Kansas, Jan 6, DOJ, Veterans, Ukraine, Soc Sec, Alex Jones, Uhura, Bill Russell

  • The strategy worked for a while. The conservative movement, with their overt tax cut and implicit racism agenda, found a way to use the anti-abortion, anti-gay side of religion as a smokescreen.
     
    Infidel753 looks at the conservative disaster in Kansas, followed by the flatfooted Republican attempt to oppose veteran’s health care, and concludes the smokescreen has eaten the original agenda and taken over the movement.
     
  • Imani Gandy has a thought on Kansas:

  • Iron Knee at Political Irony looks at the Supreme Court changes to the Constitution affecting abortion, conservative activists pushing for even more, then Kansas – and suggests that maybe – well lets see how Iron puts it:
    This is what overreach looks like.
     
  • Andy Borowitz reports that Kansas Republicans are facing a dark future in a state where women have rights.
     
    Best quote:
    “If this kind of nightmare can happen in Kansas, it can happen anywhere,” one Republican said.
     
  • Ted McLaughlin at jobsanger has the numbers. Reputable polling shows the Republican campaign to move abortion decisions from individual women to the hands of government bureaucrats, conservative politicians, and anti-abortion activists is depriving Republican candidates of their traditional off-year advantage. Currently, Democrats are even ahead.
     
  • Darren Bailey is a candidate now catching a tsunami of flack after comparing abortion to the Holocaust. driftglass finds a lesson on how to tell what Republicans really stand for.
     
    Turns out it isn’t that hard.
     
  • Our favorite Earth-Bound Misfit sees the overturning of Roe v Wade as already endangering women.
     
  • Julian Sanchez points out that a bogus accusation is suddenly turning real:

  • The Palmer Report considers how to limit a renegade Supreme Court apparently set to drastically slash basic rights, and comes up with an alternative to expanding the court.
     
  • CalicoJack in The Psy of Life reminds us of the open plan of conservative activists to rewrite basic rights by Convention, replacing the US Constitution with something that fits a right-wing vision.
     
  • Libertarian Michael A. LaFerrara makes a bad argument on his blog against a bad argument in an op-ed against a bad anti-vax argument accusing abortion rights advocates of hypocrisy.
     
    Michael agrees with abortion rights, but objects to making a needlessly weak case. He believes he can do better.
     
    He can’t.
     
    His standard is simple. It is at the heart of libertarianism. If government tells you what to do, it is wrong. That includes prohibition of abortion. It also would include proscribing a mandatory vaccination.
     
    Abortion prohibition is wrong.
    My body, my choice.
     
    Government mandated vaccination is wrong.
    My body, my choice.
     
    A private business vaccination requirement is absolutely right.
    My business, my choice.
     
    The weakness in his argument goes to definition:
     
    Properly understood, a vaccine mandate issued by the state violates individual rights. An employer “mandate”—which is really a condition of employment to work at that company—violates no one’s rights. When the government mandates vaccines, it means get a vaccine, period. A business can not mandate a vaccine for anyone. It can simply say if you’re not vaxed, you can’t work here.
     
    Aside from members of the military, there has never existed a government vaccine mandate in the US as Michael defines it. No private citizen has ever been forced to get a vaccine.
     
    Although he does not say it here, Mr. LaFerrara does oppose actual vaccine mandates as they have existed: the government requirement that businesses impose mandates, it is easier to oppose what does not exist.
     
    Government requirements on private businesses have been an integral part of American society since long, long before either Michael A. LaFerrara or I came into existence. Before Mr. Trump’s exaggerated influence, it was controversial only on the fringes.
     
    Libertarians are against any workplace safety standards. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in Manhattan in 1911 killed 146 workers who could not get out of the building. Libertarians say that since that sort of thing is bad for business, that should be cost enough. Same with vaccinations. Whether to protect employees who do not want exposure to a virus to be a job requirement should be a business decision, unaffected by government standards.
     
    Libertarians are also against consumer safety standards. When the Bush administration relaxed food inspections, the Peanut Corporation of America sent out contaminated peanut butter to kids all over the nation. 8 people died. That sort of thing is bad for business, and that should be cost enough. Same with vaccination or masking requirements. Businesses should decide for themselves whether to protect their customers, whether we’re talking about a virus or Salmonella infection.
     
    Arguing against any and all work safety and food safety standards is a heavy lift, but Libertarians should take it on. They occasionally do.
     
    Arguing against government agents pushing needles into the arms of unwilling citizens is easier.
    But it is a bogus argument against a bogus example.
     
  • Wisconsin conservative James Wigderson reacts emotionally to Dick Cheney. Don’t we all?

  • Dave Dubya finds hope in the January 6 Committee, newly revealed DOJ investigations, and public reaction. But he warns there is much more that must be accomplished.
     
  • So Republicans reverse themselves and support healthcare for veterans after celebrating their success in blocking it. At The Moderate Voice Kathy Gill reads the bill and considers the Republican accusation that their opposition was misunderstood.
     
  • Scotties Playtime has Rand Paul explaining why he opposes health care for veterans.


A few tweets I thought worthy:































And I’m allowed a few of my own:







































– Podcasts –
 

4 thoughts on “Kansas, Jan 6, DOJ, Veterans, Ukraine, Soc Sec, Alex Jones, Uhura, Bill Russell”

  1. LaFerrara’s argument epitomizes the practical problem with libertarian ideology — it would actually give the average person less freedom, not more. An infringement on freedom is an infringement on freedom regardless of whether it comes from the government or an employer, and in practice your boss gives you more orders in a week than the police do in a year. Libertarianism removes any constraints on an employer’s power to exploit his position to infringe on your freedom.

    The argument that you could switch jobs if you don’t like your employer’s rules is true only in an abstract technical sense. For most people, switching jobs is a huge and risky upheaval; in practice, they’re stuck. For that matter, one could equally well claim that if you don’t like the government’s rules, you’re free to emigrate to some other country you like better. A freedom which can only be exercised at the cost of a hugely difficult procedure is a freedom that barely exists in practice.

    Libertarianism would reduce most people’s freedom by putting them at the mercy of powerful non-state entities (employers, polluters, almost any business you deal with) no longer restrained by the state.

  2. What a great compilation, again, Mr. Demming! Now my husband (not on WordPress) is a reader, too. He got drawn in with your response tweet to our US Senator Dr. Sen. Roger Marshall. (He’s very slimy, btw.) He ended up scrolling down, then up. So, now I’ll forward him my email, and he’ll click through and read, too. Thanks again!

  3. Oh, gosh. DH is not slimy, but will read your emails. This one doesn’t have to go up.

    [Note: We did get permission from Alison to publish. I thought it was funny and sweet – Aunt Tildy]

Comments are closed.