PRESIDENTIAL “DEBATE”
Do we really have to start with the debate? Oh why not. Maybe I’ll do a whole post on some of the comments and whatnot, but for a quick review:
First off, I don’t think anyone’s mind was changed, with one small caveat I’ll put at the end. People who plan to vote for Biden will still vote for him, people who plan to vote for Trump will still vote for him. That’s about 88-95% of the electorate, from what i’ve hear. But there is that 5+%.
People will debate this I’m sure, but in my opinion, I don’t think there’s any way to come away from that debate thinking Biden won. I don’t think Trump “won” so much as he sucked less, and that’s something.
From what I understand, this was Biden’s team who wanted the debate, because they wanted to counter the narrative that Biden was too old or too lethargic. If that was the plan, then I think they failed. I listened on the radio, so all I could do was listen, but Biden seemed every bit the octogenarian. From the comments I’ve seen, the visual was, if anything, worse.
I’m ok with Biden stuttering, and I understand his team is saying he had a cold, so he was hoarse and raspy. That’s all well and good, but stuttering doesn’t make it impossible say a policy position. A hoarse voice doesn’t make one unable to stay on point. I don’t know that Biden’s ever been a great debater, but in the words of a collegiate debate coach, his first 20 minutes or so may be the worst of any presidential debate.
And of course Trump was Trump, unable to stick to any one point, rambling, complaining, no vision of what he will actually do, just blaming Biden and a lot of “the worst in the history of blah blah blah.” I heard a lot of “this never would have happened…” It’s pretty easy to talk about what would have been. You can make up anything you want. I did think Trump’s plan was essentially to blame Biden for all the bad consequences of Trump’s presidency, but I’m not really sure that matters. His supporters already think that, and Biden’s supporters already think otherwise.
The only thing I think might have changed after tonight is that more people will just say “forget it. I’m just staying home.” For myself, this just basically cemented my resolve not to vote for either of these guys. Whoever wins (and yes, it will be one of them unless Biden somehow doesn’t get the nomination), I at least will not contribute to this travesty.
SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST GOVT AGENCIES
So, this might be a little complicated, but to sumup – the SEC (people who regulate the stockmarket, among a host of other financial issues) has rules to enforce compliance. Basically, Congress says “SEC, you’re in charge of making sure business do investments fairly.” The SEC has set up what are essentially tribunals – where in-house judges hold a hearing and decide if a business/person has violated those rules, and imposes fines or penalties.
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that this practice violates the 7th Amendment, and requires that people accused of these violations deserve a jury trial. In other words, the Courts are acting as a check on Congress’s power. Which is not a terrible thing.
That said, this is a big change, and could radically change how government agencies prosecute violators, and could possibly open the door to considerably more violations as the cost and time to prosecute could escalate quickly.
For people who hate government regulation, this is about as big a win as you can imagine. It’s still unclear how this will affect other agencies, but might include changes to the Federal Trade Commission, the Internal Revenue Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Social Security Administration, the National Labor Relations Board and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Kev Opinion: In general terms, conservatives like this ruling, and liberals don’t. I have no strong opinion on this, other than to say I think sometimes the idea of cutting regulations takes on an almost mythical quality, as if all regulations are bad. Regulations that do good things are good, regulations that do bad things are bad. Still unclear which this ruling will affect.
OKLAHOMA MANDATES TEACHING BIBLE IN SCHOOL
The Oklahoma superintendent of schools released a statement requiring schools to teach Bible in grades 5-12 in all Oklahoma schools.
Aside from what seems like an obvious violation of promoting a religion, I am not a fan of this. Why so, you may ask? Aren’t I slightly-qualified Biblical teacher? Indeed I was, and hence my concern.
For some reason, people think anyone who can read can teach Bible. I know people explicitly said that to me – let’s just grab one of the parents and have them teach. For some reason, people don’t really understand there’s in the vicinity of 2000 years of Christian interpretation of the Bible (and that doesn’t count non believers, or even Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament). As hard as it may be to believe, all of those interpretations don’t match.
I remember teaching at Trinity, a specifically evangelical school, and we still had more than 10 denominations represented in one classroom. It was tough enough to balance that in an explicitly christian environment, with someone with moderate experience in denominational history. I can’t imagine trying to do that in a public school, with people with only a cursory knowledge of it.
So no, not a fan. But it probably doesn’t matter. It seems to me this is a pretty clear violation of the First Amendment, at least as far as it’s been interpreted for like 250 years. But, never say never I guess.
SUPREME COURT ALLOWS FOR EMERGENCY ABORTIONS IN IDAHO
The Supreme Court overturned a decision to allow Idaho’s total abortion to go into effect. Essentially, they ruled that hospitals could perform emergency abortions if the mother’s life is at stake.
This doesn’t really change much overall, as multiple states are still wrestling with this question. That is, I think nearly all people think at some level that an abortion to save a mother’s life is appropriate. But what is the definition of “life at stake”?
For example, if the mother has depression, could that constitute their life is at stake? What if they have leukemia and need chemo? What if they have skin cancer and need minor surgery? Should they be forced to wait until after delivery? And so forth and so on. The problem is a legally-enforceable line.
(or of course, if you believe that a fetus isn’t a person, than the mother can decide whatever she wants with her doctor, and there shouldn’t be legal involvement at all. )
Kev Opinion: As usual, I think this comes down to the personhood of the fetus – is a fetus a person, and at what stage of development? If the answer’s no, then any restriction on the mother is a violation of her rights. If the answer’s yes, then there has to be some careful weighing of lives. I personally don’t see these debates being solved until there’s some agreement on that.
I was just talking with somebody on social media, and when i mentioned this, they just responded “there’s no debate. A fetus isn’t a person. Period.” Well, if that’s your position, and you can’t even comprehend someone else’s position, then we’re not very close to a solution here.
ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR
Benjamin Netanyahu released a statement saying the “intensive phase” of the Gaza war will be ending shortly. I’ve done a little googling, but I can’t figure out what that’s supposed to mean. To my thinking, war is as intense as the people getting killed say it is. I assume this means they will relax the pace of attack and so forth, but I don’t know by how much
I do think it’s good there’s at least a hint that things might cool down a little. I don’t think it’s going to solve the overall issue, which is Israel’s decision that they will no longer consider Palestinian claims in Gaza. I get it, after the Hamas attacks. But it still is an unresolved issue, even if the immediate fighting dies down.
Kev Opinion: This always gets me in trouble, but I will say it again anyway. For Christians, I do not think the current state of Israel is the same as the “nation” of Israel in the Bible. The Biblical word means “people,” and there are more Jewish people in the US than in Israel. Does that mean the US is the nation of Israel? So no, I don’t think Christians are under obligation to endorse and support everything the political and military state of Israel do.
That said, I’m enough of a googler of war to know that attacking neighbors in defense, taking land, establishing new boundaries, and claiming historic land rights is just something countries do. I think Israel had legitimate reasons to reach the end of their rope with Hamas. Whether the response was appropriate to the offense, I can’t say, but I don’t necessarily think it was unexpected.
As I always say on this, I’m torn. I would love there to be an end to war. But I don’t know that there ever will be. Perhaps more humanitarian aid can at least get through.
GUN VIOLENCE DECLARED A NATIONAL EMERGENCY
Dr Vivek Murphy, the US surgeon general, has declared gun violence a national public health crisis. The idea here is to move the discussion of guns from an issue of politics to an issue of public health, similar to how smoking was reframed.
Murphy has several proposals:
calls on the U.S. to ban “assault weapons and large-capacity magazines for civilian use,” introduce universal background checks for purchasing guns, regulate the industry, pass laws that would restrict their use in public spaces and penalize people who fail to safely store their weapons.
Of course, this will be opposed by gun rights advocates and most likely by most members of the GOP. We’ll see if it goes anywhere.
KENYAN TAX PROTESTS
The Kenyan govt passed a bill that, among other things, raised taxes on basic imported goods and bread. The govt claimed this was necessary to pay off the nation’s debt, but younger Kenyans saw it favoring the wealthy over the rest of the population.
At least 22 people have been killed, and the president has announced he will no longer sign the bill.
The thing I find interesting here is that these protests were fueled and guided on social media, and the protestors used spam attacks on parliament and govt officials. They used TikTok, Instagram, and even ChatGPT to create and spread information about the protests.
I need to look into it further, but it’s a fascinating look at how new technologies are affecting real-world political events.
RHINOS INJECTED WITH RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL
Researchers injected 20 South African Rhinos with a small amount of radioactive material into their horns. In a new attempt to limit poaching, the idea is that if poachers try to smuggle horns out of South Africa, they will be more easily detected by radiation detectors.
Many (most?) airports around the world have radiation sensors that scan everything and everyone that comes through, as a way of fighting terrorist activity. The idea here is that if the rhino horns are faintly radioactive, they will set off these sensors, making it more difficult to smuggle horns.
The worldwide rhino population has declined from 500,000 to 16,000 in just over 100 years, and it remains one of the most-poached animals due to continued demand for its horn on the black market.
Kev opinion: Generally speaking, I’m in favor of conservation efforts. I think we are commanded from the Bible to care for the earth, and I think that includes guarding animal populations. So, I’m in favor here, though obviously as a child of the 80s, the idea of radiation is always going to raise my eyebrows. However, we’re constantly exposed to small amounts of radiation, so I’m pretty ambivalent on the methodology.
PANTHERS DEFEAT OILERS FOR STANLEY CUP
In sports, apparently some sort of hockey tournament was going on. To my understanding a team from the great hockey hotbed of Florida defeated a Canadian team. I can only image their shock and disbelief.