Today's Chuck Norris Fact:
The leading causes of death in the United States are: 1. Heart Disease 2. Chuck Norris 3. Cancer
-----------------------------------------------
I'm beginning to get very, very tired of liberals using the courts to further their agenda, rather than the democratic principles on which our country was founded. The latest example has two states forcing Wal Mart to carry the morning-after pill, against its wishes. This has happened in Illinois already, and now Massachusetts as well (should we be astonished at the locations, two of the most liberal states in the country?). I have nothing against the morning-after pill; like most other moral choices, the choice to have unprotected sex and let medical science take care of the responsibility for you is nothing new and is a personal choice for everyone. Mostly, I'm disturbed by this latest situation for three reasons:
1. These rulings were made under state laws that mandate every pharmacy to carry "commonly prescribed drugs". The morning-after pill is not commonly prescribed; I'd estimate it's probably as "commonly prescribed" as medicinal marijuana, which is also governed by state law in many states. Will Wal Mart next be forced to carry marijuana in its pharmacies, simply because it is classified by the state as a "commonly prescribed drug?
2. Unlike other "commonly prescribed" drugs, the morning-after pill has no function except to prevent unwanted pregnancy, something that is in no way life-threatening and that could have been prevented anyway. I wouldn't put it in the same class as, say, insulin, or a drug I take myself for my severe stomach acid problems, Aciphex. In other words, drugs to mitigate or eliminate LEGITIMATE medical issues that can't necessarily be resolved with preventative measures. Unwanted pregnancy is something that can be universally prevented through several proactive measures, and therefore doesn't really fit in the same category.
3. What difference does it make whether Wal Mart carries the stuff or not? There are plenty of other pharmacies that carry it, in both of the above states, where it is easily and readily accessible to those who need it. In other words, Wal Mart's decision not to carry it in the past is a free-market decision; consumers can take their business elsewhere if they don't agree with Wal Mart's decision. This is simply another assault on another of the Angry Left's mortal enemies: Wal Mart. Just look at some of the ridiculous decisions made against this company in many states, even though Wal Mart provides hundreds of thousands of jobs across the country while keeping prices on household goods low, both of which can only benefit consumers. Wal Mart is not union, another reason why its business model works so well (just ask GM and Ford about the "benefits" of unionized workers in maintaining a competitive advantage in the marketplace, and you'll see why).
Perhaps it's time the liberals took their reality pills again, and asked the people what they want. Then again, given the outcome of the last few elections, you'd think they'd have learned what the people want by now...
------------------------------------------------------------
The Olympics have already been going a few days, and already I'm sick of hearing about it. I might watch some of the hockey, but other than that, the winter Olympics are a wasteland to me. It's really more hype than anything, from all I can see. NBC's constant playing of that ridiculous Olympic theme song, coupled with their increasingly outrageous attempts to turn it into the largest live reality television show on the planet, complete with human-interest stories and so-real-it-CAN'T-be-scripted dramatic moments, makes it less appealing with every new moment. The games aren't about international cooperation; we've seen far too much politicization of the games by many countries and terrorist organizations in the past. It's not really about sports, either; pseudo-sports like figure skating, gymnastics, half-pipe, and synchronized swimming, which have no objective scoring system and are thus merely athletic competitions rather than sports, continue to increase in popularity against real sports such as skiing, bobsled/luge/skeleton, hockey, wrestling, and track and field. In the end, it's more about how well NBC hypes it and how many eyeballs they can con into watching the events, and thus how much money they can squeeze from advertisers. The ideal of the Olympics as being about sports and international cooperation went on life-support in 1968 with the infamous "raised fist" incident and truly died in 1972 when the terrorists killed the Israeli athletes; since then it's really been more about international competition and politics (see also the 1980 and 1984 games with their boycotts for further proof of the politicization of the games). Add in the scandals of fiscal mismanagement, possible bribery of judges, and steroid use, and the games have been emptied of any meaning they once had.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not telling you to not watch. Watch and enjoy the games, if that's your karma. I simply argue that it's time we began to accept the games for what they've really become, just another bit of entertainment in the increasingly-competitive entertainment field. Personally, I have better things I can think of to do, like watch my Las Vegas Season 1 DVDs Heidi got me for Christmas.
------------------------------------------------------
A storm is moving in to the Denver metro today. I hope it doesn't get too nasty; if it starts to get bad I'm leaving VERY early. I got stuck up here in Boulder last time we had a big snowstorm and I came in to the office, and I'd like to avoid that scenario this time around.
------------------------------------------------------
I'm making the move from Windows to Linux as my primary operating system (i.e., the computer environment I will be working in every day). I'm not totally ditching Windows; I will still run it in what we call a "virtual machine" using software from a company called VMWare. There are still a few things that I can only do on Windows, unfortunately. I've tried making this switch before, and Linux just wasn't quite ready. However, it's getting better at it all the time and so I'm going to give it another go. You might ask why I would want to make such a change. To be honest, for the most part, Linux is generally more stable and less susceptible to viruses and other malware than Windows is. Also, many of the heavy-duty security tools I use, particularly those for assessments and forensic work, run much better in Linux than they do in Windows. So it's really more of a functional necessity than an aesthetic or personality choice (some folks make this decision for those reasons; see the recent success of Apple Computer for the type of "lifestyle computing" many users seem to want today). Personally, I would never own or use a Mac; they're just like any other computer system, only prettier, and frankly, they don't run much of the software I need to use on a daily basis. Windows and Linux do. Until Apple can figure out how to do more than graphic design, iPods/iTunes, and pretty -boy interface with pretty-boy cases, I don't have much use for them. Computers are tools, not lifestyle accoutrements.
----------------------------------------------
Hope you're all having a good day today. Thanks for reading along.
No comments:
Post a Comment