Skip to main content

Musings

 

Right-To-Lifers Don’t Go Far Enough

 

    I was pro-choice, but I’ve changed my mind.  The problem is not that the State should govern what a woman does with her body, the problem is that the State has not gone far enough.  The argument is that to protect the life of a fetus, the State must overrule a woman’s privacy and bodily autonomy and regulate her body for her.  Fine.  If we want the State to be in the business of protecting life through bodily regulation, then go all in.  Stick to the prime directive.  Protect all life.

  The State should govern both men and women to protect life.  The State should tell any healthy person what to do with their body in order to protect life.  So, if someone needs a kidney, liver, or any organ transplant to save their life, the State should find someone and take whatever parts are needed to save that life.  If not, then we are allowing organ-icide.  (Let’s start with the Senate and the Supreme Court.  They’re mostly old and on the way out, anyway).

  However, requiring someone to be vaccinated against Covid-19, or any other virus, as has been done for decades, in order to attend school, work or any event, to protect the public health, well, that’s an invasion of privacy and cannot be allowed.  Slippery slope, you know.

 

On the Deep State and Trump

 

  I’m confused.  Donald Trump pledged to replace the idiots in previous administrations with the best people, and to rid government of the Deep State.  So, he appointed a record number of judges, and he hired and appointed a great number of top cabinet and agency officials and staffers.  Then, many of them were indicted and were replaced; many resigned and were replaced; many were fired and replaced, and fired and replaced, etc.   Okay.  So far, I understand.  This could have happened in any previous administration (although it didn’t in 200+ years).  But, it could have happened.

  What confuses me is the fact that in 60 or so court cases brought by Trump’s legal team to reverse the election results, he lost every one of them.  [note: nine of Trump’s lawyers have been referred for sanctions as of August 25th.]  Many of the judges ruling against him were appointed by him or other Republican Presidents.  There were also heads of agencies, most notably his Attorney General Willian Barr, his guy, his protector, his “Roy Cohn”, who certified that the election was free, fair and well run.  Even a Republican-led Congressional Committee came to the same conclusion.  Rudy Giuliani, Sydney Powell and the pillow guy said they had irrefutable evidence, but they never presented any, even in the court cases.  They presented lots and lots of hearsay, but no real evidence.  It was unanimous:  Trump lost in a free and fair election.

  So, these people were all appointed, hired, or endorsed by Trump; therefore, they could not be part of the Deep State.  Then, they failed to support him, were fired, indicted, convicted or resigned, so they must be part of the Deep State.  But, if so, how could he have appointed, hired or endorsed them in the first place, if he, and only he, could put the absolute best people in his administration?  How could he support so many people who turned out to be Deep Staters?  How could so many people end up in the swamp that he claimed only he could drain?

  Would some MAGA people out there please explain this to me so that I can MAGA, too?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That's How the Light Gets In On Economic Perspective $Million per day My argument in today's blog is that the rich, especially the ultra-rich do not need protection from people advocating redistribution of wealth downward.   I'm recalling "Joe, the Plumber", (who was not named Joe and was not a plumber) who was used by a conservative Presidential candidate to exemplify that liberals would try to tax away the opportunity to start a business and become wealthy.  Also, I've been accused of being a conspiracy theorist when I've complained that the ultra-wealthy collude to protect and increase their massive wealth.    So, I'll address three issues at once: 1.  Are we trying to deprive the wealthy of their lifestyle? 2.  Do ultra-wealthy have the time, resources, and inclination to conspire to strongly influence politics and economics? 3.  To get an idea of economics in general, it helps to have an understanding of wealth. My ans
1 comment
Read more
 Bannon Up! This analogy is far from perfect, but it represents to me a futile mindset.   A sacrifice bunt in baseball involves giving up an out to advance a runner into a better position to score a run.   Occasionally, a pitcher tries so hard to throw pitches that are difficult to bunt, that he ends up walking the batter, which moves the lead runner into scoring position, gets no out, and puts another runner on base.   I’ve heard former coaches and players announcing games cry, “He’s trying to make an out.   Let him!”   I believe Steve Bannon wants to go to prison, to make himself a martyr and hero to the right-wing nuts who support him.   I say, let him.   I’ve heard some pundits worry that convicting him would further infuriate the right-wing nuts.   I think it’s time to abandon that type of thinking.   We have seen time after time that making concessions to appease these people is completely unproductive.   They see concessions only as weakness.   Even so-called reasonable
Post a Comment
Read more

grooming

  Political parties have long used wedge issues to encourage their members to turn out to vote.   Sometimes these issues are inflammatory, employing demonization, occasionally to the point of being dangerous.   I fear that this year, we are witnessing such an issue: the accusations of pedophilia.   I realize that the Q-Anon conspiracy theorists have made this an issue for a couple of years now, but there is a new, and much more dangerous twist, that is surfacing that may turn out to be far more insidious.   Rather than merely accusing all Democrats and liberals of being child-trafficking pedophiles who drink children’s blood, they have broadened out the accusation to include grooming children for pedophiles.   A bit of background:   you may remember the ardent believer who took a gun into a New York pizza parlor where he was told children were being kept in the basement by a cabal of pedophiles led by Hillary Clinton among others.   Fortunately, when he arrived, he was persuaded th
Post a Comment
Read more