You go, Flatlanders! That’s really smart.
Meanwhile, in the state that acts like your fun upstairs neighbor who occasionally does stupid shit, they renewed gramma’s license without any questions.
She’s NINETY-SEVEN, fer chrissakes!
“Oh, that’s sooo smart, Mom. Did you get the sticker on the back that says the next child you run over can be an organ donor?”
I realize we old folks are more likely to have declining vision, but I find it comforting that in KS and MO you need to have a minimal visual acuity to drive, no matter your age.
Yeah, I’m in Kansas and I’m used to taking the vision test every four years when I renew my DL. I blithely assumed that was the case in every state.
ETA: you can have your optometrist perform the test, and then have the results in hand when you go the renewal office.
Is that not true of EVERY state? If not, I need to know which states to steer clear of.
I’ve had an eye test every time I renew. And, of course, when I got my first license. My right eye isn’t as good as the left, so my instructor wrote “MUST DRIVE CAR WITH RIGHTHAND SIDE VIEW MIRROR”.
I checked, and back in the '60s, that was an optional accessory!
There has been a settlement:
What puzzles me is how low the amount of money is. This is from three different bars and Enterprise car rental–so it is not the case the settlement is low because of low policy limits. Although it doesn’t include any money from the drunken driver.
Did you ask why the hell the car has a steering wheel if that’s the case?
Here’s a stupid and definitely evil piece of dross:
Drunken Texas woman tries to drown three-year-old Muslim child while yelling racist slurs.
No doubt when she sobers up we’ll get the usual blubbering “That’s not who I really am” whine.
Booze brings out the real you, often enough.
Please, no comments about “just desserts”, “icing the Cakes” or “head of the Family”.
Well, that’s the way the cookie crumbles.
In vino veritas
I would never.
But you have to admit that story has many layers.
No criminal charges for the driver, but he could still face a torte
So the dead dude will no longer rise to the occasion.
And over in San Francisco, a like-minded twerp harassed people celebrating Eid al-Adha at the Islmaic Center of San Francisco. (Link goes to Yahoo.)
Eid al-Adha celebrations were disrupted for a group of Muslims in San Francisco on June 17 when a man walking his dogs shouted a volley of abuse at them.
Saaleh Shoel Shaikh told Storyful that he and his friends were preparing for prayers outside the Islamic Center of San Francisco when the man started making “hateful and racist remarks”.
“Your religion is full of hate,” the man can be heard saying in the video, before shouting expletives and making threats to the group.
“You come from a f*****-up country,” he says, before threatening, “I’m going to put some pig grease here for you c**********.”
The redactions above are in the linked article.
It seems to me it’s the harasser’s religion that’s full of hate.
I seem to recall something in the New Testament about motes, beams and eyes. Although the shouter (if he’s even aware of it) would probably assume it had been inserted later by the libtards who corrupted so much of it later with their woke nonsense.
I’m putting this here not so much because of the topic itself (which could have been, and probably was, foreseen) but because of some of the responses from the law’s backers. Anyway, onward …
Texas lawmakers touted their heartbeat law as an effort to save lives, but the state’s near-total ban on abortion appears to have triggered an increase in infant deaths, according to a new study published Monday.
The findings in JAMA Pediatrics show that infant deaths rose after Texas’ Senate Bill 8, which banned all abortion after about six weeks from conception. S.B. 8 became Texas law in September 2021 and U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion just over nine months later, on June 24, 2022. The high court ruling in the Dobbs case prompted more than a dozen states to issue near-total bans on abortion. Observers speculate that evidence will also show increases in infant deaths in those states, akin to what Texas has seen, the study said.
“It just points to some of the devastating consequences of abortion bans that maybe people weren’t thinking about when they passed these laws,” Alison Gemmill, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health who authored the study, told USA TODAY. She called the deaths following the Texas heartbeat law its “spillover effects on moms and babies.”
But what really made my blood pressure go through the roof are Greg Abbot’s response:
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s office did not dispute the study’s findings but defended the Republican-controlled state’s anti-abortion record. This effort included the 2021 heartbeat law “to save the innocent unborn, and now thousands of children have been given a chance at life,” Andrew Mahaleris, a spokesperson for Abbott, said in a statement to USA TODAY. He said the governor has taken “significant action to protect the sanctity of life” and offered resources to expectant mothers “so they can choose life for their child.”
And a response from a typical anti-abortion spokesbeing:
Amy O’Donnell, a spokesperson for Texas Alliance for Life, said the study’s findings didn’t come as a surprise. She said babies born with disabilities and even fatal anomalies deserve a chance at life, even if that means a newborn dies after birth from a condition doctors anticipated would be lethal. The death of a child is not easy, she acknowledged. She noted that her nonprofit offers resources for families grieving from such losses.
“In Texas, we celebrate every unborn child’s life saved. We treasure the fact that our laws are protecting women’s lives,” she said. “We don’t apologize for the fact that we don’t support discrimination against children facing disabilities or fatal diagnoses in or out of the womb. And that’s the line that we just believe should not be crossed.”
So … in order to “choose [a tragically short and likely painful] life” for a non-viable fetus, they force months of agony on a family — particularly on the mother, who must live with the knowledge that the child within her will not survive — who could use that time to grieve and heal. And they’re proud of it.
(BTW, I wonder how many “resources” they supply the family once the child is born? Despite Ms O’Donnell’s assurances, given the track record of that side of the political spectrum I’d venture to guess they’re wholly inadequate.)
I’m not sure whether Hell exists, but if it does I could easily postulate an eighth level for those who would inflict additional pain on people already in crisis — all in the name of their “morality.”
Sorry about the length, but I have two daughters whom I treasure beyond words; and even the concept of them being in such a position absolutely enrages me.
Let’s not forget they’re pro-birth, not pro-life.
“I do not believe that just because you are opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, a child educated, a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”
Clear back in 2004. Nothing has changed.
Au contraire Good Sir. Lots has changed.
But only for the worse. Immoral hate-filled shitbags the lot of 'em. But now they’re powerful enough to make their evil stick.
Ditto, exactly.