Eliminating Parental Rights
A federal judge blocked a Tennessee law that prevented adults from helping minors get abortions without parental permission. Obviously. Because the federal government believes parents should have all the responsibility and none of the rights of being parents. "All of your kids are ours."
I Don't Even ...?
Alabama has decided that a person can get their driver's license changed to reflect their "new gender" ... as long as they sterilize themselves first. I'm not at all happy about the whole anti-science, nonsensical concept of "transgender," but I'm not at all clear about how sterilization makes it better. Mind you, changing sex designations on a driver's license to match gender identity is a crazy thing, but so is this new ruling.
A Threat to Democracy
Robert Kennedy Jr. tried to position himself as the "right candidate" in past months, concerned about truth and justice and all that. As opposed to the Left. As opposed, even, to Trump. But he saw the writing on the wall and dropped out, fighting to have his name removed from ballots on states in which it would dilute the pool. Until now. Now, the candidate who is not running for president is suing to have his name put back on the ballot in New York, not because he hopes to get elected (he's not running), but because it will dilute the Democratic vote in that state. Now, if "democracy" is a numbers game, then however you arrive at your numbers, "democracy" is all well and good, but if it is discovering "the will of the people," this will only eliminate that possibility. Pure political gamesmanship to skew numbers in favor of an outcome. So much for democracy. So much for integrity, Mr. Kennedy.
You Keep Using That Word ...
Two reports are out bemoaning the rise of book banning in schools. "These things," they are crying, "ought not be! It's censorship! It is in direct opposition to the freedom of the press!" Except ... it isn't. No one flinches when they disallow, for instance, Playboy magazines in elementary school libraries. Six-year-old boys don't need porn readily available in their schools. Nor do eight-year-olds need to learn about the mechanics of gay sex. And that's not "censorship" or "book banning" because all that garbage is available elsewhere. It's only "book banning" when the books are banned, not just when they're not allowed in a specific, child-centered venue. Pornography took over this country first via the "free speech" argument. If we keep this up, every six-year-old boy will be able to learn to read from the likes of The Happy Hooker, Fifty Shades of Grey, and The Joys of Gay Sex for the sake of the "free press." And that's not progress.
Kettle, Meet Pot
Harris's campaign has been banging away at "Trump's plan to charge a national sales tax." She is (deceitfully) referring to his (ill-advised) plan to charge tariffs for foreign goods, which, in turn will raise prices on foreign goods sold to the consumer. That part is true, but only foreign goods. Fortunately, Harris's plan is to "raise corporate taxes" ... which, of course, will raise the price of American goods. Is she going to call this her "national sales tax"? Oh, no, never mind. That would make her an honest politician ... something we don't see much of.
Fake News You Can Trust
The Bee has a story about how Democrats are warning that if public libraries are defunded, homeless people will have nowhere to watch porn. They have a point. After California banned "deep fake" political ads (actual story) (although it's still legal to lie boldly in political ads) and limited AI imagery (actual story), the Bee is reporting raids in California seizing over 2,000 memes while Texas Governor Abbott declares Texas a sanctuary state for memers. And the real reason Newsom signed the ban was because he was tricked into thinking a picture of Trump as a merman was real.
I know it's true; I read it on the Internet.
7 comments:
Eliminating Parental Rights
What do you expect from a culture that has been raised in media that portrayed children as brilliant and parents as dullards? And since they've completely abandoned logic, it's logical to allow genital mutilation on children without parental permission but not to get a tattoo. There argument? "A tattoo, you see, is a permanent mark on the body. Now OFF WITH HER BREASTS!"
I Don't Even...?
That is why this while thing has never made sense. For all the time that gender has been a term, on forms all over the place it has been a synonym for sex. I've seen it as a away to distinguish the word "sex" between it's noun form and verb form, if you get what I mean. But because gender and sex have magically been disambiguated, people now see them as different some how and lose sight of the reason we need to have make and female distinctions in the first place.
A That To Democracy
I wasn't all that thrilled when RFK Jr. flipped to Trump and bowed out because I didn't see how it would really change matters. It bothered me even when he announced it that he told his fans in red or blue states to go ahead and vote for him, but not in swing states. If he's not running for president, he shouldn't be on any ballots. Anybody undecided at this point will be willing to vote for him regardless of his running status, simply on the basis that they don't like Trump or Harris. Plus they're going to be such a low information voter that they might not even know he's not running anymore.
You Keep Using That Word...
You anti-"book ban" folk, I have a question. Should the Bible still be banned from schools? Then, by your own definition, you are for banning books.
Kettle, Meet Pot
Yet another example of the clearheaded thinking and logical power of our ruling class. "I said different words from my opponent, so they can't mean the same outcome."
Fake News You Can Trust
I get most of my weekly Bee stuff from their YouTube channel, and a few months ago they had one of a young girl trying to get a tattoo, along with a bunch of other things banned from non adults. Until she got to asking for a sex change, and he was excited to provide her that.
To be fair with the RFK thing, since some states are mandating that his name be left on ballots to dilute the Trump vote, it's not totally off the wall.
The problem with the RFK thing is his fighting to put it back on the ballot in some states, and to take it off in others. The honest thing would be to only fight one way or the other.
David,
I agree that removing or leaving it on in all states would be the best option. Yet I also agree that him fighting against the DFL attempts to use his name on the ballot to attempt to benefit the DFL is not the wrong thing to do.
Honestly, despite all of the evidence to the contrary, I can't believe that a significant number of voters are stupid enough to vote for RFK after he so publicly dropped out and supported Trump. I get that some will, as a protest vote, but the stupidity to vote for a candidate who's dropped out because you don't know seems incredible. Yet, we see plenty of morons out there.
Nancy Pearcy wrote about the move away from parental rights a while ago and as I've followed the movement it seems that it is definitely getting more overt. Much like that movement to de stigmatize pedophiles, it sounds absolutely crazy at first, then slowly gains legitimacy.
The RFK thing is kind of strange, but I think it speaks more to the DFL and their ruthless willingness to keep anyone they don't want from competing with the anointed DFL candidate. I think that RFK and Tulsi might sway some on the center-left towards Trump in the election.
The whole "book ban" issue is mostly about what books should be available to what age groups, in what context. No one is suggesting that the gay/trans porn for children be prevented from being published or that the writers/publishers be prosecuted. No one is suggesting that parents be prevented from purchasing this porn and providing it to their children at home. They're objecting to public funds being used to purchase books that are not age/context appropriate for children. Which should seem to disqualify them from taking over responsibility from parents anyway.
Craig, you have greater faith in the voting public than I do, that's for sure. Too many dead or incapacitated politicians have won local elections lately for me to hold such faith.
David, that may be True. I think it's more about RFK voters and third party voters in general being more informed that many in the GOP/DFL. I think that the choice to support a third party candidate takes a bit more effort and that they'll likely be more influenced by RFK's suggestion than by seeing his name.
It's too bad we can't apply a stupidity test for voting though.
Post a Comment