Friday morning links

Harvard, the place where they just had a separate black only graduation is talking about exclusive clubs???

How much you want to bet that 'minority only' clubs will be allowed?

#3 Jay on 2017-07-14 09:39 (Reply)

I suspect that the smallest minority group on campuses will soon be the non-mentally ill.

#3.1 JJM on 2017-07-14 11:32 (Reply)

Watched the documentary Get Me Roger Stone on the Netflix last night.

Stone is a GOP operative that has been involved in national politics since Nixon.

It held my attention. I didn't fall asleep as I normally do watching Netflix.

Some Maggie's readers may like it.

Here's the trailer if anyone is interested. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IPyv4KgTAA

#4 feeblemind on 2017-07-14 09:45 (Reply)

Thanks feeble. After seeing the trailer, I'll definitely put it on my list!

#4.1 mudbug on 2017-07-14 11:27 (Reply)

I didn't know anything about him mudbug.

Among other things:

He was caught up in the Watergate net but he viewed it as a plus for his career.

He is credited with inventing the 'negative' ad and he and his partners are credited with originating modern lobbying, where one pays lobbyists to buy access.

Stone doesn't seem to be a hypocrite and above all else he is a master of intrigue.

#4.1.1 feeblemind on 2017-07-14 13:13 (Reply)

re Union Files Grievance Over ‘Goat Crews’ Clearing Brush On University Campus

Depending on how the union contract is written, they may have a case.

#5 feeblemind on 2017-07-14 09:47 (Reply)

Private Home Ownership May Not Be Viable Because Climate

This is the true objective of Climate Change. It is dangerous thinking and a lot of young people are true believers.

#6 annieoakley on 2017-07-14 11:01 (Reply)

"Private Home Ownership May Not Be Viable Because Climate [...] a lot of young people are true believers."

More likely, private home ownership may not be viable simply because the little buggers won't be able to afford one because of ballooning national deficits abetted in great part by failing economies and insane "climate change" fiscal policies.

#6.1 JJM on 2017-07-14 11:30 (Reply)

Or maybe their own ballooning student loan debt.

#6.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2017-07-14 13:45 (Reply)

That too.

#6.1.1.1 JJM on 2017-07-14 14:13 (Reply)

Re: SPLC

It has become a hate group

Become?

#7 mudbug on 2017-07-14 11:31 (Reply)

Became one some time back, because there's $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
in it, which is what they want.

#7.1 Sam L. on 2017-07-14 22:40 (Reply)

Why Middle America Doesn't Care About The Trump Jr. Narrative: Reuters Explains

The narrative is too hard to follow for the simpletons who don't even know what a Subway sandwich shop is?

#8 Jerryskids on 2017-07-14 11:41 (Reply)

I understand that it's a dangerous precedent to prosecute your political opponents - even if the case is pretty clear. Traveling down that road will likely devolve to prosecuting progressively less straightforward and likely less substantial charges against a political opponent.

Wait, isn't that what we have now?

#9 mudbug on 2017-07-14 11:43 (Reply)

Many people voted SOLELY to see justice done.

#9.1 Phil Taylor (Link) on 2017-07-15 00:20 (Reply)

Healthcare I just want to relate a conversation that I had regarding a severely neurologically disabled child, who has already exceeded maximum insurance caps. The other party to this conversation was convinced that single payer would be a dream come true and magically resolve the financial difficulties of the child's family. I couldn't say anything, but I was wondering, how can you say that, don't you understand rationing or restrictions. Look at Charlie Gard. Now I, for one, understand there have to be limits, but a lot of people don't, like the politician who was exploiting a child's tragedy today on the news.

#10 Exasperated on 2017-07-14 12:28 (Reply)

Exasperated: don't you understand rationing or restrictions. Look at Charlie Gard.

That is not the situation with Charlie Gard. Every viable means to help the baby has been tried in Britain. The question is whether it is worth using artificial means to keep Charlie alive, but in probable pain, unless there is a viable chance of recovery. The issue of whether an experimental treatment has a reasonable probability of success is the matter under consideration in the British courts, not cost.

#10.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-14 14:09 (Reply)

EXACTLY, you got one right. Full disclosure; my grandson was born at 22 weeks and I am fully aware that had he been born anywhere but here, and possibly Australia, there would have been NO effort to save him, the family may or not even be consulted. He would have been allowed to succumb or been helped along. He is 13 now and didn't suffer any long term consequences. We know this in HINDSIGHT, but there was no way we could have known it at the time.
You missed my point which is the naiveté of the typical single payer advocate.

#10.1.1 Exasperated on 2017-07-14 14:20 (Reply)

I couldn't disagree more. As long as the parents (or their sponsors) are paying (and I am led to understand that the experimental procedures would not be payed for by taxpayers), it should be up to the parents to determine the treatment of their child, not a government bureaucrat.

#10.1.2 mudbug on 2017-07-14 14:39 (Reply)

mudbug: I couldn't disagree more. As long as the parents (or their sponsors) are paying (and I am led to understand that the experimental procedures would not be payed for by taxpayers), it should be up to the parents to determine the treatment of their child, not a government bureaucrat.

You are apparently disagreeing with the British system, not our description of the Charlie Gard cause.

Most of the time, letting the family decide results in the best decision, but sometimes not. Under the standard of always letting the family decide, people with emotional problems concerning death could use modern medical technology and medical insurance to keep virtual zombies 'alive' indefinitely.

#10.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-14 15:30 (Reply)

Z: The issue of whether an experimental treatment has a reasonable probability of success is the matter under consideration in the British courts, not cost.

I am saying that given the fact that the taxpayers are not on the hook for the experimental procedures, it should not be an issue for the courts to decide in the first place.

#10.1.2.1.1 mudbug on 2017-07-14 21:10 (Reply)

mudbug: I am saying that given the fact that the taxpayers are not on the hook for the experimental procedures, it should not be an issue for the courts to decide in the first place.

What would be useful in these sorts of discussions is actually understanding and responding to the points raised.

1) Who pays is clearly not the issue in Britain.
2) The doctors, some of the best in the world, who have tried to save Charlie, argue that with no reasonable probability of an improvement in Charlie's condition, it would be cruel to keep him alive by artificial means.
3) This leaves the question as to whether the experimental procedure meets medical muster. Experts are testifying to help the court determine this.

Perhaps your point is that the parents should decide, no matter how cruel the result may be?

#10.1.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-15 08:13 (Reply)

Now you understand why "public health insurance" is tyranny and oppression. When government bureaucrats control whether you get health care or not, or whether you live or die, you have tyranny. This is why Obamacare should simply be repealed, not replaced.

#10.1.2.2 Jim on 2017-07-14 15:38 (Reply)

Jim: Now you understand why "public health insurance" is tyranny and oppression.

It was the doctors, not the bureaucrats who decided there was nothing else they could do for Charlie. If there is no reasonable chance of recovery, and the baby is in pain, there's no reason to keep him alive artificially.

#10.1.2.2.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-14 15:42 (Reply)

Yet the NHS said they would not allow it to happen. NOT ALLOW, no matter where the money came from.

#10.1.2.3 Sam L. on 2017-07-14 22:43 (Reply)

Sam L: Yet the NHS said they would not allow it to happen. NOT ALLOW, no matter where the money came from.

1) Who pays is clearly not the issue in Britain.
2) The doctors, some of the best in the world, who have tried to save Charlie, argue that with no reasonable probability of an improvement in Charlie's condition, it would be cruel to keep him alive by artificial means.
3) This leaves the question as to whether the experimental procedure meets medical muster. Experts are testifying to help the court determine this.

#10.1.2.3.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-15 08:16 (Reply)

All the parents wanted to do is to use private resources for outside specialists to see if anything could be done for their child. The power of the state blocked that option based on their opinion that Charlie would be better off dead, based on what the judge now implicitly acknowledges was incomplete information. Williams should be asking why Judge Francis and the EU Court of Human Rights didn’t seek examinations and testimony from those specialists directly before consigning Charlie to death.

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/07/14/hmmm-judge-allows-us-specialist-examine-charlie-gard/

#10.2 drowningpuppies on 2017-07-14 19:48 (Reply)

drowningpuppies: the judge now implicitly acknowledges was incomplete information

Scientific information is always incomplete, especially in medicine. The court is seeking additional medical testimony.

#10.2.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-15 08:20 (Reply)

The reason why this hearing was necessary at all is because Judge Francis was obstinately closed-minded about the evidence in the first hearing, and so was everyone else who arrogated to themselves the authority to act on Charlie’s behalf from his parents.

Kinda like you kidz.

#10.2.1.1 drowningpuppies on 2017-07-15 14:05 (Reply)

drowningpuppies: "Judge Francis was obstinately closed-minded"

Do you have evidence to support that claim? It would require looking at the evidence before Judge Francis. Even the most optimistic views are that the experimental procedure is unlikely to help.

#10.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2017-07-15 16:10 (Reply)

RE “You want to know how an ordinary person can also be a monster? Read this. Read this person do evil to her son.”

QUOTE:

Despite my enthusiasm

That's the problem Jody Allard is trying to live vicariously through her kid who probably does suck at sports so his failure becomes her failure, in her brain stem.

Apart from that Jody needs to get laid.

#11 Someone who hasn't read espn.com since Hunter S. Thompson left on 2017-07-14 12:35 (Reply)

Just out of interest, how does one actually go about keeping politics out of healthcare?

#12 JJM on 2017-07-14 14:22 (Reply)

"NBC: 'Parisians Resigned to Hosting President Donald Trump in France for Bastille Day.'"

Well, we watched the défilé de la Fête nationale on TV5 this morning as we always do. The two presidents seemed to be getting along just fine, thanks. And Melania appears to have wowed the French; I don't think they've had a visiting US First Lady quite like her since Jackie Kennedy. Which reminds me of one of JFK's great lines:

"I am the man who accompanied Jacqueline Kennedy to Paris."

Anyway, the drapeau tricolore is up at the house today and we have champagne chilling to toast le quatorze juillet this evening. We always have fancified steak-frites on the BBQ. Hélas, the torrential monsoons we keep getting here in the Ottawa Valley mean we likely will have to enjoy our celebrations inside rather than poolside tonight.

Vive la France!

#13 JJM on 2017-07-14 14:45 (Reply)

I believe they ARE going after Hillary. We just have someone at the DOJ that doesn't believe in leaking every investigation he has going on. Sessions even said so in his last testimony to Congress...that keeping your trap shut about ongoing investigations is paramount.

So, I expect we are going to be very surprised one day soon. Remember, Sessions has been in his office for less than 6 months. We are waiting for a new FBI Director to take charge.

Patience, people, patience.

#14 MissT on 2017-07-14 15:00 (Reply)

I hope you are right MissT.
Many people voted to see justice done!

#14.1 Phil Taylor (Link) on 2017-07-15 00:16 (Reply)

I fully expected the Maine labor story to be from the Onion.

#15 dcjuggler on 2017-07-14 18:00 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Friday, July 14. 2017

Friday morning links