Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Celerity
Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
July 13, 2022
https://archive.ph/Cmqj3
Lately, I have been craving what’s familiar, and that has translated into what I’ve been eating at home. Some might call them basic dishes: a burger, a cheddar cheese quesadilla, scrambled eggs with toast and bacon. That’s how Salisbury steak made a reentry into my life. It’s also how I discovered cookbook author and food blogger Amanda Rettke. (I know thousands already know her through her @iambaker Instagram, TikTok and website. She’s been food blogging for a dozen years, so, yes, I’m late to the party.)
I was drawn to her new cookbook, “Homestead Recipes,” because it fit my mood in this moment. It met a need for simple food that I can make with confidence. The 110 “Midwestern” recipes feature ingredients that, she notes, you could grow at home as well as common staples. (She and her husband and five children live on a 15-acre “homestead” outside Minneapolis, where they raise fowl and grow their own food. If you ever need zucchini recipes, she has a whole chapter devoted to them.)
Rettke prides herself on her self-deprecating humor (next to a luscious picture of chocolate cake, she writes: “Not to brag — but I have one of those metabolisms where I can eat anything I want and still get fat.”) Her social media is a combination of take-her-as-she-is silliness, well-constructed recipes and unvarnished insights into how she operates, from seeking and paying for celebrity “cameos” (and getting one from Bethenny Frankel) to debunking bad cooking advice that enrages her (no, you can’t just use baking soda if a recipe calls for baking powder).
As I flipped through the cookbook, I came across her saucy Salisbury steak. It immediately brought back fun memories. The first time I recall eating this dish was in a TV dinner — those flat, foil-covered trays with little compartments to hold your meat, potatoes and vegetables. You’d run it in the oven and then carefully lift the piping hot foil to reveal your meal. My childhood friend, whose mother was a great cook, often insisted on buying them when I slept over. Maybe it was her little form of rebellion, and I’ll admit that as a kid, it seemed pretty cool — these little boxed meals that we could heat and eat all by ourselves. Today, I think: It’s so simple to make. Why buy it frozen?
snip
recipe at the top links
Salisbury steak is a reminder that a basic recipe can be so good
https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2022/07/12/salisbury-steak-recipe/https://archive.ph/Cmqj3
Lately, I have been craving what’s familiar, and that has translated into what I’ve been eating at home. Some might call them basic dishes: a burger, a cheddar cheese quesadilla, scrambled eggs with toast and bacon. That’s how Salisbury steak made a reentry into my life. It’s also how I discovered cookbook author and food blogger Amanda Rettke. (I know thousands already know her through her @iambaker Instagram, TikTok and website. She’s been food blogging for a dozen years, so, yes, I’m late to the party.)
I was drawn to her new cookbook, “Homestead Recipes,” because it fit my mood in this moment. It met a need for simple food that I can make with confidence. The 110 “Midwestern” recipes feature ingredients that, she notes, you could grow at home as well as common staples. (She and her husband and five children live on a 15-acre “homestead” outside Minneapolis, where they raise fowl and grow their own food. If you ever need zucchini recipes, she has a whole chapter devoted to them.)
Rettke prides herself on her self-deprecating humor (next to a luscious picture of chocolate cake, she writes: “Not to brag — but I have one of those metabolisms where I can eat anything I want and still get fat.”) Her social media is a combination of take-her-as-she-is silliness, well-constructed recipes and unvarnished insights into how she operates, from seeking and paying for celebrity “cameos” (and getting one from Bethenny Frankel) to debunking bad cooking advice that enrages her (no, you can’t just use baking soda if a recipe calls for baking powder).
As I flipped through the cookbook, I came across her saucy Salisbury steak. It immediately brought back fun memories. The first time I recall eating this dish was in a TV dinner — those flat, foil-covered trays with little compartments to hold your meat, potatoes and vegetables. You’d run it in the oven and then carefully lift the piping hot foil to reveal your meal. My childhood friend, whose mother was a great cook, often insisted on buying them when I slept over. Maybe it was her little form of rebellion, and I’ll admit that as a kid, it seemed pretty cool — these little boxed meals that we could heat and eat all by ourselves. Today, I think: It’s so simple to make. Why buy it frozen?
snip
recipe at the top links
July 13, 2022
https://www.thedailybeast.com/allegations-of-manosphere-pastor-jesse-lee-petersons-gay-past-roil-macho-men
In the hyper-masculine right-wing internet community known as the “manosphere,” few figures loom larger than Jesse Lee Peterson. The Los Angeles-based pastor and online radio host has become a star in conservative media in part for his demands that men and women return to his unorthodox version of traditional gender norms. Peterson’s ideas about gender can be eccentric even by the standards of his compatriots, with Peterson claiming that a woman who orgasms during sex is somehow “becoming a man,” a practice he frowns upon.
Peterson has also emerged as one of the right’s most vocal anti-gay figures. He’s claimed that people who march in gay pride parades are the children of Satan, and that “radical homosexuals are evil.” He’s become a regular sparring partner for progressive YouTube personalities, telling online commentator “Destiny” in 2020 that he didn’t understand why his debating partner was openly bisexual.
“I don’t understand the purpose of putting that out there,” Peterson said. “People are going to judge you, they’re going to look down on you.” Now several of Peterson’s one-time friends allege that the pastor’s own personal life is rife with gay sexual relationships. Two of Peter’s former male associates came out in June with on-the-record interviews saying they engaged in sexual activities with him, while other men say he propositioned them.
These allegations about the pastor—who in public is staunchly heterosexual—have ripped like an earthquake through the manosphere, prompting some of Peterson’s allies to abandon him and prompting one manosphere conference to ban him. “I’m very sorry to have Jesse’s situation damage the conservative movement,” Patrick Rooney, one of the men who claims to have had a sexual relationship with Peterson, told The Daily Beast.
snip
Allegations of Manosphere Pastor's Gay Past Roil Macho Men
Jesse Lee Peterson has emerged as one of the right’s most vocal anti-gay figures, but his one-time friends now allege that the pastor has had many same-sex relationships.https://www.thedailybeast.com/allegations-of-manosphere-pastor-jesse-lee-petersons-gay-past-roil-macho-men
In the hyper-masculine right-wing internet community known as the “manosphere,” few figures loom larger than Jesse Lee Peterson. The Los Angeles-based pastor and online radio host has become a star in conservative media in part for his demands that men and women return to his unorthodox version of traditional gender norms. Peterson’s ideas about gender can be eccentric even by the standards of his compatriots, with Peterson claiming that a woman who orgasms during sex is somehow “becoming a man,” a practice he frowns upon.
Peterson has also emerged as one of the right’s most vocal anti-gay figures. He’s claimed that people who march in gay pride parades are the children of Satan, and that “radical homosexuals are evil.” He’s become a regular sparring partner for progressive YouTube personalities, telling online commentator “Destiny” in 2020 that he didn’t understand why his debating partner was openly bisexual.
“I don’t understand the purpose of putting that out there,” Peterson said. “People are going to judge you, they’re going to look down on you.” Now several of Peterson’s one-time friends allege that the pastor’s own personal life is rife with gay sexual relationships. Two of Peter’s former male associates came out in June with on-the-record interviews saying they engaged in sexual activities with him, while other men say he propositioned them.
These allegations about the pastor—who in public is staunchly heterosexual—have ripped like an earthquake through the manosphere, prompting some of Peterson’s allies to abandon him and prompting one manosphere conference to ban him. “I’m very sorry to have Jesse’s situation damage the conservative movement,” Patrick Rooney, one of the men who claims to have had a sexual relationship with Peterson, told The Daily Beast.
snip
July 13, 2022
When the Social Security Administration’s inspector general investigated allegations earlier this year that one of the agency’s senior leaders was routinely impaired on the job, six witnesses painted an alarming picture. Theresa Gruber, a deputy commissioner overseeing around 9,000 employees and a $1.2 billion budget in the hearings and appeals operation, displayed “significant anomalies” at work over the course of at least a year, including slurred speech in which she “appeared intoxicated,” leaving meetings without notice, slouching in her chair and aggressive behavior, witnesses told investigators.
But five months after acting Social Security commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi was presented with the internal report, which The Washington Post obtained, Gruber remains on the job. The allegations by witnesses were corroborated to The Post by three members of Gruber’s senior staff, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. In recent months, Inspector General Gail Ennis’s office has received more formal complaints about Gruber’s conduct, according to people with knowledge of the communications.
She has continued to act erratically, three agency employees said, and in recent weeks has missed several meetings of her leadership team. Gruber, who was not interviewed by investigators contrary to standard practice in administrative probes, declined to comment for this article. Staff members told investigators that while they did not directly witness Gruber consuming alcohol on the job, her comportment led them to wonder whether she had been drinking. Gruber, 53, is also diabetic, the report notes, a condition that, when poorly treated, can cause irritability, disorientation or slurred speech. She told a close circle of colleagues that she was dealing with medical issues stemming from the condition, according to the report.
Witnesses told investigators that whatever the cause, Gruber’s conduct has affected her management of the agency’s Office of Hearings Operations, which runs one of the largest administrative judicial systems in the world. One high-ranking official interviewed by The Post described a “rudderless” department under Gruber, who sometimes does not communicate with her staff for days at a time, the official said. “She is MIA, and they’re not holding anyone accountable,” said this person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss matters publicly. Another official described “delays to decision-making” and important meetings and difficulty getting Gruber’s attention — factors they say threaten the department’s mission to conduct impartial hearings and issue decisions on appeals involving retirement and survivor and disability benefits for poor and elderly Americans.
snip
Top Social Security official keeps job after reports of being impaired at work
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/12/social-security-investigation-impaired-inspector-general/When the Social Security Administration’s inspector general investigated allegations earlier this year that one of the agency’s senior leaders was routinely impaired on the job, six witnesses painted an alarming picture. Theresa Gruber, a deputy commissioner overseeing around 9,000 employees and a $1.2 billion budget in the hearings and appeals operation, displayed “significant anomalies” at work over the course of at least a year, including slurred speech in which she “appeared intoxicated,” leaving meetings without notice, slouching in her chair and aggressive behavior, witnesses told investigators.
But five months after acting Social Security commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi was presented with the internal report, which The Washington Post obtained, Gruber remains on the job. The allegations by witnesses were corroborated to The Post by three members of Gruber’s senior staff, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. In recent months, Inspector General Gail Ennis’s office has received more formal complaints about Gruber’s conduct, according to people with knowledge of the communications.
She has continued to act erratically, three agency employees said, and in recent weeks has missed several meetings of her leadership team. Gruber, who was not interviewed by investigators contrary to standard practice in administrative probes, declined to comment for this article. Staff members told investigators that while they did not directly witness Gruber consuming alcohol on the job, her comportment led them to wonder whether she had been drinking. Gruber, 53, is also diabetic, the report notes, a condition that, when poorly treated, can cause irritability, disorientation or slurred speech. She told a close circle of colleagues that she was dealing with medical issues stemming from the condition, according to the report.
Witnesses told investigators that whatever the cause, Gruber’s conduct has affected her management of the agency’s Office of Hearings Operations, which runs one of the largest administrative judicial systems in the world. One high-ranking official interviewed by The Post described a “rudderless” department under Gruber, who sometimes does not communicate with her staff for days at a time, the official said. “She is MIA, and they’re not holding anyone accountable,” said this person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss matters publicly. Another official described “delays to decision-making” and important meetings and difficulty getting Gruber’s attention — factors they say threaten the department’s mission to conduct impartial hearings and issue decisions on appeals involving retirement and survivor and disability benefits for poor and elderly Americans.
snip
July 13, 2022
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-most-important-scotus-case-no-ones-talking-about
We need to talk about Moore v. Harper.
The right-wing rogues in the Supreme Court have agreed to hear a case that very well might put a judicial capstone on the GOP’s ongoing coup attempt, which could be the death knell for our democracy. The nation is still reeling from the blitzkrieg unleashed by an extreme Supreme Court that used its last term to bulldoze a woman’s right to abortion, neutered the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse emissions, limited states’ rights to regulate guns, eroded the separation of church and state, and weakened civil rights by ruling law enforcement can’t be sued for failing to read a person their Miranda rights. But the Supreme Court isn’t done trying to implement minority rule and advance its Christian nationalist agenda. They have agreed to hear Moore v. Harper, the most consequential case to our nation’s democracy that most Americans still aren’t talking about.
In Moore, North Carolina’s Republican House speaker wants to restore heavily gerrymandered congressional maps drawn by GOP elected officials that were rejected by the North Carolina Supreme Court. The court ordered them redrawn because they gave the GOP an “extreme partisan advantage” that violated the state constitution. In response, Republicans are invoking the “independent state legislature doctrine” which advances “the idea that, under the Constitution, only the legislature has the power to regulate federal elections, without interference from state courts,” as Amy Howe put it in SCOTUSblog.
If the court buys this nonsense theory, then the Republican-controlled state legislatures would be immune from any interference from state courts, governors, and elected officials who step up to protect voting rights and fight back against “constitutional mischief.” Republicans are arguing the Constitution allows state legislatures to completely ignore state Supreme Court decisions when passing laws related to federal elections, and this opens the door for the Supreme Court to say they could ignore the governor and act on their own.
To put it plainly, if President Joe Biden wins battleground states again in 2024, the Republican-controlled state legislatures of Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, and Pennsylvania could simply reject the will of the majority and install their own slate of electors and hand-deliver the presidency to a Republican. That’s exactly the crazy plan outlined by Trump-allied right-wing attorney John Eastman in his six-point memo, which a federal judge concluded was a “coup in search of a legal theory.” During his deliberate and sober testimony before the Jan. 6 Committee, retired Judge J. Michael Luttig, a life-long conservative, eviscerated the independent state legislature doctrine as dangerous bullshit and warned that “Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to American democracy.”
snip
The Most Important SCOTUS Case No One's Talking About
The Supreme Court will soon hear arguments in Moore v. Harper, a case that could give Republicans the legal authority to steal elections.https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-most-important-scotus-case-no-ones-talking-about
We need to talk about Moore v. Harper.
The right-wing rogues in the Supreme Court have agreed to hear a case that very well might put a judicial capstone on the GOP’s ongoing coup attempt, which could be the death knell for our democracy. The nation is still reeling from the blitzkrieg unleashed by an extreme Supreme Court that used its last term to bulldoze a woman’s right to abortion, neutered the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse emissions, limited states’ rights to regulate guns, eroded the separation of church and state, and weakened civil rights by ruling law enforcement can’t be sued for failing to read a person their Miranda rights. But the Supreme Court isn’t done trying to implement minority rule and advance its Christian nationalist agenda. They have agreed to hear Moore v. Harper, the most consequential case to our nation’s democracy that most Americans still aren’t talking about.
In Moore, North Carolina’s Republican House speaker wants to restore heavily gerrymandered congressional maps drawn by GOP elected officials that were rejected by the North Carolina Supreme Court. The court ordered them redrawn because they gave the GOP an “extreme partisan advantage” that violated the state constitution. In response, Republicans are invoking the “independent state legislature doctrine” which advances “the idea that, under the Constitution, only the legislature has the power to regulate federal elections, without interference from state courts,” as Amy Howe put it in SCOTUSblog.
If the court buys this nonsense theory, then the Republican-controlled state legislatures would be immune from any interference from state courts, governors, and elected officials who step up to protect voting rights and fight back against “constitutional mischief.” Republicans are arguing the Constitution allows state legislatures to completely ignore state Supreme Court decisions when passing laws related to federal elections, and this opens the door for the Supreme Court to say they could ignore the governor and act on their own.
To put it plainly, if President Joe Biden wins battleground states again in 2024, the Republican-controlled state legislatures of Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, and Pennsylvania could simply reject the will of the majority and install their own slate of electors and hand-deliver the presidency to a Republican. That’s exactly the crazy plan outlined by Trump-allied right-wing attorney John Eastman in his six-point memo, which a federal judge concluded was a “coup in search of a legal theory.” During his deliberate and sober testimony before the Jan. 6 Committee, retired Judge J. Michael Luttig, a life-long conservative, eviscerated the independent state legislature doctrine as dangerous bullshit and warned that “Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to American democracy.”
snip
July 12, 2022
The unexpected retirement may flip the court’s ideological balance on critical issues, depending on Governor Kathy Hochul’s choice of a replacement.
https://boltsmag.org/new-york-chief-judge-di-fiore-resigns/
On Monday, Janet DiFiore, the chief judge of the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court, announced that she will be resigning this August. The news stunned much of New York’s political establishment and offered Governor Kathy Hochul, who will nominate DiFiore’s replacement, the chance to reshape the Court of Appeals for years to come.
The court has taken a sharp turn to the right over the last year, New York Focus reported last week. DiFiore leads a group of four conservative judges who have voted as a bloc in 96 of the 98 cases in the seven-member court’s most recent term, giving it control over essentially all the court’s decisions.
In that time, this bloc has issued a slew of rulings favoring law enforcement, large corporations, and landlords over defendants, employees, consumers, and tenants. DiFiore and her three allies—Anthony Cannataro, Michael Garcia, and Madeline Singas—have also been responsible for a sharp drop in the court’s overall caseload, and particularly in the number of criminal appeals that the court hears, experts say.
This conservative majority was expected to remain in control of the court until at least 2025, the year DiFiore would have had to leave the court due to turning 70, New York’s mandatory retirement age for judges. DiFiore offered no reason for her sudden resignation on Monday. But Law360 reported that she is currently the subject of an ethics investigation for interfering in the disciplinary process for a court officer who threatened to post flyers critical of her on court buildings. If Hochul were to appoint a judge who is more progressive than DiFiore, it could flip the court’s ideological balance on key issues.
snip
New York's Chief Judge Resigns, Breaking Up High Court's Right-Leaning Majority
The unexpected retirement may flip the court’s ideological balance on critical issues, depending on Governor Kathy Hochul’s choice of a replacement.
https://boltsmag.org/new-york-chief-judge-di-fiore-resigns/
On Monday, Janet DiFiore, the chief judge of the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court, announced that she will be resigning this August. The news stunned much of New York’s political establishment and offered Governor Kathy Hochul, who will nominate DiFiore’s replacement, the chance to reshape the Court of Appeals for years to come.
The court has taken a sharp turn to the right over the last year, New York Focus reported last week. DiFiore leads a group of four conservative judges who have voted as a bloc in 96 of the 98 cases in the seven-member court’s most recent term, giving it control over essentially all the court’s decisions.
In that time, this bloc has issued a slew of rulings favoring law enforcement, large corporations, and landlords over defendants, employees, consumers, and tenants. DiFiore and her three allies—Anthony Cannataro, Michael Garcia, and Madeline Singas—have also been responsible for a sharp drop in the court’s overall caseload, and particularly in the number of criminal appeals that the court hears, experts say.
This conservative majority was expected to remain in control of the court until at least 2025, the year DiFiore would have had to leave the court due to turning 70, New York’s mandatory retirement age for judges. DiFiore offered no reason for her sudden resignation on Monday. But Law360 reported that she is currently the subject of an ethics investigation for interfering in the disciplinary process for a court officer who threatened to post flyers critical of her on court buildings. If Hochul were to appoint a judge who is more progressive than DiFiore, it could flip the court’s ideological balance on key issues.
snip
July 12, 2022
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/07/where-is-the-national-outrage-over-uvalde/670501/
Unexplained Failures
Around this time two summers ago, Americans were marching in the streets of cities across the country to protest the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer. Almost two years to the day after Floyd’s death, a gunman at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, killed 19 students and two teachers. This past weekend, hundreds of family members of victims and their supporters marched in Uvalde. It was a lonelier protest. Already, national attention has started to move on, including to the July 4 massacre in Highland Park, Illinois. (To be frank, I had to check to make sure I wasn’t forgetting any other major mass shootings.)
Floyd’s murder and the Uvalde massacre are two horrors in which police are at the center, though in completely different ways. In Minneapolis, police used excessive force; in Uvalde, everyone seems to agree, they failed to use force as soon as they should have. These are extreme examples of a familiar dyad of overpolicing, which includes pretextual stops (when officers find an excuse to stop someone, in the hopes of uncovering a more serious offense) and brutal enforcement, and underpolicing, in which citizens feel abandoned by law enforcement.
In the Floyd case, junior officers were convicted for failing to intervene as Derek Chauvin kneeled on Floyd’s neck. In Uvalde, officers did not act for nearly 80 minutes as they waited for an order. Experts say criminal charges in Uvalde are unlikely—prosecuting officers for inaction is even harder than prosecuting them for things they did—though civil suits are possible. Pete Arredondo, chief of the school-district police, has stepped down from a city-council seat and is on leave from his police role but has not heeded demands to resign.
Both cases are also unusual in that they have attracted widespread condemnation from other police officers. Yet nearly 50 days have passed since the massacre, and the public still knows vanishingly little about why the police failed so badly in Uvalde. But as we've learned from past incidents, civilians should be skeptical of official accounts, especially early on. The initial police report about Floyd’s death infamously stated that “officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress.”
snip
Where Is the National Outrage Over Uvalde?
Almost 50 days later, attention is moving on, but officials still haven’t explained how police failed so badly. George Floyd’s murder changed how Americans view law enforcement. The Uvalde massacre could have its own impact on policing and guns, and yet we still don’t know why the police response went so wrong.https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/07/where-is-the-national-outrage-over-uvalde/670501/
Unexplained Failures
Around this time two summers ago, Americans were marching in the streets of cities across the country to protest the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer. Almost two years to the day after Floyd’s death, a gunman at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, killed 19 students and two teachers. This past weekend, hundreds of family members of victims and their supporters marched in Uvalde. It was a lonelier protest. Already, national attention has started to move on, including to the July 4 massacre in Highland Park, Illinois. (To be frank, I had to check to make sure I wasn’t forgetting any other major mass shootings.)
Floyd’s murder and the Uvalde massacre are two horrors in which police are at the center, though in completely different ways. In Minneapolis, police used excessive force; in Uvalde, everyone seems to agree, they failed to use force as soon as they should have. These are extreme examples of a familiar dyad of overpolicing, which includes pretextual stops (when officers find an excuse to stop someone, in the hopes of uncovering a more serious offense) and brutal enforcement, and underpolicing, in which citizens feel abandoned by law enforcement.
In the Floyd case, junior officers were convicted for failing to intervene as Derek Chauvin kneeled on Floyd’s neck. In Uvalde, officers did not act for nearly 80 minutes as they waited for an order. Experts say criminal charges in Uvalde are unlikely—prosecuting officers for inaction is even harder than prosecuting them for things they did—though civil suits are possible. Pete Arredondo, chief of the school-district police, has stepped down from a city-council seat and is on leave from his police role but has not heeded demands to resign.
Both cases are also unusual in that they have attracted widespread condemnation from other police officers. Yet nearly 50 days have passed since the massacre, and the public still knows vanishingly little about why the police failed so badly in Uvalde. But as we've learned from past incidents, civilians should be skeptical of official accounts, especially early on. The initial police report about Floyd’s death infamously stated that “officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress.”
snip
July 12, 2022
TRACKLIST:
Yazoo - Nobody's Diary
Electronic - Getting Away With It
Anything Box - Living In Oblivion
Pet Shop Boys - Always On My Mind
The Lightning Seeds - Love Explosion
Information Society - Running
Kraftwerk - The Model
ABC - Be Near Me
The Lightning Seeds - Sweet Dreams
Red Flag - Broken Heart
New Order - Shellshock
The Lightning Seeds - Pure
Stephen Duffy (Tin Tin) - Kiss Me
Erasure - Chains Of Love
Pet Shop Boys - Heart
Kon Kan - I Beg Your Pardon
New Order - Round & Round
NEW WAVE ALTERNAT!VE.. MIX VOL 5
TRACKLIST:
Yazoo - Nobody's Diary
Electronic - Getting Away With It
Anything Box - Living In Oblivion
Pet Shop Boys - Always On My Mind
The Lightning Seeds - Love Explosion
Information Society - Running
Kraftwerk - The Model
ABC - Be Near Me
The Lightning Seeds - Sweet Dreams
Red Flag - Broken Heart
New Order - Shellshock
The Lightning Seeds - Pure
Stephen Duffy (Tin Tin) - Kiss Me
Erasure - Chains Of Love
Pet Shop Boys - Heart
Kon Kan - I Beg Your Pardon
New Order - Round & Round
July 12, 2022
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/07/12/new-york-times-essay-ectopic-pregnancy-error/
In a July 4 guest essay on ectopic pregnancy for the Times, Leah Libresco Sargeant used language that doesn’t meet medical standards for discussion and treatment of such conditions, as a social media furor promptly pointed out. In an apparent effort to host an array of opinions, the Times privileged the author’s linguistic preferences over the greater imperative to convey precise, factual information to readers. That mistake comes at a fraught moment to be writing about women’s health, as new battles over reproductive rights have turned the beat into a linguistic and ideological minefield.
https://twitter.com/laurachapin/status/1544029089907912704
The Supreme Court’s decision last month overturning Roe v. Wade has not clarified the regulatory environment but upended it. Concerns arising from the conflicts in state abortion policies include how medical providers will treat patients with pregnancy complications. STAT, for instance, reported that a woman experiencing an ectopic pregnancy days after the court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health had to wait for a Missouri hospital’s ethics committee to sign off on her treatment.
Ectopic pregnancies are potentially fatal for the mother — and always fatal for the fetus. Will hospitals treat these cases as aggressively as they did before the court’s decision in Dobbs? “The lack of specificity over what counts as a threat to the mother’s life means some doctors feel pressure to sit and watch patients’ health deteriorate until they’re able to intervene,” reported STAT. In her Times piece, Sargeant defined ectopic pregnancy as one in which “the baby implants somewhere other than the uterus.” And the essay noted that the “situation is fatal for the baby” and dangerous for the mother.
In the vast majority of ectopic pregnancies, the embryo lodges in the fallopian tubes — a perilous development, physician Beverly Gray explains to the Erik Wemple Blog. “It’s a very narrow tube, and you have an embryo that’s traveling along the tube. The tube is not hospitable for the development of a pregnancy and what happens is it stretches to the point where it’s super thin and that can cause an emergent situation: Hemorrhage and bleeding,” says Gray, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Duke University School of Medicine.
snip
New York Times won't correct its errant essay on ectopic pregnancy
Memo to the New York Times: It’s a bad time to publish inaccurate information about pregnancies.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/07/12/new-york-times-essay-ectopic-pregnancy-error/
In a July 4 guest essay on ectopic pregnancy for the Times, Leah Libresco Sargeant used language that doesn’t meet medical standards for discussion and treatment of such conditions, as a social media furor promptly pointed out. In an apparent effort to host an array of opinions, the Times privileged the author’s linguistic preferences over the greater imperative to convey precise, factual information to readers. That mistake comes at a fraught moment to be writing about women’s health, as new battles over reproductive rights have turned the beat into a linguistic and ideological minefield.
https://twitter.com/laurachapin/status/1544029089907912704
The Supreme Court’s decision last month overturning Roe v. Wade has not clarified the regulatory environment but upended it. Concerns arising from the conflicts in state abortion policies include how medical providers will treat patients with pregnancy complications. STAT, for instance, reported that a woman experiencing an ectopic pregnancy days after the court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health had to wait for a Missouri hospital’s ethics committee to sign off on her treatment.
Ectopic pregnancies are potentially fatal for the mother — and always fatal for the fetus. Will hospitals treat these cases as aggressively as they did before the court’s decision in Dobbs? “The lack of specificity over what counts as a threat to the mother’s life means some doctors feel pressure to sit and watch patients’ health deteriorate until they’re able to intervene,” reported STAT. In her Times piece, Sargeant defined ectopic pregnancy as one in which “the baby implants somewhere other than the uterus.” And the essay noted that the “situation is fatal for the baby” and dangerous for the mother.
In the vast majority of ectopic pregnancies, the embryo lodges in the fallopian tubes — a perilous development, physician Beverly Gray explains to the Erik Wemple Blog. “It’s a very narrow tube, and you have an embryo that’s traveling along the tube. The tube is not hospitable for the development of a pregnancy and what happens is it stretches to the point where it’s super thin and that can cause an emergent situation: Hemorrhage and bleeding,” says Gray, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Duke University School of Medicine.
snip
July 12, 2022
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/congress-inaction-partisanship/670486/
https://archive.ph/daxnf
On the last day of the Supreme Court’s most recent term, the Court released two cases that highlight a challenge to American democracy—a challenge that is the direct result of one of the Founders’ more consequential miscalculations. They granted Congress more power than any other branch of government, and they mistakenly thought Congress would possess a sense of institutional responsibility and authority. Instead it is largely a partisan body, drained of any sense of independent civic duty, and American democracy suffers as a result.
The two cases seem unrelated at first glance. One is West Virginia v. EPA, in which the Supreme Court struck down the Environmental Protection Agency’s Obama-era clean-power rule. The Court relied on the so-called major-questions doctrine, a relatively new term for the legal idea that if Congress intends to delegate significant power to regulatory agencies to fashion new rules and regulations, it has to do so explicitly. The second case is Biden v. Texas. The Court upheld the Biden administration’s decision to reverse the Trump administration’s “remain in Mexico” policy, which required a small number of non-Mexican nationals who were detained at the border to wait in Mexico during their removal proceedings.
What do these cases have in common? They both arose from serious and problematic congressional inaction. In the EPA case, the executive branch was responding to legitimate concerns about climate change, but the executive branch is not supposed to be a lawmaking body. In the “remain in Mexico” case, Congress failed to fund sufficient immigration detention facilities, rendering it impossible for the president to comply with Congress’s mandate that immigrants who are not “clearly and beyond a reasonable doubt” entitled to entry “shall be detained.” This left the president with the choice of releasing migrants into the country or requiring them to return to the “foreign territory contiguous to the United States” from which they arrived.
Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” With the growth of the administrative state, Congress has effectively delegated some of its legislative powers to administrative agencies, which promulgate regulations that have the force of law. For example, many of the rules that govern American immigration, environmental policy, workplace safety, and the securities industry are regulations promulgated by the executive branch, not statutes passed by Congress.
snip
The Constitution Isn't Working
And the Supreme Court can’t fix it by itself.https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/congress-inaction-partisanship/670486/
https://archive.ph/daxnf
On the last day of the Supreme Court’s most recent term, the Court released two cases that highlight a challenge to American democracy—a challenge that is the direct result of one of the Founders’ more consequential miscalculations. They granted Congress more power than any other branch of government, and they mistakenly thought Congress would possess a sense of institutional responsibility and authority. Instead it is largely a partisan body, drained of any sense of independent civic duty, and American democracy suffers as a result.
The two cases seem unrelated at first glance. One is West Virginia v. EPA, in which the Supreme Court struck down the Environmental Protection Agency’s Obama-era clean-power rule. The Court relied on the so-called major-questions doctrine, a relatively new term for the legal idea that if Congress intends to delegate significant power to regulatory agencies to fashion new rules and regulations, it has to do so explicitly. The second case is Biden v. Texas. The Court upheld the Biden administration’s decision to reverse the Trump administration’s “remain in Mexico” policy, which required a small number of non-Mexican nationals who were detained at the border to wait in Mexico during their removal proceedings.
What do these cases have in common? They both arose from serious and problematic congressional inaction. In the EPA case, the executive branch was responding to legitimate concerns about climate change, but the executive branch is not supposed to be a lawmaking body. In the “remain in Mexico” case, Congress failed to fund sufficient immigration detention facilities, rendering it impossible for the president to comply with Congress’s mandate that immigrants who are not “clearly and beyond a reasonable doubt” entitled to entry “shall be detained.” This left the president with the choice of releasing migrants into the country or requiring them to return to the “foreign territory contiguous to the United States” from which they arrived.
Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” With the growth of the administrative state, Congress has effectively delegated some of its legislative powers to administrative agencies, which promulgate regulations that have the force of law. For example, many of the rules that govern American immigration, environmental policy, workplace safety, and the securities industry are regulations promulgated by the executive branch, not statutes passed by Congress.
snip
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 43,333
