All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Catlady in training]

Austrian doctor commited suicide, after she has been repeatedly harrased online and in person by #&#@&>s for promotong vaccinations against covid
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/31/e...ntl/index.html

It's yet another example of what happens when authorities don't take online and verbal harassment seriously enough. There should have been stricter punishments for this sort of thing years ago, as social media becomes more and more deranged. Free speech has nothing to do with harassment and threats.

[Catlady in training]

I am not sure at all. Or how they would know if a woman did do this. But a few states either have that or want to put it in their abortion laws. I know Kentucky did this and it is being challenged in court. So I figure this one will as well.

What I don't understand:
People who lean more on the right in US often make fearmongering arguments that Democrats will bring "communism" or "socialism" and begin authoritarian rule similar to USSR/China/Cuba, etc. This seems to work well especially on some Hispanic voters whose ancestors came from countries like Cuba that had this kind of rule. As someone from former Eastern block country that suffered a lot during socialism, I can understand the emotional appeal and the knee-jerk resistance to socialism.

HOWEVER, do people who fall for this not realize that the only party that repeatedly shows inclination towards authoritarianism is the Republican party?
The above case is a clear example of it. A state ruled by Republicans passes a law which restricts rights of some citizens and threatens to punish them for going out of state to do something that is legal elsewhere. Which means: tracking movements of their citizens and following what they do in another state - basically spying on them. This is exactly what state security services were doing here under communist rule, the next step will probably be that people will have to ask permissions to travel outside of state and declare what they plan to do there.

Another situation that is mentioned regarding abortion is that people might be asked to spy on their neighbors and report them when they suspect they had an abortion, as I understand something like this already works in Texas. This is again a clear example of what tends to happen in states under authoritarian rule, people spy on one another, they begin to suspect and fear people they know and the whole atmosphere in society turns to suspicion, fear, people stop being honest and start speaking what they think that government wants to hear.

Yet another example: women have already been asked to stop using apps that keep track of their periods out of concern that the government might be able to access (steal, I would say) their data. Same with being careful about what they search for on the internet. Well, we didn't have this kind of technology back then, but that sound exactly like what a communist government would do.

Seriously people, it's not public healthcare, free colleges or consumer protection agencies that are the danger of social democracy that some progressive Democrats push for (the misunderstanding between social democracy and socialism would be a separate rant), the real danger is this erasure of personal freedom, rigts to privacy and free travel and sowing of distrust in society.

Oh, and one other sign is the demonisation and/or elimination of free press. I wonder which party is more likely to do that?

[Kirby101]

Catlady, the answer to your question is RELIGION. They don't see autocratic rule in the name of Religion as they do anything that smells like Socialism. Also many of those Hispanics you mentioned supported Right Wing Fascist dictators like Batista.

[worstblogever]

Ukraine seems like they're coming back for ALLLLL their stuff. They just hit Russian Black Sea Naval Headquarters in Sevastopol with a drone strike this morning. Russians are reporting 6 injured, but again, nothing they say can be taken at face value.

[Tami]

Found this on Twitter

As a tax researcher, I was skeptical of rumors Trump buried his ex-wife in that sad little plot of dirt on his Bedminster, NJ golf course just for tax breaks.

So I checked the NJ tax code & folks...it's a trifecta of tax avoidance. Property, income & sales tax, all eliminated.

From Bill Corbett (MST3K Fame)

Beautiful tribute to a beloved mother and ex-wife

It’s like a grave you’d make for a pet goldfish you had for one year, tops

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Found this on Twitter



From Bill Corbett (MST3K Fame)

I wonder how Don Jr, Eric and Ivanka handled that distasteful bit of business? I’m guessing they were either perfectly fine with the scam, or had no choice but to play ball for fear Trump would cut them out of his will if they didn’t. My vote’s for the former.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I know we say it often, but damn...

There really is no bottom with Trump, is there?

Her grave is barely better than the one I have for my dog. Why does Trump have the freakin' power to do this?

[Tami]

I know we say it often, but damn...

There really is no bottom with Trump, is there?

Her grave is barely better than the one I have for my dog. Why does Trump have the freakin' power to do this?

Unfortunately, apparently (and I didn't know about this beforehand, and I live here) there is no law in NJ that forces him to give her a proper burial. Which means that, as long as no one objects, he can bury her on any piece of property that he owns.

[worstblogever]

Found this on Twitter



From Bill Corbett (MST3K Fame)

I wonder how Don Jr, Eric and Ivanka handled that distasteful bit of business? I’m guessing they were either perfectly fine with the scam, or had no choice but to play ball for fear Trump would cut them out of his will if they didn’t. My vote’s for the former.

I saw this guy joke about it on Twitter...



And I'm like... that's funny, but no, Trump HATES WINDMILLS. He thinks they cause cancer.

Which, holy s***, I think I just figured out why he hates windmills. He's a golfer, and I bet he went to a mini golf course YEARS AGO and couldn't get past a windmill and is still pissed about it like 40-50 years later.

[Jack Dracula]

But…do the eccentric thing of looking at it from the woman’s view and in this case (with her life endangered) she has effectively been deprived of at least two constitutional rights (life and liberty).

In theory it’s hard to see how if a specific case with those precise characteristics (a woman who needs to travel to abortion site to save her own life) was brought before the Supreme Court that the Court could fail to protect her right to travel.

But in practice, I don’t see how a case like that could be brought…by the time the case could be brought to court the woman would be dead.

But perhaps a punitive case could be brought against the State Authorities that stopped her travelling?

You see the underlying injustice of all of these state laws and how they impact the fundamental rights of women. If they become pregnant, they essentially become state property with limitations imposed on them by that state.
I've been wondering about what sort of legal obligations this puts on doctors. Once a woman's doctor discovers she's pregnant are they automatically legally obligated to monitor the situation and disclose to the authorities if she is suddenly no longer pregnant? Are they going to lose their license if they don't report? Seems to me a situation like that could result in certain states losing a great number of medical professionals as they relocate to states where they're not at risk of losing their license.
Awful things are bound to happen from these new laws and the way things are in Republican-controlled states, they aren't likely to be reversed any time soon.

[Jack Dracula]

What I don't understand:
People who lean more on the right in US often make fearmongering arguments that Democrats will bring "communism" or "socialism" and begin authoritarian rule similar to USSR/China/Cuba, etc. This seems to work well especially on some Hispanic voters whose ancestors came from countries like Cuba that had this kind of rule. As someone from former Eastern block country that suffered a lot during socialism, I can understand the emotional appeal and the knee-jerk resistance to socialism.

HOWEVER, do people who fall for this not realize that the only party that repeatedly shows inclination towards authoritarianism is the Republican party?
The above case is a clear example of it. A state ruled by Republicans passes a law which restricts rights of some citizens and threatens to punish them for going out of state to do something that is legal elsewhere. Which means: tracking movements of their citizens and following what they do in another state - basically spying on them. This is exactly what state security services were doing here under communist rule, the next step will probably be that people will have to ask permissions to travel outside of state and declare what they plan to do there.

Another situation that is mentioned regarding abortion is that people might be asked to spy on their neighbors and report them when they suspect they had an abortion, as I understand something like this already works in Texas. This is again a clear example of what tends to happen in states under authoritarian rule, people spy on one another, they begin to suspect and fear people they know and the whole atmosphere in society turns to suspicion, fear, people stop being honest and start speaking what they think that government wants to hear.

Yet another example: women have already been asked to stop using apps that keep track of their periods out of concern that the government might be able to access (steal, I would say) their data. Same with being careful about what they search for on the internet. Well, we didn't have this kind of technology back then, but that sound exactly like what a communist government would do.

Seriously people, it's not public healthcare, free colleges or consumer protection agencies that are the danger of social democracy that some progressive Democrats push for (the misunderstanding between social democracy and socialism would be a separate rant), the real danger is this erasure of personal freedom, rigts to privacy and free travel and sowing of distrust in society.

Oh, and one other sign is the demonisation and/or elimination of free press. I wonder which party is more likely to do that?

"Surely, the leopards would never eat MY face."

[WestPhillyPunisher]

You see the underlying injustice of all of these state laws and how they impact the fundamental rights of women. If they become pregnant, they essentially become state property with limitations imposed on them by that state.
I've been wondering about what sort of legal obligations this puts on doctors. Once a woman's doctor discovers she's pregnant are they automatically legally obligated to monitor the situation and disclose to the authorities if she is suddenly no longer pregnant? Are they going to lose their license if they don't report? Seems to me a situation like that could result in certain states losing a great number of medical professionals as they relocate to states where they're not at risk of losing their license.
Awful things are bound to happen from these new laws and the way things are in Republican-controlled states, they aren't likely to be reversed any time soon.

Margaret Atwood is recoiling in horror as she’s watching The Handmaid’s Tale come to life before her eyes, and I don’t mean the TV show either.

[Malvolio]

I saw this guy joke about it on Twitter...



And I'm like... that's funny, but no, Trump HATES WINDMILLS. He thinks they cause cancer.

Which, holy s***, I think I just figured out why he hates windmills. He's a golfer, and I bet he went to a mini golf course YEARS AGO and couldn't get past a windmill and is still pissed about it like 40-50 years later.

That makes sense. Trump is known to hold grudges even longer than Sharon Osbourne does.

[JackDaw]

You see the underlying injustice of all of these state laws and how they impact the fundamental rights of women. If they become pregnant, they essentially become state property with limitations imposed on them by that state.
I've been wondering about what sort of legal obligations this puts on doctors. Once a woman's doctor discovers she's pregnant are they automatically legally obligated to monitor the situation and disclose to the authorities if she is suddenly no longer pregnant? Are they going to lose their license if they don't report? Seems to me a situation like that could result in certain states losing a great number of medical professionals as they relocate to states where they're not at risk of losing their license.
Awful things are bound to happen from these new laws and the way things are in Republican-controlled states, they aren't likely to be reversed any time soon.

I can sort of understand the Supreme Court deciding it’s up to each State to decide abortion regulations. (Though on balance think its a regrettable decision.)

But what I can’t get close to understanding is how the Supreme Court could support stopping a woman travelling from one State to another to go to a State that has more liberal abortion laws.

It’s removing the woman’s right to liberty. (It can’t …in the eyes of the Supreme Court be crossing a State Boundary for immoral purposes, because the Supreme Court has left each State to set laws in this area…and if any State set a totally unacceptable law, surely it’s the Supreme Courts responsibility to strike it down.)

Then once the woman has travelled, had a perfectly legal operation…then what right has anyone to “examine” her?? Again…it would obviously be an infringement of her constitutional right of liberty.

I’d also argue that if (when?) a woman lost her life because she was prevented from travelling, that her husband and close family had their right to pursue happiness fundamentally breached.

But…sadly…it’s genuinely difficult to see how in practice this could be put before the Supreme Court…who would then need to consider what a mess their recent ruling has created.

But no sane Supreme Court could prevent a woman travelling from one State to another. Or allow a State Court to do that. Could it??

[Malvolio]

So I think that states like Indiana and Ohio are essentially telling women that if they go to another state to get an abortion, they better not come back to their home state or they'll immediately be arrested. Sounds twisted, though, doesn't it?