In 1978, at my very first full-time job after college, our group health insurance did not cover oral contraceptives. So even though I had to take them to treat severe menstrual cramps, and not for birth control (although that was a nice side benefit), they wouldn't pay for them. I had to go to Planned Parenthood to get them at a price I could afford, where they had a sliding scale based on income. I can't remember when health insurance in Missouri started covering oral contraceptives, but I think it was some time in the mid 80's.
And I was lucky, because my mother and my older sister couldn't get ANY birth control at all unless they were married. In 1965 one of my older women friends bought a wedding ring at a pawn shop and went to see a new doctor who didn't know her and said she was married, so she could get a diaphragm.
Well, yeah. This kind of undoes every other argument the Reactionaries put up these days.
"Moms Against Liberty" or whatever the hell they call themselves says their freakouts about library books are public concerns, so my rights as a parent and my kids' rights as kids can't be public concerns because they're personal to us. But then, we can't consider our personal rights to be violated by the bookburners, because our rights are personal and not matters of public concern.
Same for every other argument they put up. Women's healthcare. The whole rest of the list of situations where the Reactionaries claim they have a right to deny everyone else's rights.
TL;DR: The Fascists are completely full of shit, and so is every legislator and judge who helps them in their fecal explosion.
They won't answer that question (why the rest of our rights don't seem to matter). Neither the people at the local level (Beth Bourne, I'm fucking looking at your vile ass) nor at the national level will answer this.
The woman speaking for the national organization was interviewed by NPR a few months back and the NPR person asked her point blank where other parents' rights were in the equation, and the bint refused to answer.
That is the only question any of them should be asked.
Living in society is like living in a family, in an analogy those people seem to warm to.
Until I get to the next part...
We all have rights we have to balance with other people's rights, and sometimes have to forego when they cause more trouble than they're worth.
Was it "fair" that I, as the oldest kid, often had to go without dessert because there wasn't enough for everyone, but the baby would go apeshit if they didn't get ice cream? No. But I did it anyway because my parents made me, and I was the one who had to take care of the baby anyway and it was easier if they weren't having a screaming full-body meltdown.
Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.
These are concepts these arrested development toddler-sociopaths can't grasp.
Exactly. And I think they're done with the idea of a pluralistic, multi-cultural democracy. It was all fine and good as long as they were the dominant culture, but they are about to be overtaken by demographics, so now they want to get rid of that.
There are concessions we all make living in such a society. One of the biggest ones is if it's not hurting you, mind your own fucking business.
Why can they not abide by that, but the rest of us are capable of it?
It's not his rhetorical flourishes praising life, living, and freedom that make me like the man as a judge. I like him as a judge more for his ability to cut through the bullshit to see the heart of the matter and rule wisely.
I like him as a human being more for his rhetorical flourishes praising life, living, and freedom, but that's a separate thing. On the whole, not only a good judge, but a good man to share a pot of tea and talk shit about Republicans on a lazy afternoon. FSM bless 'im, he should be a Wonker.
That quote from him is masterful. I've always known those people's arguments were fundamentally dishonest and classic examples of having it both ways; but hadn't quite nailed how to explain it clearly.
I am already at work on my first sketch of a scene from the Orkneys. It's at a preserved ancient village. There are paths and houses built into the ground, like it's Hobbit Central.
I'm using the first picture shown at the top of the screen here:
Former AG Bill would have advised Mr. Kennedy to keep quiet about his involvement in a ten-year-old crime.
Also:
There is no explicit Constitutional prohibition against dumping the body of a dead bear cub in Central Park, so it's hard to see why liberals are much such a big deal about it.
I am not aware of a statute of limitations on dumping dead wildlife and bicycles in the park. So much emphasis on not drinking makes me assume he was pissy, blind drunk. Isn't there a fine for littering. and possibly a fine for mis-handling the baby bear's corpse? How much meat is on a baby bear, anyway? Maybe I don't want to know...
All of the names floating around for VP pick are acceptable. I don't think any of them are JD Vance level picks, where the only thing they bring to the table is an aura of couch-fucking weirdness.
Upvote for any judge who quotes Whitman.
Hooray for that judge!
I have that cat tattooed on my wrist!
Ta, Crip Dyke. I love watching DeathSentence lose, and our trans brothers and sisters win.
Ah yes. The bad old days.
Damn that's inspirational. Not something that you see from the judiciary frequently.
In 1978, at my very first full-time job after college, our group health insurance did not cover oral contraceptives. So even though I had to take them to treat severe menstrual cramps, and not for birth control (although that was a nice side benefit), they wouldn't pay for them. I had to go to Planned Parenthood to get them at a price I could afford, where they had a sliding scale based on income. I can't remember when health insurance in Missouri started covering oral contraceptives, but I think it was some time in the mid 80's.
And I was lucky, because my mother and my older sister couldn't get ANY birth control at all unless they were married. In 1965 one of my older women friends bought a wedding ring at a pawn shop and went to see a new doctor who didn't know her and said she was married, so she could get a diaphragm.
When they say "Make America Great Again," that's the kind of America they mean. And we're already at least halfway there.
That judge is amazing.. Also, I can't see "oriechtomy" without it reminding me of this:
Friend: Oh hey, how's it going? How are you feeling?
Patient: I'm good, thanks. Just recovering.
Friend: That's great! Can I ask what you had done?
Patient: Oh, sure! I don't mind. I had a bofaectomy.
Friend: What's a bofaectomy?
Patient: *DEEP BREATH..*
I enjoy Oriechtomy with Broccoli Rabe & Sausage.
Must be nice, Floridians, to have a governor who is nowhere to be seen during an emergency, like this storm that is wrecking the state.
Oh shush Texas.
Has anyone looked around Acapulco? There's precedent.
𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑀𝑠. 𝑊𝑜𝑜𝑑 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑎, 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑏𝑒 𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑀𝑠. 𝑊𝑜𝑜𝑑. 𝐵𝑢𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑎 𝑐𝑎𝑛’𝑡 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑒𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙.
Well, yeah. This kind of undoes every other argument the Reactionaries put up these days.
"Moms Against Liberty" or whatever the hell they call themselves says their freakouts about library books are public concerns, so my rights as a parent and my kids' rights as kids can't be public concerns because they're personal to us. But then, we can't consider our personal rights to be violated by the bookburners, because our rights are personal and not matters of public concern.
Same for every other argument they put up. Women's healthcare. The whole rest of the list of situations where the Reactionaries claim they have a right to deny everyone else's rights.
TL;DR: The Fascists are completely full of shit, and so is every legislator and judge who helps them in their fecal explosion.
Rights for me, not for thee.
They won't answer that question (why the rest of our rights don't seem to matter). Neither the people at the local level (Beth Bourne, I'm fucking looking at your vile ass) nor at the national level will answer this.
The woman speaking for the national organization was interviewed by NPR a few months back and the NPR person asked her point blank where other parents' rights were in the equation, and the bint refused to answer.
But Bethie is still driving around with the bumper sticker on her soccer mom van that says "Let me tell you about my son's penis."
To be fair, now and then she stops the van to haul the dog out so he can burn his paws on the sidewalk.
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What a piece of work. Jeezus.
That is the only question any of them should be asked.
Living in society is like living in a family, in an analogy those people seem to warm to.
Until I get to the next part...
We all have rights we have to balance with other people's rights, and sometimes have to forego when they cause more trouble than they're worth.
Was it "fair" that I, as the oldest kid, often had to go without dessert because there wasn't enough for everyone, but the baby would go apeshit if they didn't get ice cream? No. But I did it anyway because my parents made me, and I was the one who had to take care of the baby anyway and it was easier if they weren't having a screaming full-body meltdown.
Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.
These are concepts these arrested development toddler-sociopaths can't grasp.
Exactly. And I think they're done with the idea of a pluralistic, multi-cultural democracy. It was all fine and good as long as they were the dominant culture, but they are about to be overtaken by demographics, so now they want to get rid of that.
There are concessions we all make living in such a society. One of the biggest ones is if it's not hurting you, mind your own fucking business.
Why can they not abide by that, but the rest of us are capable of it?
Toddler-sociopaths, indeed.
Circular arguments and anecdotal evidence are all they have.
No, they have fictional evidence and made up standing as well.
It's not his rhetorical flourishes praising life, living, and freedom that make me like the man as a judge. I like him as a judge more for his ability to cut through the bullshit to see the heart of the matter and rule wisely.
I like him as a human being more for his rhetorical flourishes praising life, living, and freedom, but that's a separate thing. On the whole, not only a good judge, but a good man to share a pot of tea and talk shit about Republicans on a lazy afternoon. FSM bless 'im, he should be a Wonker.
That quote from him is masterful. I've always known those people's arguments were fundamentally dishonest and classic examples of having it both ways; but hadn't quite nailed how to explain it clearly.
I have enough trouble worrying about my own genitals, let alone someone else's. I just don't understand the obsession.
What they fear is that someone, somewhere, is having more fun with their genitals than they are with their own.
What they fear is that someone, somewhere, is having more fun.
Well said. And when I use a public restroom, I don't care who else is there, as long as they mind their own business, as I am minding my own business.
That's because you're not a neurotic pervert with a perpetual persecution complex.
Right? I don't get it, either.
Live and let fucking live, man.
Hurray! A win in an otherwise shitty string of court decision thingies. Thanks
OT: Henlo.
Birb speaks, and birb moves.
I am already at work on my first sketch of a scene from the Orkneys. It's at a preserved ancient village. There are paths and houses built into the ground, like it's Hobbit Central.
I'm using the first picture shown at the top of the screen here:
https://www.ricksteves.com/watch-read-listen/read/articles/orkney-islands-scotland
It's a Jedi village!
Yes!
I was also thinking hobbits.
Who wouldn't want to live there? Curvy houses, right next to the water, and lots of neighbors, so you can go over to their houses and eat.
They're 5000 years old, so they might be due for some maintenance.
I’ve been here and after all this time the roof doesn’t leak. It’s a major talking point from the Irish guide.
https://newgrange.com/
Well, let's build some new places like that. Old school, still works!
I'll take a pass on the thatched roof, though. Also too, if winter heat involved indoor livestock, maybe design past that.
Maybe a special large-ish separate house for the moos?
I SO look forward to seeing your work, beautiful Boid!
You have chosen some breathtaking scenery to inspire the artist within.
Thank yoo, missmam.
I am going to parse out the colors, when I'm done with the sketching.
I was on Shetland Islands last summer and it was very similar. Good luck. Make sure to convey the wind which blows constantly.
Thank you. Maybe I will put some flags somewhere, and they'll be leaning over in the breeze.
OT: Legal advice and opinion for RFK, Jr.
NYT Pitchbot:
Did RFK Jr. Talk to the Wrong Barr?
Former AG Bill would have advised Mr. Kennedy to keep quiet about his involvement in a ten-year-old crime.
Also:
There is no explicit Constitutional prohibition against dumping the body of a dead bear cub in Central Park, so it's hard to see why liberals are much such a big deal about it.
by Jonathan Turley
I am not aware of a statute of limitations on dumping dead wildlife and bicycles in the park. So much emphasis on not drinking makes me assume he was pissy, blind drunk. Isn't there a fine for littering. and possibly a fine for mis-handling the baby bear's corpse? How much meat is on a baby bear, anyway? Maybe I don't want to know...
Maybe he had veal on his mind.
From what I remember, Davy Crockett "Kilt him a b'ar when he was only three." Or was it a Barr?
Born with the storied name of Kennedy
Kilt him a bar when he was sixty-three
RFK, Jr needz moar coonskin cap.
He had a skinful, anyways.
What the fuck, NYT?
Harris Faces Party Divisions as She Chooses a Running Mate
Party divisions.
"For the last time, Bernie, no anchovies & pineapple. You're the only one who eats it."
Consider the source!
You may always count on these shit disturbers to twist and sensationalize SOP.
All they're trying to do is instigate uncertainty and division for the sake of propagating more sensationalist headlines.
It is ALL about those click$ and view$, comrade.
Well, yeah, and also too they want to help pab.
That train is never late.
Because of course it's the NYT. They almost went a WHOLE DAY without disparaging the Democrats or Kamala.
How about "an embarrassment of riches, as she has so many capable candidates from whom to choose," you numb dopes?
All of the names floating around for VP pick are acceptable. I don't think any of them are JD Vance level picks, where the only thing they bring to the table is an aura of couch-fucking weirdness.
The Whitman reference has brought me to tears.
Now I just wish EVERY district had the benefit of judges like Chief Judge Mark Walker.
That is one of my favorites. Just so.....*human*.
I used to teach excerpts of it in my various Intro to Lit classes and my students usually loved it.
Whitman's words simply wrap themselves warmly around the heart in movingly relatable meter.
Yes! Very well described.