Purple and Black
Taking Independent and Unofficial Back

Political Hodgepodge

I read (part of) an article and listened to (part of) a podcast that both spoke to the strong currents of this time we're living in. The article is about Ohio state politics.


Oof. Tough read but important. It's not a unique situation.

The podcast was Ezra Klein and he was talking to a guest, journalist Sean Illing, about how the media of a time shape the messaging and politics. One comment that interested me concerned the inherent Achilles heel of democracy: the inclusiveness of all voices opens the door to nefarious actors, even those that seek to destroy democracy, which basically describes what's happened in Ohio, along with gerrymandering. Of course, nefarious actors are well-dispersed throughout the country.

How We Communicate Will Decide Whether Democracy Lives or Dies [NYT; 7.26.22]

One quote:
"The Republicans’ antics lasted so long that they basically ran out the clock. Election deadlines were looming, and the makeup of Ohio’s districts still hadn’t been settled. “They contrived a crisis,” Russo told me. At that point, a group allied with the Republicans, Ohio Right to Life, urged a federal court to intervene, on the ground that the delay was imperilling the fair administration of upcoming elections. The decision was made by a panel of three federal judges—two of whom had been appointed by Trump. Over the strenuous objection of the third judge, the two Trump judges ruled in the group’s favor, allowing the 2022 elections to proceed with a map so rigged that Ohio’s top judicial body had rejected it as unconstitutional.

On Twitter, Bill Seitz, the majority leader of the Ohio House, jeered at his Democratic opponents: “Too bad so sad. We win again.” He continued, “Now I know it’s been a tough night for all you libs. Pour yourself a glass of warm milk and you will sleep better. The game is over and you lost.”"

Depressing stuff, but important information.

I don't have a cohesive message. These are just two things I came across that I think are interesting, so I'm throwing it out here, in case you're twiddling your thumbs, wondering what to do right now.
 
Last edited:
Every so often, I find myself whispering, "Mississippi Goddamn" (thanks, @JCrash54), under my breath, when I read the news. Like here, read this...


and click on the poster within the post to see more examples.
Have you known anyone that's died from complications of diabetes, combined with poverty? Mississippi Goddamn.
 
Every so often, I find myself whispering, "Mississippi Goddamn" (thanks, @JCrash54), under my breath, when I read the news. Like here, read this...


and click on the poster within the post to see more examples.
Have you known anyone that's died from complications of diabetes, combined with poverty? Mississippi Goddamn.
Hahaha, I'm telling you man. That damn Nina Simone was ahead of her time with her civil rights music
 
Someone's house got raided by the FBI last night. They made sure to come while the homeowner was out of town. In order to search that home, the FBI had to convince a judge that there was a reasonable expectation of finding documents or items that evidenced a serious crime. And they did, getting a court order to conduct that search. While that court order is currently sealed, it's nearly certain the FBI was looking for more than just documents the homeowner took from his previous employer which he shouldn't have. Court orders like that are usually written very broadly, so that if the FBI finds evidence of just about any kind of crime, they can take that evidence into custody.

It appears that's exactly what happened.
 
Someone's house got raided by the FBI last night. They made sure to come while the homeowner was out of town. In order to search that home, the FBI had to convince a judge that there was a reasonable expectation of finding documents or items that evidenced a serious crime. And they did, getting a court order to conduct that search. While that court order is currently sealed, it's nearly certain the FBI was looking for more than just documents the homeowner took from his previous employer which he shouldn't have. Court orders like that are usually written very broadly, so that if the FBI finds evidence of just about any kind of crime, they can take that evidence into custody.

It appears that's exactly what happened.
 
Suspected "Proud Boy" tries to storm FBI office, fucked around and found out what happens to "Proud Boys" that try to storm an FBI office.
 

This topic should really have its own thread where we compile a list, except how to keep up with the endless examples.
 
I guess this is politics, it's certainly hodgepodge:

We went to Austin for the weekend and I packed everything I needed except syringes for my insulin. No problem, I can get them at any drugstore. No prescription needed for insulin or syringes, on account of people need that stuff to live.

Except not at CVS! They kept asking me for my prescription and I kept telling them that in 13 years, I'd never once needed a prescription to buy insulin or syringes, anywhere. "Well, this is CVS policy," said the pharmacist. "So, if I came in here, on the cusp of going into diabetic shock because I had my insulin but not any syringes, you still wouldn't sell me something that has never, ever required a prescription?" "That's CVS policy".

I was not happy. And guess what? It IS CVS policy. Apparently they're too afraid of a meth head getting some needles than they are worried about diabetics dying. I was not very happy, let's just say that.

Thank GOD for Walmart. That's generally where I buy both insulin and syringes. We found the nearest Walmart and they happily sold me 100 syringes for $12.

As far as I'm concerned, CVS can suck it and I will ALWAYS be a fan of Walmart. EDIT - and CVS, too!
 
Last edited:
Good news! I sent a nice-but-firm email to the CVS CEO, which was forwarded to their conflict resolution team. The district manager for the Austin area called me this morning, apologized, and said it is absolutely NOT the policy of CVS to require a prescription for insulin or syringes.

Hooray!

About the only justification the manager said could have possibly been used is a state law that says pharmacists have the discretion to refuse to fill any order. This generally applies to someone that comes in and says, "Hey, I'm from out of town but I need 4 bottles of codeine cough syrup and 6 boxes of extra-strong sinus medicine". Yeah, right! As far as I know, I don't look like Walter White or a meth head at all.

Anyway, I was very relieved to hear that the policy was what it should be, and I hereby rescind all criticisms of CVS.
 
Good news! I sent a nice-but-firm email to the CVS CEO, which was forwarded to their conflict resolution team. The district manager for the Austin area called me this morning, apologized, and said it is absolutely NOT the policy of CVS to require a prescription for insulin or syringes.

Hooray!

About the only justification the manager said could have possibly been used is a state law that says pharmacists have the discretion to refuse to fill any order. This generally applies to someone that comes in and says, "Hey, I'm from out of town but I need 4 bottles of codeine cough syrup and 6 boxes of extra-strong sinus medicine". Yeah, right! As far as I know, I don't look like Walter White or a meth head at all.

Anyway, I was very relieved to hear that the policy was what it should be, and I hereby rescind all criticisms of CVS.
Go back to the same CVS again and see what happens.
With our prescription plan we have to go to CVS. I'm a little tired of them not letting me refill scripts the day before because it isn't time yet.
 
Go back to the same CVS again and see what happens.
With our prescription plan we have to go to CVS. I'm a little tired of them not letting me refill scripts the day before because it isn't time yet.

I can't, it's 180 miles away. But I'm sure they got everything straightened out. The CVS district manager is a really nice guy.
 
Click on the whole conversation.

*sigh* Why weren't we all out there, clamoring for this??? Wouldn't revealing the devious megadonors trying to control our system of government significantly diminish their abilities? Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

For the gop-leaning amongst us, I'm sorry to say that the gop comes down on the wrong side of many important voting rights issues, while trumpeting loudly that the dems are doing this, doing that, and all sorts of misdeeds, when it's purely a sham on their part. If they really cared about the issue, they'd vote for this bill. The gop don't want us to know the purveyors and workings of dark money because they benefit from it.

From The Washington Post, 9.22.22:
Senate Republicans block bill to require disclosure of 'dark money' donors

I wouldn't say that dems don't play this game. It would be foolish for them not to, since it's being used liberally by the other side. At least, dems are making an effort to turn the tide.

Some additional history on the 'Disclose Act' from Business Insider [9.22.22]:
Republican senators vote to block a bill requiring dark-money groups to disclose their donors: 'I don't want to see them doxxed'
 
Last edited:
So the new British PM killed the Queen and then quit 45 days later??? And now Boris might be back in?
 
So the new British PM killed the Queen and then quit 45 days later??? And now Boris might be back in?
It's a mess isn't it? We're the laughing stock of the world, but worse people are dying whilst they play about with the country's laws and finances. We haven't really had a PM all year, not properly. Johnson went missing, then he disappeared for months, and Truss did far less than 45 days as everything shut down for 10 days for the Queen and then another 10 days for Conferences. She only ever did two weekly PMQs.

I doubt Johnson will get back in. He's like Trump, he likes the headlines. He's too controversial right now. I think he will come back (though I hope he doesn't), but I don't think he'll do it now.
 

Links to Folks we Support

Back
Top