In Case You Missed It (v117)

Finally - a busy writing week!

It's been a long time - just shy of a full year - since I had a week with enough posts to warrant a recap. Hopefully, it's the start of a regular posting habit.  In case you missed anything, here's what made it out of my head. 

I started and ended the week with a Quick Take post. The first was about Rep. Brandon Williams, my congressman, and how far off base he was when he dropped a Bible verse to recognize Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and then went about as far away from what the verse was about as one could possibly go when he talked about immigration. 

I'm not a religious person, but that doesn't stop me from looking up verses when I see them, particularly when they're offered up by politicians. As I interpret Isaiah 58, the basic question is "Aren't we doing enough?" and the answer is, pretty much, "No - you're not,"  if you continue to oppress others, finger-point and speak ill of them, and deny them food and shelter. 

Next up? Visits to the Sunday School classrooms, including chats with That Guy from Vermont (CNN State of the Union), Florida Man Ron DeSantis (This Week), and Joe Manchin (Face the Nation). 

 

Sanders thinks folks will eventually rally around Biden, but it's tough given the way things are going with Israel and what's happening in Gaza.

You cannot give billions of dollars to a country that ignores your wishes, violates international law. So, I would hope that the president follows through on his concerns and says to Netanyahu, this is unacceptable. You're not getting a nickel more from the United States unless you radically change course. We're not going to see hundreds and hundreds of thousands of children starved to death.

Manchin was asked whether he'll vote for Joe Biden; here's what he had to say about that.

I love my country too much to vote for Donald Trump. I love my country too much. And I think it would be very detrimental to my country.

In your Extra Credit, we heard from former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, and David Axelrod, who made a name for himself during the Obama years. It was fun to hear their thoughts on Iowa, offered the day before the caucuses. 

Hogan noted that Donald Trump was going to win, but noted

I don't think it matters that much, because, for the past 24 years, the winner of the Republican Caucus in Iowa has not been the nominee. So it's really about the fight for second place.

And while he had good things to say about Nikki Haley's chances, Axelrod thought she had some things to be concerned about, notably polling showing a distinct lack of enthusiasm from her supporters.

... 49% of Donald Trump's supporters said they were extremely enthusiastic about voting for him, 23% of Ron DeSantis'. For Haley, that number was 9%. 

Turns out he was right. 

 I was Wondering on Wednesday about more abusive legislation on tap for Florida, where

the state legislature continues to attack people and things they don't like. Among the latest proposed bills is one that would effectively end legal recognition of trans people.

 When I first heard about this last week, it was in the context of driver's licenses and a required gender affidavit - and I couldn't help wondering if trans people were really worse drivers than anyone else.

That wasn't the reason - but it's only almost as silly as the reason suggested by one of the sponsors, which I included in the post.  

A fun bit of wondering was inspired by the tourism folks in Lexington, KY, who are looking to the Final Frontier for visitors. I'm not sure they thought the whole thing through, but you can decide for yourself. 

And finally, there was the second Quick Take, about endorsements and how they're treated by the media. When Sen. Tim Scott endorsed Trump yesterday, the media was all gaga over how important it was. It's not, really, if you consider this:  

According to the folks at 538, as of January 14th, Trump had picked up 185 endorsements,

including nine governors, 24 senators, and 116 U.S. representatives. By comparison, only 22 of them had endorsed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis or former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley. 

Help me understand: did Trump need Scott's endorsement, or did Scott make the endorsement for his own purposes? Why can't the media discern the difference, and report on it appropriately?

That's last week in a nutshell; be sure to check back this week for our regular features, and maybe a few extras.

Wondering on Wednesday 1/17/24

 

Ready... set... wonder!

I'd guess that no one was surprised with the outcome of the Iowa Republican caucuses; Donald Trump won, garnering more than 50% of the vote. Ron DeSantis (2nd) and Nikki Haley (3rd) got fewer votes - combined - than Trump. I have to wonder, though, why media outlets were calling the vote for Trump barely half an hour after the caucuses started? Sure, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that he would win, but come on - at least let people go through the process.

Another thing I'm wondering? How many people stayed home, and why did they? As of last November, Iowa had 718,000 registered Republicans, but only about 110,300 people voted. 

Was it the weather? Was it an enthusiasm gap for DeSantis and Haley voters? Did the media's constant Trump-gushing have an impact? We may never know, for sure, but I think we can agree that an early declaration of victory like what happened this week is not helpful.

One last thing before we leave presidential politics,  I find myself wondering if Trump's abuse of Nimarata Nikki Haley's full name, following his promotion of the lie that she's ineligible to be president, is indicative of his concerns that she has a chance against him? Remember, he took this same approach to the candidacies of former President Barack Hussein Obama and Sen. Rafael 'Ted' Cruz. Of course, there's always a chance that he's just a jerk and can't help himself, so maybe we shouldn't read anything into it.

Meanwhile, back in Florida, the state legislature continues to attack people and things they don't like. Among the latest proposed bills is one that would effectively end legal recognition of trans people.

The bill starts by defining "sex" in a way that excludes transgender people and incorporating this definition at the beginning of Florida's legal code - Section 1.01.  It demands that every law in Florida adhere to this definition, effectively eliminating all transgender legal representation in a single move. It then goes through many areas of code and creates additional policies that allow for the tracking of transgender people's assigned sex at birth and the enforcement of laws that exclude or criminalize them.

When I first heard about this last week, it was in the context of driver's licenses and a required gender affidavit - and I couldn't help wondering if trans people were really worse drivers than anyone else. Come to find out, one of the authors of the bill says it's to protect law enforcement. According to Rep. Dean Black of Jacksonville, 

We need law enforcement to know what they are dealing with. If you can go change your gender on your driver's license on a whim, that can actually endanger law enforcement.

Not sure why officers will be 'protected' by knowing the birth gender of a driver, especially in a state that now offers permitless concealed firearms carry, but maybe that's just me.

We'll close with an interesting bit of tourism promotion from the city of Lexington, KY, where the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) is going where no CVB has gone before: outer space.

The agency said it worked with scientists and scholars to beam the message toward potentially habitable planets in the TRAPPIST-1 solar system 40 lightyears away.

The effort was led by Lexington native Robert Lodder, who is an expert in computer engineering, astrology, and Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence.

If you're wondering, the message, which was sent with FAA approval, opens with

The first thing you'll notice as you descend through Earth's atmosphere above Central Kentucky is the lush green countryside that surrounds Lexington's vibrant city center. That's our famous bluegrass.

It includes recommendations where ET and friends can "stay and eat and shop." 

Now, I think this is kind of cool - I mean, why not have some fun, right?  But I can't stop wondering what's going to happen the first time one of the visitors stops at a horse farm, for example, and thinks it's a restaurant? 

What's on your wondering mind these days?

TGIF 4/7/23

It's been nearly a month since I last posted.  Much has changed in my life in that time, and I'm struggling to find a reason to write, much less trying to figure out what to write about. It occurred to me, though, that writing about anything is almost certainly better for me than not writing at all.  

And so, it starts again.

Usually, I stay home while My Sweet Baboo makes the run to our favorite Lenten fish fry, but today I went with him to pick up our orders. I waited near the table where a gentleman was selling tickets for a couple of fundraisers. 

A man approached the table to get tickets, and the two struck up a conversation. I could only hear the ticket seller's part of it and was surprised when I clearly heard, "We've got to get rid of the damn liberals..."

I sat up a bit straighter, I did - and then I remembered where I was, and I remembered I was just there to get some fish and support the organization, and not to get into a fight while I waited, so I behaved - I didn't even laugh.

I did, however, think of a few things as I sat there. For example:

Get rid of the damn liberals, you say? 

It is not the damn liberals demanding that all children who want to participate in athletics must expose their genitals to a stranger.

It is not the damn liberals stripping parents of their rights to raise their children and get them age-appropriate medical care.

It is not the damn liberals having bounty hunters chase your wife, daughter, or sister around to find out when she had her last menstrual period.

It is not the damn liberals policing doctors instead of protecting schoolchildren.

It is not the damn liberals allowing teenagers to carry concealed handguns without a background check or training. 

It is not the damn liberals stripping people of their right to representation in state legislators. 

It is not the damn liberals threatening to impeach a judge who just won an election. 

It's not the damn liberals calling to defund the Justice Department, the FBI, or the IRS.

It's not the damn liberals calling for death and destruction in America, calling the US a third-world country, or pretending they are above the law. 

It's not the damn liberals saying and doing all of the above and proclaiming themselves to be patriotic Americans at the same time.  

It's not the damn liberals doing all of these things - it's the damn MAGA Republicans.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday 3/8/23

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Let's dive right into the wonderment, shall we? 

If you've followed me for a while, here or elsewhere on social media, you know I'm a frequent critic of media folks and publications. I don't pretend I can do their jobs better than they do; I just sometimes wish they did their jobs a little better. 

And that's how I felt reading this AP article about a "surreal Twitter exchange" between an employee and chief twit Elon Musk.

Haraldur Thorleifsson, who until recently was employed at Twitter, logged in to his computer last Sunday to do some work — only to find himself locked out, along with 200 others. 

After several days of not hearing from the company whether or not he had been fired, Thorleifsson decided that publicly engaging Musk might get him the information he was looking for. 

Eventually, he got his answer after a surreal Twitter exchange with Musk, who proceeded to quiz him about his work, question his disability and need for accommodations (Thorleifsson, who goes by “Halli,” has muscular dystrophy and uses a wheelchair) and tweet that Thorleifsson has a “prominent, active Twitter account and is wealthy” and the “reason he confronted me in public was to get a big payout.” While the exchange was going on, Thorleifsson said he received an email that he was no longer employed.

There's more to the story, and the article covers it all. Here's what I'm wondering: why write an article about a Twitter exchange, surreal or otherwise, and not include a link to the tweets? 

News is out that Walmart is closing its last two Portland, OR stores.

The closures come after Walmart CEO Doug McMillion said in 2022 that record-breaking retail theft has hit the company’s economic performance and could lead to store closures. “Theft is an issue. It’s higher than what it has historically been,” McMillion said, adding that “prices will be higher and/or stores will close” if authorities don’t crack down on shoplifting crimes.

Maybe it's just me, but it seems kind of obvious to wonder whether the company considered hiring security guards instead of greeters and employing cashiers instead of leaving it up to customers to do the work.

NY's Gov. Kathy Hochul has put forward changes to our state's bail reform law. A key change? Getting rid of  "the so-called 'least restrictive' standard for judges when considering bail." 

It's going to be a battle with her own party; "Democratic leaders have called for ways to address underlying issues surrounding crime, such as poverty, housing, and mental health," while Hochul is looking to make the law itself fairer. 

It depends on the judge and the political leanings or the philosophical leanings, or the judicial leanings of a judge versus looking at commonsense, commonly accepted criteria.

I can't help wondering why so many Dems disagree with her. After all, they're among the first to complain when people 'judge shop' to find a friendly ear for redistricting or gun control cases. Surely, the Dems know that alleged criminals don't have that chance. 

There are probably a couple million folks talking about the spate of 'anti' bills introduced by Republican legislators around the country.

One, in Florida, would ban the use of pronouns "that do not correspond with [a] person’s sex." The guy who submitted the bill said it

would enshrine the “God-given” responsibility of parents to raise their children... The bill also protects students and teachers from being forced to use language that would violate their personal convictions.

I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I have to wonder why we need laws designed to disregard the God-given responsibility of parents who are respectfully raising their children, and to violate the personal convictions and identities of others. 

Tennessee is trying to out-Florida Florida. A bill passed this week would 

require paid drag performers to get a permit before they can take the stage, and would specifically prevent minors from attending their shows...

I didn't have to spend a lot of time wondering how soon drag performers would start acting for free just to be able to host a show without having to go through the permitting process? And it's fun to think about the 'small government, anti-regulation' folks having the tables turned on them, isn't it?

And speaking of protecting minors, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that America's Youngest Governor, Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R- AR), just signed a bill "loosening child labor protections" in her state. 

Under the law, the Youth Hiring Act of 2023, children under 16 do not have to obtain permission from the Division of Labor to get a job. They will no longer need to get an employment certificate, which verified their age, described their work and work schedule, and included written consent from a parent or guardian. Sanders signed the bill into law on Tuesday.

Why was this bill necessary, you might be wondering? Because requiring a permit 

had placed an "arbitrary burden on parents" who needed government permission for their child to get a job. 

If you follow all of this kid-protecting stuff, coming from the same basic political idea gene pool, you're doing better than I want to do.

What are you wondering about tonight?

Wondering on Wednesday 12/14/22

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

In no particular order, I'm wondering tonight about holiday parties. You know, the kind we host or attend, with family, or coworkers, or friends and neighbors. Or, you know, the kind attended by Associate SCOTUS Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The party in question was hosted by "far-right operative" Matt Schlapp, who runs the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC), the group that's hosted both Donald Trump flag-kissing events and Hungarian right-wing strongman Viktor Orban. 

In a planned leak of party attendees, Kavanaugh's name is at the top of the list; other names below his include some with business before the Court. The linked article provides some details on that, and also notes

If Kavanaugh was a judge in any other federal court, his attendance at Schlapp's party might have violated Cannon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. Specifically, Kavanaugh is permitting Schlapp and others to, at a minimum, "convey the impression" that they have special access.  

A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.

We know Kavanaugh's not the only one, nor are the conservative justices alone on stuff like this. But with all the focus on Justice Clarence Thomas, his wife Ginni, Justice Samuel Alito and his parties, and the leaks, I can't help wondering why Kavanaugh didn't just find a quiet bar somewhere to share some holiday cheer. 

Speaking of "all the focus on" people, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Brittney Griner, the WNBA star and world's most famous vaper. Griner, you know, was released from her Russian prison camp in an exchange for convicted international arms dealer Viktor Bout who had served more than half his 25-year sentence. Not released along with Griner? Former Marine Paul Whelan, who's been held in Russia on espionage charges. 

I don't know enough to talk intelligently about whether any trade for Bout would have been a good idea, and I certainly don't know diddly about the negotiations that led to the exchange. All I do know is lots of people were arguing about whether we should have brought home the vaping 'woke' black lesbian National Anthem protestor, or if we should have brought home the white former presumably straight presumably non-vaping Marine.

Noticeably missing from any of the arguments? The fact that Whelan was a staff sergeant in the Marines, until he was busted down to private, and was given a bad conduct discharge. I have to wonder this: if people were as aware of his military history as they are of her National Anthem history, would they think he was really all that much better a trade? 

And speaking of history, there's Texas, which has a long history of interjecting into things that the government doesn't really need to get involved in: keeping pregnant women on life support against their wishes, or providing bounties to folks who report women seeking health care, or wanting to investigate parents of trans children for child abuse, for example.  

And, we learned, the Lone Star State is still interested in interjecting where it doesn't need to be. As the WaPo reported, Texas AG Ken Paxton went looking for info on transgender Texans. 

“Need total number of changes from male to female and female to male for the last 24 months, broken down by month,” the chief of the DPS’s driver license division emailed colleagues in the department on June 30, according to a copy of a message obtained by The Washington Post through a public records request. “We won’t need DL/ID numbers at first but may need to have them later if we are required to manually look up documents.”

That's what Department of Public Safety staff were asked to provide, based on a verbal request from Paxton. And they found "more than 16,000 such instances," which led them to tell the AG they couldn't provide the data he asked for.

So, what's the wondering, you're wondering? Simply, this: what the actual hell is going on down there? What compelling government interest is there in having this data? Is it because their plan to charge parents got shot down, so they're going to attack adults instead? Or is it because Paxton's a Texas-sized jerk? 

What's got you wondering these days?

Wondering on Wednesday 5/25/22

Right off the bat, I remind everyone that thoughtful discussion is always welcomed here at veritable pastiche, and I warmly encourage your constructive and respectful comments, if you're so inclined. 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Another day, another school, another group of slaughtered children, another round of thoughts and prayers. And, another round of wondering.

• I wonder how it is that we so readily pass legislation requiring preparation for large-scale threats, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly pass rules requiring us to remove our shoes, have our body physically patted down or x-rayed, and regulating the size of personal products to board airplanes, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass legislation banning social media companies from silencing so-called "conservative thinkers", but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass retribution language against companies who use their corporations are people too' freedom to actually speak out on issues that matter to their customers, employers and investors, but we there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws protecting people from sign-waving, chalk-wielding protestors but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws confining women inside their state borders, to prevent them from seeking medical care in another state, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws preventing parents from providing loving care to their children, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws allowing unlicensed, untrained people to carry guns, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily gerrymander the crap out of our state and federal district maps but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws turning neighbor against neighbor, with cash incentives, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws forcing women to give birth, but there's nothing we can do about the mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily authorize sending tens of billions of dollars to a foreign country, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new legislation "freeing" us from public health mandates, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new legislation cutting health care programs, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass bills encouraging book banning, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new legislation taking tax dollars out of public education, and shifting those dollars to private schools, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass laws allowing just about any professional to refuse to provide services to people they don't like, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily rise to defend statutes and historical monuments, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass new laws freeing people from consequences when they drive through protests, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

• I wonder how it is that we can so quickly and easily pass legislation banning trans athletes from participating in athletics, but there's nothing we can do about mass murder...

I wonder how, in the land of the free and the home of the brave, there's nothing we can do about mass murder... 

I wonder how, in a world where "All Lives Matter," there's nothing we can do about mass murder. 

I wonder why the very best that the very best of us can do is offer thoughts and prayers.

I wonder why we are so complacent. 

I wonder how we are sleeping at night, knowing that children are not coming home from school, and people are not coming home from the grocery store, not coming home from religious services, not coming home from the movies. People are not coming home. Again.

They. Are. Not. Coming. Home.

What are you wondering about?

The Journal of Unpopular Opinions (Chapter 2)

I was reading what I anticipated would be a funny take on 'gender reveal' parties, those often way-over-the-top shindigs with explosions and death and destruction and whatnot. 

The article was moving along, I was chuckling, and then? Then the 'U' word appeared. You know what I'm talking about, right? Here's how it showed up in the article.

 We are fortunate enough to have the resources for almost the ultimate in frivolity: gender reveal parties. Ukraine is the ultimate in seriousness, in a life-and-death battle with all the suffering and horrors of war. Gender reveal parties should be an opportunity for us to be thankful for what we have and to support and fund our fellow humans in Ukraine.

Seriously? Gender reveal parties should be an opportunity for us to send money to Ukraine? As you can tell from the opening of this post, I think gender reveal parties are kind of crazy, but I also think the constant focus on Ukraine, to the exclusion of everything else (other than the price of gas,) is equally crazy.

Like people everywhere, I'm horrified by what I've seen and heard about in Ukraine. I've watched President Zelenskyy's messages to our Congress, to elected officials in other countries, and the UN. I support sanctions on Russia, and I support us giving some military and humanitarian support to Ukraine. 

That said, I think it's ridiculous - and, frankly, grossly unfair - to expect us to turn everything we do, and everything that brings us joy, into an opportunity to help Ukraine. 

Frankly, there are other crises happening in the world, too.? Here are just a handful of them.

• China has committed crimes against humanity by their treatment of Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic groups; over a million are dead, hundreds of thousands imprisoned, and others sent into forced labor over the past several years. 
• In South Sudan, hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced or killed; nearly 5,000,000 children are not in school, and some 8,00,000 people are facing hunger or famine. This, too, has been going on for years,
• So has the war in Yemen;  4,000,000 people have been displaced, more than 110,000 have been killed, and over 20 million need humanitarian aid.
• And don't forget Somalia, with a million deaths, and more than a million people displaced in that country's ongoing civil war.
• And, have we already forgotten about Afghanistan and the Taliban?

Why do these get less attention? Other than China, we rarely hear about these conflicts, and when we do, it's well after the Ukrainian news of the day. And would we have heard much about China, absent the Olympics? 

Why is that? Is it because these aren't social-media-savvy countries? Is it because civil wars don't matter? Is it because these people don't look like us? It's hard to ignore that last question.

And, in case you're thinking everything's hunky-dory here at home, think again.

• Politicians from both parties continue to choose their voters, instead of the voters choosing their politicians; it's been going on for decades, and is getting worse instead of better as gerrymandering flourishes.
• Politicians are doing their best to make voting more complicated instead of easier, and while they say they are making voting more secure, we know that what many of them are trying to do is make it easier for them to erase the vote of the people.
• We are pulling books from schools and libraries, because people who have never read them have been told by their churches or their politicians that this is the right thing to do.
• We are (knowingly) underfunding public education (here in New York, for example) and allowing individuals to take taxpayer money out of public schools and give it to private schools - including corporate, profit-driven entities - and religious schools.
• States are codifying vigilante justice to avoid having laws struck down by the courts. So far -- so far -- it's just laws against abortion; who knows where they'll go next with this plan of attack. Texas started this; others are following.
• States are trying to pass laws to prevent citizens from seeking medical are in other states (Missouri and Oklahoma for starters), or threatening to jail parents - potentially with life sentences - for seeking medical treatment for their children (Idaho), and charge providers with felonies for providing treatment (Oklahoma, again).
• And let's not forget the "Don't Say Gay" bills - yes, that's plural now, with Alabama following Florida's lead.
• States are attacking marriage equality, proposing marriage contracts that would only be allowed for opposite-sex couples (Tennessee).
• States have passed laws allowing doctors to pick their patients, instead of having to treat everyone - even people they don't like (Ohio, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas...).

In America, folks - this is all happening, right here in America, to Americans.

Should we care about Ukraine? Of course. Should we care only about Ukraine? Of course not. 

We should learn (or remember) how to walk and chew gum at the same time; we can hear about, and care about, more than one thing at a time. Even if the people don't look like us, or don't have great social media skills.  

We should never let our guard down here at home, no matter how compelling the news from elsewhere in the world might be.

And we should allow ourselves a little joy, without feeling guilty and without feeling obligated to anyone else. 

TGIF 3/11/22

The TGIF post has always been used to identify individuals or groups of people who've had a pretty good week, or a particularly bad week. 

This week however, I'm highlighting a state that, in my opinion, has had a particularly bad week. Which state gets this singular honor? Texas. 

Now, I've written about Texas several times over the years - after all, they've got Ted Cruz. Here's a sampling: 

• the state's efforts at making sure people don't have to worry about letting their deeply held beliefs get in the way of doing their jobs; 
• Gov. Greg Abbott saying he'll eliminate rape in Texas; and
• the state interjecting itself into medical decisions that should be made by a patient's family, not the government.

So, what's been going on recently that earned them this dubious feature tonight? Plenty.

Last month, Abbott directed the state to investigate parents for child abuse if they allowed their transgender children to receive certain types of medical care. The policy was put on hold; the court ruled it "had been improperly adopted and violated the Texas constitution." The state, of course, appealed. 

Testimony in the hearing brought some ugly details to light, including that  

abuse investigators had been told to prioritize cases involving the parents of transgender children and to investigate them without exception, after the state’s governor’s order. 

Department of Family and Protective (DFPS) staff were told not to put anything about these cases in texts or emails, something they've never been advised about any other investigations. And, it's important to note that the DFPS 

has been the subject of a decade-old federal lawsuit over its foster care system, in which children faced abuse as well as long waits to be adopted or placed in safer homes. Federal monitors have been overseeing the process of carrying out judicial orders since 2019, among them a directive to improve the handling and investigation of reported child abuse.

So yes, by all means, let's focus on trans kids and their loving parents, and not actual cases of child abuse. Makes perfect sense to me (yes, that's sarcasm). As does the state's Department of Health removing LGBTQ suicide prevention resources from its website. 

Instead of listing the phone number, website, and text line for the Trevor Project, as it did at the beginning of February, the website no longer includes any links for LGBTQ youth. Instead, information on the Trevor Project can only be found in a PDF for “Parent and Youth Suicide Prevention” but does not include information about the Trevor Project in the least bit. 

What else? 

We're all familiar with the Texas abortion law, which encourages Texans to turn on each other for bounties if they think a woman has gotten an abortion in violation of the law. Now that I think about it, why didn't they include that part on the trans child abuse directive? 

Anyway, the US Supreme Court (twice) refused to pause the law while the case moved through the Texas courts; the review's finished. 

The decision by the Texas Supreme Court turned on whether medical licensing officials had an enforcement role under the law... writing for the court, Justice Jeffrey Boyd said those state officials have no enforcement authority, “either directly or indirectly.”

So, states now have a free pass on legal responsibility for laws they enact no matter how irresponsible they might be. 

I don't want you to think that Texas only discriminates against women and LGBTQ kids they're equal opportunity discriminators.

A Texas agency discriminated against communities of color when it denied more than $1 billion in federal relief funds sought by Houston and Harris County to help hard-hit areas recover from Hurricane Harvey, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development found.

Remarkably, Houston and Harris County didn't receive any money when the state initially handed out funds, even though the whole country saw the photos of the storm damage. You can see them here, if you're interested.

HUD officials said the state agency’s method of doling out the funds “discriminated on the basis of race and national origin” and “substantially and predictably disadvantaged minority residents, with particularly disparate outcomes for Black residents,” according to a Friday letter detailing the result of a HUD probe. The land office is in violation of the Civil Rights Act as well as federal housing law, federal housing officials said.

I have a hard time reconciling these headlines with this cheerful statement on the state's website:

There's something for everyone in Texas!

And I can't imagine any state having a worse week than the one that Texas just had - not even Florida.

TGIF, everyone.

Trump in Transition (v20)

"After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individual to serve in any capacity in the US Military.

Our Military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you."

No, Mr. Trump, thank you for being so considerate of our tax dollars and how the military blows them on healthcare.

People have actually investigated this issue, the burden of the "tremendous medical costs" that would become crippling to the military if transgender members were allowed to serve. For example, here is some info from an article in Scientific American (which might actually be somewhat of an oxymoron under the Trump administration):

A June 2016 study from the RAND Corporation estimated that there were between 1,320 and 6,630 transgender active-duty service members — out of 1.3 million service members in total — and noted that not all of them would seek treatment related to gender transitioning. The study also estimated that the cost associated with medical care for gender transition would only increase military health care expenditures by between $2.4 million and $8.4 million each year — an increase of between 0.04 and 0.13 percent.

The same article references another study, too:

A September 2015 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reached similar cost estimates.

 The study estimated that there were about 12,800 transgender service members who would be eligible for medical care. But it hypothesized that fewer than 200 would require care for gender transition each year, based on the percentage of transgender people who sought such care outside the military and the percentage of Australian service members who sought transition-related care.

The overall estimated cost to the Pentagon: $4.2 million to $5.6 million — what the study’s author called “little more than a rounding error in the military’s $47.8 billion annual health care budget.”

It's good that Trump is paying attention to out of control costs in the military, even as he proposes massive increases in military spending. Perhaps he's aware of this article in the failing NY Times back in 2010 which discussed comments by former Bush and Obama administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who tried and failed to make changes to the military's health insurance program:

"Health care costs are eating the Defense Department alive," Mr. Gates said in a much-noticed speech in May. Defense budget analysts say that rising health care costs will make less money available for new weapons, repairs to a worn-out arsenal and quality-of-life programs like schools on military bases. 

"In the long run, it could actually limit our ability to field a military of sufficient size," said Todd Harrison, a senior fellow for defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington.

That's some scary stuff right there, don't you think? Military healthcare costs may actually be putting you and me in jeopardy!

There's lots of information on efforts to reign in these costs, including raising the minuscule 'enrollment fee' for the military's TRICARE insurance plan, which is offered for life even to the millions of military retirees who now work in the private sector and are eligible for health insurance through their jobs. As Robert Gates and others who came after him found, the military lobby is large, it is active, and it has the ear of Congress, so change does not come often, or quickly.

But, the reality is, not accepting or allowing trans people to serve in any capacity - not as translators on the front line, not as analysts, not as cyber experts, not as drone pilots -- isn't going to make a dent in the military's health care budget.

But there is something that can be done that would make a dent, I think: accepting and allowing only people who choose a lifetime of dependent-free living. Single, no kids, no baggage, and no plans to ever stop being singe, kidless and baggage-free.

According to the 2015 Demographics Profile of the Military Community (emphasis added),

Overview of Military Families Across the Active Duty and Selected Reserve population, there are 2,120,505 military personnel and 2,783,141 family members, including spouses, children, and adult dependents.

Here are some facts about those dependents:

• Of the military personnel, 43.1 percent are single with no children, 34.9 percent are married with children, 15.6 percent are married without children, and 6.3 percent are single with children. 
• Overall, 41.2 percent of military personnel have children in 2015, compared to 39.9 percent in 2000. 
• Of the 1,758,365 total military children in 2015, the largest percentage are between birth and 5 years of age (37.5%), followed by 6 to 11 years of age (31.3%), and 12 to 18 years of age (24.2%). Fewer children are between 19 and 22 years of age (7.0%); however, children ages 21 to 22 must be enrolled as full-time students in order to qualify as dependents. 
• More than half (50.5%) of military personnel are married. 
• Of the 1,012,251 military spouses, nearly one-quarter (23.5%) of spouses are 26 to 30 years of age, while 21.3 percent are 31 to 35 years of age, 20.3 percent are 41 years of age or older, 20.1 percent are 25 years of age or younger, and 14.8 percent are 36 to 40 years of age.

I would suggest that providing healthcare for these 2.78 million freeloaders is considerably more costly than it is to provide health care for a small handful of trans people who may decide to transition on the government's dime.

Not only that, but the constant disruption of worrying about spouses, adult dependents, and children while trying to achieve decisive and overwhelming victory must be a huge and bigly burden on our troops, their commanders, and even on Trump's personal generals. We clearly need to nip that worrying in the bud.

And we certainly cannot continue to abide the more than 6% of military people who are single parents -- that is completely unacceptable! We know the only good family is one with a daddy and a mommy who are married to each other.

And here's another idea - check out this graphic, again, from the 2015 Demographics Report:

There were more than 865,000 civilian DoD employees?  For heaven's sake, outsource them! Get them off the government payroll and into the private sector where they belong!

Have the Dealmaker in Chief personally negotiate a cut-throat bargain with the private companies to give us these services on the cheap. Let the private sector treat these budget-suckers like the rest of Americans are treated -- you know, the people caught in the pro-business, market-driven deregulate-a-thon who go to bed every night wondering if they'll still have benefits when they wake up in the morning.

And the best part of my plan?

No one has to check anyone's 'particulars', if you will, to make the decision. It's clean, clear, and straightforward; no messing around in medical records, and no brightly-lighted inquisition rooms required.