or the MS statute does. Justice Roberts tried conciliation again in his concurrence to say uphold the statute, but don't overturn Roe, which would have been the second betrayal after his Obamacare switch.
Strategic error #2: The GOP will blow this with their complete bans of abortion. I'm talking to you Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas! This is extremism from the other end. Oddly enough, the MS statute tried to ban D&E, tearing the fetus apart which occurs around 17 weeks. The majority of abortions nowadays are early and via pill form. If anything can blunt the Red Wave, this might.
Pronouns! I'm with you Jim, but I'm retired and nobody can make me say anything. Others won't be so lucky.
Sorry we'll miss Day 300 of Americans abandoned in Afghanistan.
Two points: Yes, because I was, and am, a lawyer for 43 years. I am used to Legalese. Second, I distrust the press and prefer to read for myself what the Justices write, rather than the press' interpretations. I do think that, while Alito's opinion is well-reasoned, the dissent has a point: what about not only the "life of the mother" exception, but in cases of rape and incest? The Dems were clearly extremist with their "abortion until infanticide" approach, but the table is set for the GOP states to be stupid and ban abortion from conception. I wish we could all settle on the 15-week exception, but it's too late now.
The US has had absolutely no effective limits on abortion for at least the past 20 years and probably longer. What supposed limits are there are unenforced, nor do liberals want to enforce them. Seriously - read the Gosnell Grand Jury testimony.
"Well, he can go screw himself. I’m not discarding thousands of years of human society, and millions of years of evolution before that, just because somebody wants to be different. He is not a plural. He’s not somehow neither male nor female. He doesn’t exist outside the boundaries of science. He’s just an asshole."
Apart from all of which, English has a perfectly good non-gendered singular pronoun: it.
I actually have to say Biden's speaking notes aren't all that uncommon for events featuring politicians or senior government officials. There's a lot of stage management that goes into these things, and these people do a LOT of this sort of event. Here, for instance, you want the President to know that he should immediately go to his seat, as opposed to, for example, walking over to personally greet the AFL-CIO president. In part because the plan doesn't call for that, in part because she's not physically present, which the card reminds him of.
Granted, Biden's more prone to screwing this sort of thing up, but even good politicians and officials can mess up badly when they're over-scheduled and don't have these sorts of aids. Like saying how happy you are to be in Ohio, when you're actually in Indiana or something. (Which some presidential or VP candidate did in a relatively recent campaign, might have been Biden himself?)
definitely one of your best efforts in this medium. love that righteous anger, poetically expressed. If you keep it up and continue to give Trump the respite that you seem to have done, you'll find a little extra something in your Xmas stocking.
Will you also take your ball and go home? Sadly, you seem to be a cantankerous, bitter old man who is determined to bite the hands that feed him. Have you considered the possibility that your marketing "acumen" is one cause of your weak subscription response?
JP Morgan announced today that they will pay for employees to get abortions in a state where it is legal. Also, my state of Oregon, approved something like $55M to pay for people to travel here to get abortions if they can't get them in their state. We can't suspend our ridiculous gas tax, but can pay for abortion tourism? Got it. What I'm saying is, if you want an abortion you certainly can still get an abortion. The ruling today changes nothing.
The last two rulings from SCOTUS did give the Dem's something to run on, tho.
Let them run on all of it. BigFedGov did the right thing this week several times.
First and foremost is to leave as many rights as possible amongst the unenumerated.
Federalism means that, if the Constitution doesn't say it, the states can go all enumerating all they want and people will make changes, either via migration or the ballot box. People won't stand for Lillian's "deflection and luxury causes" for long.
We agree about unenumerated rights. It's the one thing I disagree with Alito on. Our personal liberties are the core of our freedoms. Not that I'm looking for Ninth Amendment jurisprudence, but our core liberties should be expanded and protected.
"Pi Guy 2024: Expand and Protect!"
It fits on a bumper sticker and it's sufficiently vague. I like it.
You are right. I have additional thoughts, above. "Sanctuary infanticide towns". Ouch. I may plagiarize that one!
I've always felt that the Trans movement, as it currently is in the USA, and this whole pronoun BS is just a battle in the war on objective reality.
Prove this duck wrong.
I was thinking about this the other day, as I was out on a ride doing some zone 3 interval work on the old bicycle, about how what sex you are is used to describe someone. Like, "the suspect is a white male in his early 30's" or something like that. Are we going to be all "the suspect is a person" because we can't know if they are male or female, and age is just a number y'all, YOLO. And if you get arrested for some shit, could you go to court and say "the police said that a male about 6"4' shot the store clerk. But clearly I'm a non-binary foxkin who uses xi/xir pronouns, so you must aquit." Because that don't make shit for sense, but then again... nothing does.
Now, if you will excuse me, I should probably get some work done.
I'm pretty sure I've shared this here so One Kilopardon if you've heard this already.
The whole freaking point of pronouns is so that you don't have to be specific once you've already made the reference. It's purposely ambiguous in an effort to make communication more succinct, simple.
We don't say, "That Pi Guy is a really hoopy frood. Pi Guy really knows where Pi Guy's towel is." because we already know we're talking about Pi Guy in the second sentence. So we say - because, mind you, you don't need to know much other than the disposition of the other's doodads - "That Pi Guy is a really hoopy Frood. He really knows where his towel is."
No one has their own pronouns because purposely not stating something specific about the pre-referenced should not require special, advanced knowledge.
And frankly, even if I do know, No. Just, No. I refuse. As The Treacher notes - you're not a plural. Neither are you Kittensexual, you damned freak.
Part of tyranny is they make you repeat the lie.
There is a term for conducting an attack on objective reality: gaslighting.
" I will not use your pronouns."
No. You've got to say it like you mean it.
I WILL NOT USE YOUR F-ING PRONOUNS!!1!elventy!!1!!!
Crabby Jim is fun Jim! Too many primo quotes to pick a fave, so I'll just heart it all. Have a great weekend.
Check out fellow hoosiers: Reverend Peyton's Big Damn Band. You're welcome.
"That goes for everybody who’s jumping onto this bandwagon. I will not use your pronouns. I will not enable this mass delusion. I’m not interested in this fad. You can call yourself whatever you want, but I refuse to comply."
Exactly. I don't care if people want to indulge their delusions as long as they don't expect me to participate. Trying to read anything that uses the they/their pronouns is impossible. It makes the English language incomprehensible.
I'm sure all of the protests this summer will be "mostly peaceful", good thing we are still allowed for the moment to keep our guns...
Boy, was I late to the party! I've been busy finishing Bruen (the Second Amendment) case and I recommend the concurrences therein. Then Becerra v. Empire Health. Then went through Dobbs and I haven't read the dissent yet. (The Supreme Court's website locked up.)
To start: As I've said before, "You can't run the Presidency by committee."© Biden's cognitive decline is awful and, as I've said about Epstein's demise, "They do it right in front of you." No one's trying to hide his mental state AND they won't tell you who or which group is in charge. Whoever had the bright idea to write something on the back of his ABC card, we all owe a vote of thanks.
On overturning Roe: Alito writes much better. He's not the lively writer that Scalia was, but the decision isn't plodding. (Clarence's writing in Bruen was a bit of a slog.) It was thorough. I think his intent to cabin his reasoning to abortion only was shown up by Justice Thomas' concurrence, which does indeed put other cases into play. True, the majority limits the decision to abortion, but that may be difficult to do.
To backstop Ms. Gajewski, this came about because of Blackface Klansman Gov. Northam who, in 2019, talked about infanticide. Rather than resign as Biden urged him to do, he held on. Other states, like NY under Cuomo, passed abortion laws that would have been ILLEGAL (think italics here) under Roe's trimester framework. That set the stage for Mississippi's law.
Strategic Error: As Alito notes in his opinion, both sides stipulated that either Roe goes or the MS statute does. Justice Roberts tried conciliation again in his concurrence to say uphold the statute, but don't overturn Roe, which would have been the second betrayal after his Obamacare switch.
Strategic error #2: The GOP will blow this with their complete bans of abortion. I'm talking to you Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas! This is extremism from the other end. Oddly enough, the MS statute tried to ban D&E, tearing the fetus apart which occurs around 17 weeks. The majority of abortions nowadays are early and via pill form. If anything can blunt the Red Wave, this might.
Pronouns! I'm with you Jim, but I'm retired and nobody can make me say anything. Others won't be so lucky.
Sorry we'll miss Day 300 of Americans abandoned in Afghanistan.
Have a great weekend.
Two points: Yes, because I was, and am, a lawyer for 43 years. I am used to Legalese. Second, I distrust the press and prefer to read for myself what the Justices write, rather than the press' interpretations. I do think that, while Alito's opinion is well-reasoned, the dissent has a point: what about not only the "life of the mother" exception, but in cases of rape and incest? The Dems were clearly extremist with their "abortion until infanticide" approach, but the table is set for the GOP states to be stupid and ban abortion from conception. I wish we could all settle on the 15-week exception, but it's too late now.
The US has had absolutely no effective limits on abortion for at least the past 20 years and probably longer. What supposed limits are there are unenforced, nor do liberals want to enforce them. Seriously - read the Gosnell Grand Jury testimony.
"Well, he can go screw himself. I’m not discarding thousands of years of human society, and millions of years of evolution before that, just because somebody wants to be different. He is not a plural. He’s not somehow neither male nor female. He doesn’t exist outside the boundaries of science. He’s just an asshole."
Apart from all of which, English has a perfectly good non-gendered singular pronoun: it.
I actually have to say Biden's speaking notes aren't all that uncommon for events featuring politicians or senior government officials. There's a lot of stage management that goes into these things, and these people do a LOT of this sort of event. Here, for instance, you want the President to know that he should immediately go to his seat, as opposed to, for example, walking over to personally greet the AFL-CIO president. In part because the plan doesn't call for that, in part because she's not physically present, which the card reminds him of.
Granted, Biden's more prone to screwing this sort of thing up, but even good politicians and officials can mess up badly when they're over-scheduled and don't have these sorts of aids. Like saying how happy you are to be in Ohio, when you're actually in Indiana or something. (Which some presidential or VP candidate did in a relatively recent campaign, might have been Biden himself?)
Then why is this the first time we're seeing this?
Because Biden is Alzheimered enough to forget to keep it out of view?
definitely one of your best efforts in this medium. love that righteous anger, poetically expressed. If you keep it up and continue to give Trump the respite that you seem to have done, you'll find a little extra something in your Xmas stocking.
I'll say whatever I want about Trump or anyone else. I don't do requests.
Will you also take your ball and go home? Sadly, you seem to be a cantankerous, bitter old man who is determined to bite the hands that feed him. Have you considered the possibility that your marketing "acumen" is one cause of your weak subscription response?
I am home. That's the point. I will continue to say what I believe, no matter whose fee-fees get hurt.
If you don't like it, take care.