The latest Sequential Art cartoon made me grin wryly - and snarl a little, too. Click the image to be taken to a larger version at the comic's Web page.
I've had far too many one-sided telephone conversations like that. When can we have a menu tree that includes, "Press hash to permanently, utterly destroy the company's automated answering system"? I reckon that would be the most popular and most-used option out there!
Peter
I come from a country (South Africa) where fireworks were never a big cultural "thing". The 5th of November (Guy Fawkes Night) was celebrated as a sort of hangover from colonial days, but not in a big way. Dad would buy a small box of mixed fireworks, and us kids would wave sparklers enthusiastically while Roman Candles and small rockets lit up the sky over the garden - but it wasn't that big a deal to us. It was almost exclusively a family affair, with few or no public displays of fireworks. We didn't spend the rest of the year breathlessly waiting for the next round of bangs, booms and zooms.
Thus, when I came to this country, I was taken aback by the enthusiasm shown by almost everyone, adults and kids alike, at the prospect of converting large sums of money into smoke and (particularly) noise. I can do that on a shooting range and get some useful practice out of it, but just blowing paper, cardboard and powder into the sky? It simply doesn't do much for me. Last weekend, when the town we live in held its annual July 4th fireworks display a little early, I didn't even bother to go out and look. I did some writing at my desk, comforted the cats (who were being driven frantic by the excessive noise) and endured as patiently as possible until it was over. I know some (a lot?) of my friends here can't figure that out. To them, this is a highlight of the civic year, and the more noise we make, the better. Well, I'm glad they enjoy it.
Something I could never figure out was the seemingly immense number of small fireworks stalls and outlets along the sides of local roads. Within a couple of miles radius of my home there are at least five, all operating seasonally for major celebrations like July 4th. A couple of weeks before the day they'll open their doors, and close them again a week afterwards, reverting to their usual status of derelict old shipping containers and garden sheds, locked up until next time. I wondered how on earth their owners could make a living off such haphazard businesses . . . until I read Mr. B's explanation.
One of the guys that hangs around the airport works for an FBO….and his side job is managing at a Fireworks Outlet.
He was telling us that their market research tells them that the average customer spends nearly 820 dollars for the Independence Day holiday….And their average customer is on welfare or other government assistance, has 4 children, and gets some form of housing subsidy. They nearly all live below the poverty line.
Yet, oddly, they have enough money for fireworks.
He also said that the year they gave out Covid subsidy checks was the best year ever for the business.
There's more at the link.
The average customer spends $820 for Independence Day celebrations? I don't know if that's for food and drinks as well as fireworks, but even so, ye gods and little fishes! Those fireworks are over and above the bigger displays put on by almost all cities, towns and villages all over the country. Around this time of year, you could fly over rural northern Texas and think you were having a flashback to World War II, with every town in sight trying to shoot down everything passing overhead!
I'm sorry. I must be holiday-spirit-deficient in some way, because the thought of that much money being blown sky-high at this time of year - when many, many people are finding it so hard to make ends meet - is just . . . weird.
Peter
I was interested to read that an ancient course of the Ganges River in India, some 2,500 years old, has been discovered.
Earthquakes, caused by the shifting of Earth’s tectonic plates, have the potential to transform the face of the world. Now, for the first time, scientists have evidence that earthquakes can reroute rivers: It happened to the Ganges River 2,500 years ago.
. . .
In a July 2016 study, Dr. Michael Steckler ... had previously reconstructed the tectonic plate movements — gigantic slowly moving pieces of Earth’s crust and uppermost mantle — that account for earthquakes experienced in the Ganges Delta.
His models showed that the likely source of earthquakes in the region is more than 100 miles (160 kilometers) away from the sand volcanoes that Chamberlain and her colleagues found. Based on the large size of the sand volcanoes, the quake must have been at least a 7 or an 8 magnitude — approaching the size of the Great 1906 San Francisco earthquake.
. . .
About 50 miles (85 kilometers) away from the sand volcanoes, the scientists also found a large river channel that filled with mud at roughly the same time. This finding indicates that 2,500 years ago, the course of the river dramatically changed. The proximity of these events in both time and space suggests that a massive earthquake 2,500 years ago is the cause of this rerouting of the Ganges.
There's more at the link.
The now-demonstrated fact that a major earthquake can change the course of even a huge river like the Ganges, moving it 50 to 100 miles away from its previous course, made me think hard. I don't know that we've ever seen the like in North America; most of our rivers have changed course through a combination of erosion and silting (as far as I know, anyway). However, what might happen if something like the New Madrid Fault let go in a big way?
Earthquakes that occur in the New Madrid Seismic Zone potentially threaten parts of seven American states: Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and to a lesser extent Mississippi and Indiana.
The 150-mile (240 km)-long seismic zone, which extends into five states, stretches southward from Cairo, Illinois; through Hayti, Caruthersville, and New Madrid in Missouri; through Blytheville into Marked Tree in Arkansas. It also covers a part of West Tennessee near Reelfoot Lake, extending southeast into Dyersburg. It is southwest of the Wabash Valley Seismic Zone.
Again, more at the link.
What's more, the New Madrid Fault runs slap bang underneath the Mississippi River. If it really let go, it could easily produce an earthquake with a magnitude of 7 to 8 - it already has in the not too distant past. If it were big enough, and lasted for long enough, what might that do to the biggest river on our continent? If a waterway that big were to be displaced by 50 to 100 miles east or west, how much of our economy, our cities and our population would it take with it? And what would happen to anything in the way?
It's a fascinating subject for speculation. I wonder if it might make an interesting novel - perhaps set in older times, around the Civil War or Wild West period, as alternate history? There were powerful earthquakes along the Fault in 1811-12. What if they were repeated, say, 60 or 70 years later, at even greater intensity?
Hmmm . . .
Peter
Found on MeWe:
(Presumably referring to this study.)
And all of us who've "been up the sharp end" in our joint and several ways nod our heads in agreement, and say (loudly, with feeling, in well-lubricated chorus):
Of course it is! You don't think we'd have been there without being demented, do you?
Sheesh!!!
Peter
I guess this post could also be titled "Headline Of The Day":
A man was arrested Monday after he allegedly used fake IDs and information to make purchases at several St. Tammany Parish stores.
Later that same day, his believed accomplice was also arrested for using a fake ID to try and bond him out of jail.
One would think that, knowing your buddy had just been arrested over fake ID's, you might perhaps consider that the cops would be familiar with them and looking for more, wouldn't you?
Oh, well. Looks like itinerant criminals are now in the business of providing entertainment to otherwise bored cops in Louisiana!
Peter
In his usual famously polite, delicate, shy and retiring way, author and friend Larry Correia points out what's needed after the Chevron precedent was overturned. I've edited it for language (this being a family-friendly blog), but if you want the unexpurgated original, it's at the link.
In honor of today's argument about Chevron, here's my proposal for a new government agency that I wrote on here years ago. The Department of **** Your Job Security. :D
##
We need somebody who actively HATES the government to run it.
If I was President (ha!) I would only create a single new executive branch entity. The Department of **** Your Job Security.
The DoFYJS would consist of surly auditors, and their only job would be to go into other government agencies to figure out -
A. do you ****ers do anything worth a ****?
B. which of you ****ers actually get **** done?
Then fire everyone else.
Right now it is pretty much impossible to fire government employees. The process is asinine. It is so bad that the worst government employees, who nobody else can stand, don’t get fired. They get PROMOTED. It’s easier, and then its somebody else’s problem.
But the DoFYJS don’t care. If your job is making tax payers fill out mandatory paperwork and then filing it somewhere nobody will ever read it? **** you. Gone. Clean out your desk.
We need to get rid of entire agencies. Gone. WTF does the Department of Education improve? NOTHING.
Gone. Fire them all. Sell the assets.
Any agency that survives this purge, move it out of DC to an area more appropriate to its mission. Do we need a Dept of Agriculture? Okay. Go to Kansas.
This will also cause all the DC/NOVA power monger set to resign so I don’t have to waste time firing them.
Oh, and right wing pet causes, you’re not safe. I worked for the Air Force. We all know that we could fire 1/3 of the GS employees tomorrow and the only noticeable difference would be more parking available on base.
Cut everything. We never do, because somebody might cry. Too bad. They’re called budget cuts because they’re supposed to hurt. Not budget tickles. **** you. Cut.
Shutting off the money faucet will also destroy the unholy alliance between gov/media/academia/tech.
Right now there is a revolving door, government job, university job, corporate board, think tank, the same crowd who goes to the same parties and went to the same schools and all that other incestuous **** just take turns in the different chairs.
Sell the ****ing chairs.
Every entity that gets tax money inevitably turns into a pig trough for these people. Cut it all off. All of these money faucets ALWAYS cause some kind of financial crisis later anyway.
See the student loan crisis caused by the government, here is free money, oh college has become expensive and useless, so now we need more government to solve it. You dummies get to pay for it. Have some inflation.
It’s all bullshit.
Quit pretending any of this makes sense.
The only way the leviathan shrinks is we elect people who actively hate the government to the government, and then only let them stay there long enough to **** the government without getting corrupted by it.
The instant you see the small government crusader you sent to DC going “Oh, well maybe an unholy alliance between the state and OmniGlobalMegaCorp to develop a mind control ray is a good thing” FIRE HIM.
So there you have it. That’s my platform if you elect me president. Fire ****ing everybody. And only give me one term. Thank you.
I think I've found my ideal candidate for November 2024 . . .
Peter
Click over to this tweet by Flappr and watch the brief video provided (it's just over a minute long).
Dang, it got dusty in here all of a sudden . . .
Peter
I'm long since sick of the talking heads that are yammering on about the Biden-Trump debate last week. The essential elements could be figured out by anyone with two working brain cells (or even less) in a few minutes. Nobody yet knows how it'll work out (although it promises to be a cross between a tortured melodrama and a laugh-a-minute yuckfest finding out).
There's one commenter who seems to have his finger on the political pulse of last week's encounter. Speaking in Australia at a conservative conference, Tucker Carlson had this to say. Even if you've seen or heard bits of it before, it's worth taking nine minutes out of your day to hear it again.
I wasn't very enamored of President Trump's performance last week either. Bombastic, sometimes shrill, sometimes childish, sometimes downright dishonest . . . he did not come across as presidential, I'm afraid (at least, not by my somewhat old-fashioned standards). Nevertheless, if the choice is between him and President Biden, I think most of us will line up behind him.
Unless . . . we could persuade Tucker Carlson to offer himself as a candidate?
I'm not sure that would be a good idea; Carlson is invaluable as an honest, no-holds-barred observer of the scene and a trenchant commenter. We need him doing his present job, and calling the rest of our political establishment to account (frequently). Nevertheless . . . what if we had a mind like his in charge - whether from the left or the right, I don't care - taking a long, unafraid look at the catastrophe which is our federal government at present, rolling up his sleeves, and starting in on the cleanup?
Tempting thought . . .
Peter
Gathered from around the Internet over the past week. Click any image for a larger view.
This may be the best recording I've ever encountered of Vaughn Williams' "Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis". It may also be unique in my experience, thanks to three factors.
The first is the dividing of the orchestra into two parts. Vaughn Williams conducted this piece in the Gloucester Cathedral in 1910, and specified this arrangement for the inaugural performance. Wikipedia describes it thus:
The Fantasia is scored for double string orchestra with string quartet, employing antiphony between the three contributory ensembles. Orchestra I is the main body of strings; Orchestra II is smaller. The published score does not stipulate the number of players in Orchestra I; Orchestra II consists of two first violins, two seconds, two violas, two cellos and one double bass.
Most modern performances don't make the division, playing it as a single, united orchestra: but it does make an audible difference when two separate groups play together. In this case, the Kristiansand Symphony Orchestra performs on and above the stage at the Kilden Performing Arts Center in that city. Orchestra 1 is, as noted above, the majority of the orchestra: Orchestra 2 is positioned behind and above it, on the rear balcony. Listen for the distinctive interplay between the two music sources. It works, and adds a new dimension to the piece.
The second is the technical quality of the recording. Most modern performances of a lot of classical music emphasize the bass, and de-emphasize higher registers. I've heard performances of the Fantasia that remind me more of a German oompah marching band than a hymn! In this performance, the orchestra and the editors of the recording have returned to what I think Vaughn Williams himself would recognize as what he wanted; a more balanced, measured sound where the interplay of the elements of the orchestra, the balance of the music overall, is more important than thumpity-thump. I enjoyed it very much.
The third is the conductor, Tabita Berglund. Despite her youth and relative inexperience, she's about to take over as Principal Conductor of the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. In this performance, she's simply magnificent; and based on it, I suspect the standards of classical music in Detroit are about to take a distinct upward turn. Her style of conducting is more flowing, more intimately expressive, than many other conductors in my experience. She clearly puts herself into the music and conducts in terms of what it says to her, rather than merely reading dry notes on a music manuscript page. For example, watch the last minute or so of this piece, particularly the final notes as they fade away. Watch her body language, the expression on her face . . . and the sheer joy in her beaming smile as she looks up at the orchestra. It's a musical vignette in itself.
Without further ado, here goes.
You can bet I'm going to look for more performances by the Kristiansand Symphony Orchestra, and particularly for more under the baton of Ms. Berglund. Discovering their rendition of the Fantasia made my week.
Peter
Yesterday I said:
I can only presume that the Democratic Party, knowing his health to be so poor as to preclude re-election, has been frantically looking for any way to remove President Biden from the election ticket, and possibly from his current office as well ... Biden's handlers almost literally threw him to the political wolves last night.
After reading many more comments about Thursday's debate, from both sides of the political aisle, I'm even more sure I was right. I can't see any reason for the Democratic Party to allow a semi-senile President Biden to debate a former President Trump unless it was to provide a clear demonstration of the former's disastrous state of mental health. Having exhausted most of their other options to replace him with a better candidate for November's election, they're now effectively providing the ammunition for his enemies - aided and abetted behind the scenes by Obama loyalists, who have in effect been running the Biden administration since its beginning - to remove him for them.
The trouble is, too many people seem to have forgotten one critical point. President Biden has already won the Democratic Party's nomination to be its Presidential candidate in 2024. That can't simply be ignored. If he refuses to go, his party has almost no way left - in the time available - to legally replace him on the ballot with someone else. If President Biden, angered and frustrated at the way he's being treated by his party, turns on them and rejects their demand that he resign, there's not much they can legally do about it in terms of internal party politics.
That leaves the available options as the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, and/or some other major health crisis. Congress can order the President's removal under the 25th Amendment: or, alternatively, if President Biden falls seriously ill or is injured by whatever cause, his Vice-President may be able to take over his office until (if?) he recovers. That, in turn, might provide at least some legal justification to replace him as the candidate in November.
However, the latter case raises yet another issue. I can't see Kamala Harris willingly resigning the Vice-Presidency; and if she doesn't, she automatically becomes President if anything happens to her current boss. That would, in turn, give her a relatively strong case to go into the November election as the incumbent, with all the advantages that provides to a candidate. Sure, she's even more unpopular on a national basis than are most potential candidates to replace President Biden; but she's got the inside track, and in the absence of a suitably tempting "carrot" to give it up, she probably won't be afraid to use it.
That brings up another factor favoring Kamala Harris. We've never had a woman President. If she succeeds to President Biden's office, she can claim to have "shattered the glass ceiling" keeping women out of the top spot (much as Hillary Clinton tried to claim during the 2016 election). That might galvanize parts of the Democratic Party base who are currently wavering in their loyalty to the political establishment. Yes, her personal unpopularity would still be a factor in the election, but (IMHO) less so in the presence of that reality. She can argue that much of the former is due to men wanting to keep women down. There might even be an element of truth in that perspective, given the sheer nastiness displayed by some of our politicians.
I have no idea what will happen. I guess most of us don't. However, behind the scenes, the unseen powers manipulating both political parties are making deals, calling the shots, and getting ready to impose their preferred solution on the rest of us. I won't be surprised to see at least some of the following measures over the next month or two, not necessarily in this order.
Peter
President Biden's performance at yesterday's debate was pitiful; a shambling wreck of a re-election bid that must have given great aid and comfort to this country's enemies. After all, if you were President Xi of China, or President Putin of Russia, or Kim Seriously-Ill of North Korea, how could you not be encouraged to realize that the current President of the USA was supposed to be the person holding you in check?
I can only presume that the Democratic Party, knowing his health to be so poor as to preclude re-election, has been frantically looking for any way to remove President Biden from the election ticket, and possibly from his current office as well. After seeing that debate, I don't see how a 25th Amendment motion to remove President Biden from office can be resisted, on either side of the political aisle. Biden's handlers almost literally threw him to the political wolves last night. (I've been saying for years that the way they've been manipulating him is nothing less than elder abuse. Last night's exhibition simply made that even more clear.)
The question is, who might take his place in the Oval Office, and on the ticket in November? None of the usual suspects appear capable of attracting enough positive attention and support to succeed. Kamala Harris? Hillary Clinton? Michelle Obama? They all have their partisan supporters, but they've also attracted so much vituperation, disgust and dislike that I can't see them as viable candidates. So . . . if not them . . . who?
Wouldn't it be fun if the Democratic Party chose Stormy Daniels to run against former President Trump? Bring on those debates, boys!
Peter
A news report triggered a major flashback memory of my childhood.
The Hudson River Estuary Program fisheries staff reeled in a giant fish out of the Hudson River in New York last week.
The Atlantic sturgeon spreads six feet in length, weighing around 220 pounds, according to a Facebook post from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC).
It was caught near Hyde Park, about 80 miles from New York City.
. . .
The staff suspected the unique fish to be a female that had not yet spawned.
Atlantic sturgeons typically spend most of the year in the ocean, but the adults move in the Hudson during this time of year to spawn, the NYS DEC post said.
Atlantic sturgeons are the Hudson River’s biggest fish, and New York State’s largest sturgeon species, the post said.
There's more at the link.
And the flashback?
Apparently, during World War II, American servicemen brought to the European theater a large number of songs from their homes. My father, in turn, brought some of them home with him. One of them, which my father used to hum (and, when my mother wasn't within hearing, sing), was "The Virgin Sturgeon Song". The first verse is sort-of-suitable for polite company, so here it is:
There are many other verses, most less polite (and the lyrics at the link leave out all of the really "military verses" that Dad learned - he wouldn't sing those unless he was absolutely sure we kids were out of earshot! I had to wait until I was in uniform myself before he'd share them.) If you do an Internet search, you'll find several recordings of the song, some less... er... raw than others. No, I'm not going to embed one here! There are ladies among my readership!
It was weird. As I read that report, I could literally hear my long-dead father's voice in my head, singing the Virgin Sturgeon Song softly to himself as he repaired a piece of furniture or worked on our car. It was almost unconscious for him, a sort of meditative mouth music. The song was also one of the less... ah... impolite pieces he brought back from the war, so if Mom caught him singing it (particularly in the presence of us kids), he wasn't in as much trouble as he would be if she caught him singing "The Rape of the Sphinx" or "The Old Bazaar in Cairo". (An expurgated - highly expurgated - version of the latter may be heard here.)
Ah . . . memories!
Peter
I recently came across "18 Amazing Stories About Scotland! – The Not Always Right World Tour!". It's definitely giggle-worthy. Fun and enjoyable reading.
While browsing around the site, I also came across a series titled "Never Pick A Fight With An Old Scottish Woman":
Click over there and enjoy them. Not always safe for work, but mildly so.
Peter
I recently had an interesting exchange with a reader who was worried that most of her canned food emergency stash had "expired". When asked what this meant, she said that the "best by" dates stamped on each can had all passed. She had tried to donate those cans to a food bank, intending to replace them with newer, unexpired ones, but the food bank had told her it could not accept them because of the danger of disease from spoiled food. She was almost panic-stricken. Would she endanger her family if she used them in an emergency?
I was able to set her straight about that. I routinely use cans that are up to ten years after their expiration date, and have never yet had a single problem with them. Provided the can shows no signs of internal pressure or damage, it should be fine. Obviously, some foods will keep longer than others, but the process of heat- and pressure-canning eliminates most food-borne poisons and diseases, and provided the can is airtight, will continue to do so until it's opened.
Here are a few articles covering the subject. There are dozens more out there, as a quick Internet search will reveal.
Fellow blogger and "prepper" Commander Zero has taste-tested several older cans, and reports very few problems. During years of trekking around Africa, in the most primitive environments, I had no problem (even in equatorial or desert heat and humidity, not the greatest of storage environments) eating canned foods up to a decade old or even older, provided there were no obvious signs of swelling, damage, etc. Approaching old age, I'm still here to talk about it. An expedition in Greenland in the 1960's left canned food behind, which was discovered (and eaten) by another expedition about 60 years later. So much for expiration dates! (For that matter, a 150-year-old (!!!) jar of pickles from the steamboat Arabia was taste-tested by one of the archaeologists on that project, and found to be perfectly edible. My wife and I have visited the Arabia Steamboat Museum, and seen the recovered foodstuffs. It's well worth a visit if you're in or near Kansas City.)
So, if your emergency preparations include "time-expired" tins of food, don't assume you have to throw them away. Inspect them carefully for any signs of damage or spoilage. If none are visible, go ahead and use them (although I'd taste-test older cans first, and possibly try some of their contents on animals to see if they have any odd reactions).
Peter
Yesterday we saw headlines like these about a Supreme Court ruling. Click the links to read the articles.
They sound alarming to those of us who view Big Brother with intense suspicion, and see the courts as avoiding their constitutional responsibilities by failing to rein in said brother when necessary. However, as worded, they are not true. The Supreme Court made no such decision and no such ruling. What really happened was rather simpler (although, to my mind, still not satisfactory):
In a 6-3 decision, the Court found that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue - as opposed to tossing the case on merit - just like the vast majority of election fraud cases which didn't make it past lower courts.
There's more at the link.
We may dislike it when a court decision goes in favor of the progressive left, and cheer when the opposite happens - but we're allowing our partisan likes and fears to color our understanding of the truth. To claim that the Supreme Court yesterday allowed federal government censorship of social media is simply not true. The fact that SCOTUS' decision allows a questionable relationship between government and social media to continue in certain forms unless and until plaintiffs with standing to sue take up the matter does not mean that it's legal, and does not mean that any illegal acts committed until a ruling is given can't be prosecuted.
That's why we have courts. That's why we try to implement the rule of law, rather than partisan political perspectives, in our society. The courts are supposed to prevent excesses, stop legal violations, and punish those that occur. If they acted in an arbitrary, opinionated way instead of within the framework of the rule of law, the courts themselves would be untrustworthy - as partisan as the legislative branch of government, in fact. We've seen in recent weeks how some of our courts appear to be precisely that, in cases against former President Trump in New York. Even liberal/progressive judicial authorities have joined the chorus of disapproval and anger against such visibly partisan proceedings, and are calling for them to be overturned. The outrage, the bias, is so blatant that I hope and trust the New York courts will be stopped in their tracks - but that has to happen through the legal system, not because those with one political viewpoint "win" over those with another. If we stopped those cases by employing legally questionable tactics, just like those who "won" them, we'd be as guilty as they are of corrupting the law to serve partisanship.
I don't like yesterday's decision. I don't like anything that gives the executive branch of government any form of censorship or control over news and social media. I hope any and all such things will be systematically dealt with in future. However, that will only happen if those who do have standing to challenge them, raise such a challenge. Instead of moaning because partisan political perspectives (look at the political views of the challengers yesterday) were not able to impose their viewpoint on those of a different perspective, why don't we encourage the judicial (and, if necessary, the legislative) branches of government to clarify the laws and standards involved, so that loopholes are blocked and those with standing to intervene are defined more clearly?
When any side tries to manipulate, obfuscate or adumbrate the law for partisan advantage, we all stand in danger. Let's not allow our own passions to lead us astray.
True dat.
Peter
Trust Politico to report the obvious with an appropriate headline.
You mean, if we make an effort to give our taxpayer dollars only to those who are entitled to them, we save money? Say it ain't so!
DeSantis signed a law last year directing hospitals that accept Medicaid to ask patients about their immigration status when they seek treatment. While the law does not force patients to provide hospitals with an answer, immigrant rights groups feared the mandate would scare migrants away from seeking urgent medical attention. The DeSantis administration and other Florida Republicans say any marked decreases in spending are signs his immigration crackdown is working.
Florida’s Emergency Medical Assistance program for undocumented immigrants has seen a 54 percent drop in expenditures billed to Medicaid this year — with less than two months remaining in the fiscal year — since the state immigration law took effect, according to a POLITICO analysis. Thomas Kennedy of the Florida Immigrant Coalition said while there is no concrete evidence that the drop in Medicaid spending is a result of the law, which took effect in July 2023. there have been other signs of fallout.
“Obviously, there’s been somewhat of an exodus of migrants in Florida,” Kennedy said. “When this was all going through — we had warned about the exacerbated work[force] shortages and the distressed industries — we said this would be a bad idea.”
Federal law bars undocumented immigrants from Medicaid eligibility, even if they meet other requirements. But federal law also requires that states authorize limited Medicaid coverage for migrants facing a medical emergency, including dialysis, a pregnant woman delivering a baby or trauma.
. . .
Data provided to POLITICO by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services show $148.4 million in state and federal Medicaid dollars went toward emergency coverage for immigrants in Florida in the year before the state’s new immigration law took effect. As of May 3, $67 million has gone toward emergency coverage this year. With two months left in the fiscal year that number will rise, but the state is still on track for a dramatic decrease in spending.
Thomas Kennedy doubtless has allies who believe that spending taxpayer dollars on those who are not entitled to them is "a bad idea". Personally, I wish we had similar legislation in Texas. Why should taxpayers be forced to subsidize those who broke the law to be here?
Peter
Back in 1966, speaking to the flower power generation, Timothy Leary popularized the mantra "Turn on, tune in, drop out". It was goofy, nihilistic, short-sighted, and solved nothing of the problems then facing society.
Over the past few months, as I've had no choice (thanks to kidney issues) but to spend a lot of time sitting or lying down, I've had the opportunity to read, watch and listen to all sorts of discussions about the problems our country, and our world, are currently facing. We've discussed some of them in these pages on numerous previous occasions, and I'm not going to repeat all that now. However, the headlines - even in mainstream media - are growing more and more alarmist. I give you these few examples from the past week. If you're interested, click the links provided to read them for yourself.
It's way too easy to absorb all the doom-gloom-and-disaster flying around the news and social media. We can get so tied up in "Look what they're doing now!", "What are we going to do if this, or that, or the other happens?" and "The sky is falling!" that we ignore the reality all around us. Whatever the big-picture developments, we still need to earn our living; families need to keep raising and educating their kids; and life as we know it goes on, and has to go on, despite the foolishness of national and world leaders. Will the Trump-Biden debate today change a single thing about the way we live? It's unlikely, I think - so why obsess about it?
I think Timothy Leary's slogan might not be a bad one to adopt in the midst of all these pressures and tensions. Think about it:
The late President Theodore Roosevelt put it in a nutshell, as far as I'm concerned.
Truer words were never spoken. We need to take his advice to heart, stop living in Panic City, and get on with it. We can't change the world - we're small fry; but we can change our small piece of it to resist most (sadly, not all) of the problems that threaten it. Read those last three words again. They don't read "in Washington, D.C." or "in your State capitol" or "in your city council". They read "where you are".
Those are our marching orders. We'll be very unwise indeed to disregard them.
Peter
Got the stent out yesterday morning - then spent most of the rest of the day sitting or lying down, nursing a very achy abdomen. Not fun. Not fun at all. To make matters worse, my waterworks (for want of a better term) have for two months been effectively prevented from functioning normally by stents, so that the flow has been unimpeded by internal valves, controls and whatsits. Now that the stent is gone, they aren't sure how to function, and will have to get used to controlling things again. This is all very well, but for the fact that I don't want to find myself dripping down the supermarket aisle! Protective measures will be required for at least a few days.
Other than that, dearest wife returned safely late yesterday after driving to Chattanooga, TN and back for last weekend's LibertyCon. From what she's said so far, it looks like a good time was had by all. I wish I'd been able to be there, but unfortunately my kidney had other ideas. Here's hoping for next year! (You can read Old NFO's description of the con here.)
I'm going to take it gently (and gingerly!) this morning. I'll try to post something later.
Peter
By the time this post pops up on my blog, I'll be in the doctor's office, waiting with shrinking loins for the nice nurse to tug hard on a string and remove a stent from my kidney, down the internal passage bits, and out of my body. When they tell you, "Don't worry, this won't hurt!" you know they're lying. I've had it done once before. Yeah . . .
Say a prayer for minimal pain, please. I imagine I'll spend the rest of the day recovering from the trauma! Blogging should resume tomorrow.
Thanks.
Peter
