Home » Open thread 6/25/22

Comments

Open thread 6/25/22 — 18 Comments

  1. Enormous vast financial waste buying unneeded masks … often by govt using emergency no-bid contracts.

  2. Good for the parrot. I can remember when the masking mandates for humans led to people putting masks on their pets. There were people selling masks for cats and dogs on Etsy, and others posting videos on YouTube telling folks how to make masks for their pets. Finally even the mask-happy CDC had to tell people not to mask cats and dogs, as masks can actually harm them by compromising their breathing.

    Another pet-related issue related to masking humans: its effect on the dog/human relationship. The American Kennel Club actually posted an article on training dogs to be comfortable around masked humans:
    https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/training/mask-force-training-dogs-to-be-comfortable-around-people-wearing-face-masks/

    I hope the parrot left a dropping or two in the mask.

  3. Here, a survey of where abortion laws stand in all fifty states and DC following the Dobbs ruling. In all cases as far as I could see, medical emergencies to save the mother, rape, and incest are exceptions, so the line that abortions are outright banned is not accurate. Fetal heartbeat or six-week limits are common, which would allow the currently 50% or so of abortions which are done with pills to continue. Women will need to decide early.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/list-where-every-state-stands-on-abortion

  4. Alan Colbo, you took the words right out of my unmasked mouth.

    I wonder if they can be used as coffee filters or something as well. But this hammock idea is a good start.

  5. Some time in the last couple of days I ran across a map of the US that showed where the more restrictive abortion laws are or expected to be. Mainly the middle and south of the country. Then just a little while ago I saw a map of where the average gas prices were by state. The general trend was that the least highest ( relatively speaking ) gas prices are in the south and middle of the country.
    I am not saying there is cause and effect there, just very interesting. And how does that play out in the elections?

  6. I’m not sure when “in disarray” became a catchphrase, but the Democrats are way in disarray these days.

    Nothing is working for Democrats, i.e. the left. They thought getting rid of Trump was the hard part, but, starting with the Afghanistan bug-out, it’s been one disaster after another.

    Inflation, Supreme Court rulings, CRT and trans setbacks, recall elections in blue territories, the sinking polls (and obvious deficits) of Biden and Harris, increasing factionalism on their side. The economy is bad now, but it could easily outstrip the 2008 crisis any day now.

    The 2022 midterms look like a disaster for them and 2024 will have an even tougher electoral map. I worry about what Democrats may do in their desperation.

    Their coyness about protecting conservative Supreme Court Justices from assassination is a good example.

  7. But Huxley, it’s ALWAYS someone else’s fault.
    Clearly, it couldn’t possibly be the Democrats’ fault…since they are on the side of Good(TM); they defend the poor and needy, the oppressed and downtrodden; they are angelic; they represent the arc of history…etc…as they engage in Manichean battle with the EVIL REPUBLICAN TRUMPIAN DEPLORABLES.

    (IOW, the country is in the hands of grossly dishonest, tantrum-throwing, hate-mongering, anger-driven, violent, power-hungry, solipsistic, unscrupulous pre-adolescents.)

  8. Blast from the Past 2020-11-22
    https://notthebee.com/article/lets-talk-about-that-danish-mask-study

    They don’t work, never have, and the CDC knew it.

    As for used ones:
    https://medium.com/the-haven/alternative-uses-for-your-face-mask-951ea6e1d6a4

    https://letterpile.com/humor/25-Uses-For-An-Unused-COVID-Mask

    https://www.fastcompany.com/90682545/the-wildly-inventive-way-one-designer-used-old-face-masks

    My favorite, which of course I can’t find: use them as a sling to hold up your tomatoes as they ripen on the vine.

  9. In the euphoria of the royal flush of SCOTUS wins for the Right, don’t lose track of other things going on.
    At the end of a long, very interesting, analysis of the multiple moving parts of the Russia-owns-Trump hoax, comes this observation about Elon Musk’s bid to buy Twitter:

    https://theoptimisticconservative.wordpress.com/2022/06/22/the-chain-gang-an-alfa-gate-tale-from-senator-mbna-to-aon-to-twitter-and-musk/

    The real, underlying thing going on is that activist investors and the federal government were using the leverage they had, to exert control over choices made by the company leadership: choices about strategy, direction, investment – everything pertaining to the companies’ futures.

    They were united in that endeavor.

    Increasingly, that’s the effective power sought by investor activism, whether the investors are mostly about political activism or mostly about the somewhat older, but still relatively recent phenomenon of “cleaning a company up” to suit the taste of profit-seeking investors.

    Even the latter isn’t really what we’re talking about, because it started out as being primarily about company profitability, and bagging up gains from it. Surveying the activism landscape now, one sees more of a profile of Market Garden-type airborne landings to surprise and take down a target company’s corporate will behind its front lines – then bend and shape it to do what someone else wants to do with the company.

    All without buying controlling interest in the company: instead buying just enough to start making demands and organizing internal opposition.

    The important thing about Elon Musk’s tender for Twitter is that it’s a nearly $44 billion buyout offer.

    He’s basically proposing to immunize Twitter against investor activism.

    In my view, that’s the key factor in the cottage industry now developing to build blowback against his offer. If Musk gets what he wants, the activist investors can’t combine with government agencies to demand concessions on company planning and strategy, while Musk and the great majority of the other shareholders still assume most of the risk.

    Of course this is throwing the Biden administration for a loop. Activist investment is hot hot hot. It’s how clever, longheaded things are done now. If government agencies and activist investors agree, there are huge chunks of corporate power to be steered around out there, with minimum risk by entangling investment.

    In the case of Twitter, with the whole issue-stew in the center ring – Section 230, free speech, cancel culture, deplatforming – it’s obvious why a thousand greedy hearts want activist leverage over the company, while a buyer like Musk would want to be free of their predatory maneuverings. Urgent policy desires, with enduring import, are going to live or die here.

    Industry observers, and people cited as having an informed perspective, have reported on multiple occasions that Jack Dorsey, who was forced out as CEO in an activist-led surge, gave his blessing to Musk’s move, if he didn’t actually collude in it.

    This is very much like the sue-and-settle scam the Democrats have run very successfully for years, notably under Obama, which was partially dismantled by one of the SCOTUS wins, in a tangential way:

    https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/supreme-court-sticks-up-for-the-adversarial-process-in-voter-id-case/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=second

    This morning’s 8–1 decision in Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP stands for an important value that is often under attack from the left: the adversarial process. The question was whether North Carolina state legislative leaders (Republicans) could intervene in a federal lawsuit over the state’s voter-ID law when the state’s elected attorney general (a Democrat) was opposed to the law and likely to undermine it in court rather than defend it.

    Just last week, in Arizona v. City of San Francisco, the Court declined to consider a similar issue regarding the Biden administration undermining a Trump-era rule rather than defend it in court; in Arizona, the Court found that there were too many complicating issues and dismissed it from the docket, but not before Chief Justice John Roberts warned that the federal government settling cases against it was a potentially improper way to repeal regulations without complying with the usual notice-and-comment procedures.

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/16/epa-end-obama-era-sue-and-settle-practice/

    Having already dismantled a number of key Obama-era environmental regulations, the Trump administration on Monday took direct aim at one of the most controversial methods used to enact many of those rules: the legal loophole known as “sue and settle.”

    In a directive to his department, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said he intends to put a stop to the practice, arguing it has “harmed the American public” and kept citizens in the dark about exactly how rules and regulations are made.

    “The days of regulation through litigation are over,” Mr. Pruitt said. “We will no longer go behind closed doors and use consent decrees and settlement agreements to resolve lawsuits filed against the agency by special interest groups where doing so would circumvent the regulatory process set forth by Congress. Additionally, gone are the days of routinely paying tens of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees to these groups with which we swiftly settle.”

    Sue and settle, which became commonplace during President Barack Obama’s tenure as his EPA developed tight-knit relationships with top environmental groups, essentially is a way to circumvent the formal rulemaking procedures. Not surprisingly, green organizations on Monday blasted Mr. Pruitt’s move and cast it as a method of avoiding compliance with environmental law.

    Under the practice, sometimes called “friendly lawsuits,” an outside group would sue a department or agency — in this case, the EPA — and ask that certain regulatory steps be taken or that entirely new regulations be put in place. The suits usually were filed under the guise of the EPA not fulfilling its legal obligations under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act or other major aspects of environmental law.

    Often the agency would agree to settle the case outside of court, and the settlement agreement would provide a legal avenue for the EPA to simply enact the changes the outside organization sought without having to go through the traditional rulemaking process, which requires public comment, draft proposals and a host of other steps designed to keep the public informed.

    Numerous Obama-era environmental policies were initially put in place as a result of sue and settle. They include clean air standards for utilities; regional haze rules; Chesapeake Bay Clean Water Act rules; and many others related to air quality and energy exploration, according to a list released last month by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

    Republican lawmakers praised the move and said that, as time goes by, it will prove to be a victory for transparency.

    “The Environmental Protection Agency should not make regulations by settling lawsuits behind closed doors,” said Sen. John Barrasso, Wyoming Republican and chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “Under the last administration, the EPA advanced its political agenda by abusing its authority and leaving states and Congress in the dark. The public deserves to know how its government is operating.”

  10. AesopFan, thanks for that. It reminds me of one other case on which the Supreme Court has not yet ruled (I think): West Virginia v. EPA, if that’s what it’s called. WV says that the Clean Air Act does not authorize the EPA to regulate CO2, which is not a pollutant. WV feels that the EPA is destroying its coal industry and its electric generation capacity without proper authority.

  11. @ Kate – the EPA has destroyed a lot of things without proper authority, or at least under conditions that would get regular people or companies fined and jailed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Gold_King_Mine_waste_water_spill

    The 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill was an environmental disaster that began at the Gold King Mine near Silverton, Colorado,[2] when Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) personnel, along with workers for Environmental Restoration LLC (a Missouri company under EPA contract to mitigate pollutants from the closed mine), caused the release of toxic waste water into the Animas River watershed. They caused the accident by breaching a tailings dam while attempting to drain ponded water near the entrance of the mine on August 5.

  12. I often thought of getting a parrot. But the fact that some parrots can live in captivity 40-60 years turns me off. What is my family to do with the bird swearing like the Sailor I am?

  13. EPA is also well known for “sue and settle”. Get an activist group to sue for damages then award them in order to fund activism.
    It’s graft and corruption.

    Well, it’s pretty banal by now but this vid is a round-up of young black reviewers reacting to the Bee Gees. Common theme: no WAY are they white!!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jFGUuNWNQA
    It may be staged or over-dramatized in some cases but overall it’s heart warming and gives hope for eventual harmony.

  14. Steve57, perhaps set up a swear jar: every time the parrot cusses, it has to give up a peanut or whatever small thing that it likes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>