It's pretty obvious Fox News can't exist without GOP, as they feed off each other. But today, both seem to picked an opponent they don't realize they how much of a juggernaut will be... The mega-star Taylor Swift. Yes, that Swift.
I am NOT a Swiftie. I like her music well enough, but I liked a LOT of artists, and I have eclectic tastes in music, from speed metal to country, I listen to all sorts of stuff. But this is not about my tastes.
Now that Swift is dating Travis Kelce, Kelce, who was never political, was getting Fox pundit ill wishes such as "how will his heart break: by Swift, or the COVID vaccine". This is all well documented on X / Fox News.
Apparently, Swift, who's rich, has a rich family, and is lily white, is an enemy of Fox and GOP values because she tends to lean Democrat (for whatever her reasons are, not relevant) though has mostly remained neutral. And Kelce is getting ill wishes because he's close to Swift... collateral damage.
But has Fox / GOP bitten off more they can chew this time?
Jessie "Boss Lee" Ward has passed away from stage 4 colon cancer recently. While any death is tragic, hers is noticeably so because she had chosen to squander her remaining time since diagnosis on "alternative treatments", and used it as a marketing opportunity.
She was diagnosed in March, 2023. But instead of following the advice of her doctor, who allegedly told her that she'd be "dead by Christmas" without treatment, she decided to ignore all that advice, decided it's the just sales pitch (that she used to recruit 12000 downlines and hundreds of thousands of followers on social media).
No, she will go with FOUR unproven therapies instead: hyperbaric oxygen chamber, "magnetic" treatment (whatever that is), "ozone treatment" (whatever that is), and "red-light treatment" (whatever that is). After surgery to remove bits of her intestine, that is.
Basically, she decided to emulate Steve Jobs, and got the same results.
For those of you who don't remember, Steve Jobs died back in 2011 of pancreatic cancer. It was actually diagnosed back in 2003, and even though his own family and his doctors urged him to cut it out ASAP, he chose to try eating vegan, take herbal remedies, and acupuncture. They did a CT scan 8 months later... it didn't work. By then, the cancer had spread. He finally had the surgery, but the operation didn't get it all, eventually leading to a liver transplant in 2009, and that only gave him a few extra years until 2011.
Many doctors opined that Steve Jobs had the ONLY pancreatic cancer that's treatable and curable. By ignoring the available treatment, he had basically committed suicide.
Jessie can't even claim that. If she operated immediately and do chemo, she may make it to 5 years, according to stories she shared. But instead, she claimed she didn't even gave chemo to her dog that had cancer. But no, she wants "holistic approach", which is just... quack med.
Not unexpected, since she's also the VP of Pruvit, a "Ketone" health supplement MLM company. Selling stuff on little to no evidence is her bread and butter.
Unfortunately, she sold woo to herself this time, and she paid the ultimate price. She didn't even make it to Christmas.
How many more will die to prove that "alternative meds" don't work?
Back in May, I pointed out that rolling back Roe v. Wade was never about protecting the children, but about restricting female reproductive rights.
Here's another data point you should consider if you think that's wasn't what it's about.
Tell me, if protecting unborn babies are important, should domestic violence against pregnant woman get enhanced penalty? After all, it sounded like a no brainer.
As it turns out, only 38 out of 50 states have "fetal homicide laws" which can often be used to protect the mother
However, in 10 of these 38 states, the law includes NO exemption for the women in regard to their own pregnancies, and thus, can be used AGAINST pregnant women in those states. Basically, in those states, pregnant women who lost their pregnancy CAN be charged for fetal homicide even though the cause for loss of pregnancy is undetermined.
Frankly, for most of these laws, which includes language such as "from conception", "from fertilization", or from "implantation", they are written so broadly, it's possible a woman (and any medical professional who treated her) to be accused of fetal homicide, before she even realized she's pregnant!
Instead of being used to protect the mother from abuse, these laws at the state level are used to define "fetal personhood" and such concepts to justify abortion bans in the red states.
Laws that was supposed to protect women, turned to shackle women.
While Roe vs Wade that been repealed, and it is up to individual states to determine what can or cannot be done, we are now dealing with the aftermath of that decision.
And this trend appears to have not stopped. Dallas police has arrested Harold Thompson for shooting his girlfriend to death. His reason for killing her? She got an abortion in Colorado. This guy had an arrest warrant in March for beating a woman, probably the same one he killed. He can't control her through the baby anymore, so he killed her.
And that's just one of the more egregious cases we've seen. We have no statistics on how many women from the Red states have left to get abortions. We know that some Red states passed laws aiming to punish people who aided women leaving the state to get procedures, even those medically necessary, or to aid minors who were raped. It's gotten bad enough, some Blue states are passing shield laws to counter such.
Pro-life is not about life. It's about control over a woman's body. It always was.
But are the facts true? Here's the narrative, TL;DR version:
The Jacksons, who live in Desoto, near Dallas, Texas, chose home birth and gave birth to Mila 2 weeks ago, with a licensed midwife
Jacksons took Mila to their pediatrician for a checkup, and doctor diagnosed Mila with jaundice, a common condition.
Jacksons chose home treatment with their midwife instead of hospital stay.
The doctor reported the Jacksons to Texas Child Protective Services (CPS) even though the Jackson have explained to the doctor that the midwife will conduct phototherapy.
Desoto police and CPS agents raided Jacksons' home at 5AM but the parents refused to hand the baby over. Police and CPS left after a while, only to return later demanding that the couple hand over the child again as she's legally a CPS ward at this time, despite after hearing explanations from both the parents AND the midwife. They eventually left again. Several days went by.
Last Tuesday, police returned and demanded the baby AGAIN, and when the parent refused, one was arrested, then police took his keys, and used it to enter his home and took the baby.
Jacksons have had ONE visit with the baby, and when they noticed some problems with the baby, they were DENIED permission to seek treatment, was told "it's the foster family's responsibility"
But are these ALL the facts?
Not quite. Here's what they don't tell you, or it got glossed over, and you have to dig to find it.
While mild jaundice does go away by itself, baby Mila's bilirubin level is 21.7. That is considered "go to the hospital ASAP" level of jaundice.
And according to reports, the family has been with the same pediatrician for years, so presumably he did not call CPS at the drop of a hat, but only did so when he felt he had no choice in the best interest of the child.
But let's make things perfectly clear:
A midwife is NOT a pediatrician or a neonatologist. And severe jaundice is beyond the expertise of a midwife.
So in essence, the parents are right: they did get their baby taken away BECAUSE they want a midwife to treat their baby for severe jaundice instead of a hospital and a pediatrician.
That's the equivalent of asking your local quick-lube place (that changes your engine oil) to replace your car's engine.
But the real question now is, is CPS sending the baby off to get the phototherapy done? Did it work?
And the post-mortem, why did the whole thing took another two days for CPS to take custody?
We've seen in the MAGA states that legislatures and governors are passing laws that increasingly extend government control over people's lives, often worded in terms of "protection". This in turned enabled more and more Karens (and Chads) to act as some sort of morality police by abusing the few bits of power they have. However, two recent incidents I heard about really... "chafed my hide" so to speak.
One story is from BoredPanda, where they highlight various Reddit stories such as "/r/Idontworkherelady". To make a long story short: OP (original poster) has a job as a hotel front desk clerk. After hours, he removed all name tags and identifying material, went with a few buddies to a bar, had drinks, had a good time, and was driven home by a designated driver. Responsible adult, right? Not to a Karen. Who apparently posted something in the review forum accusing OP of being a "very poor choice of staff". The manager was reviewing the situation and interviewed everyone. OP answered truthfully, and the manager thanked him. Corporate got in touch with Karen and finally understood that Karen believed that people who work front desk jobs should be sober 24/7, even off work.
Nothing happened to OP, the review was deleted by corporate, and later that Karen was put on the DNR (do not rent) list. Whether that's due to Karen's actions, who really knows?
The temerity of that Karen, to act as morality police dictating who can have a good time and who cannot, sheesh!
-----
But wait, here comes Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler banning a drag show on campus in support of the Trevor Project, which is a suicide prevention org for LGBT+ youths. Based on Wendler's statements, he knew what he ordered is both against the US Constitution AND Texas Law, but he apparently doesn't give a ****, because he believed he was serving a higher purpose: protecting women from being made fun of.
-----
However, it gets worse. Can you imagine police coming to your door for something that happened in front of your house, smelling alcohol on your breath, seeing that your house is a bit unkempt, and deciding to arrest you, then going inside your house without a warrant to photograph the state of unkemptness as "evidence" since you apparently cannot take care of yourself?
So what's the common theme among these three stories? People who believe they can dictate what you can or cannot do, despite having no such authority. They are Type II: The Vigilante Karen, in my book. Type II Karens decided to right some wrongs with their power, except such wrongs are only in her head.
In case 1, the Karen arbitrarily decided that "front desk clerks should NEVER drink".
In case 2, the uni president arbitrarily decided that "drag shows are insulting to women and I must protect women from them"
In case 3, the police arbitrarily decided that "if she drinks and has a dirty house she must be protected from herself"
Watch out when someone else decided to make your business THEIR business...
Recently, it was revealed that the monopoly on "Eleanor", the 1967 Mustang Fastback, has finally been broken, after the judge pointed out the litigant committed perjury and tried to attribute human qualities to a car so they can claim copyright over something they don't own. However, the story is extremely complicated,
(and here's the actual vehicle as stored in Petersen Automotive Museum )
The car also appeared in two other H B Halicki movies: The Junkman and Deadline Auto Theft. Though these two movies are made with a lot of footage recycled from the first Gone in 60 Seconds.
H.B. Halicki died in 1989 while filming a sequel of sorts. His widow, Denise Halicki, was determined to protect EVERYTHING to do with the movie, including the car and its name, "Eleanor", and proceeded to trademark it, and licensed the movie for the 2000 remake starring Nicholas Cage and Angelina Jolie.
The Eleanor in the 2000 movie was a 1967 Mustang GT500 redesigned by Chip Foose and Steve Sanford. It looks nothing like the vehicle above, as you can see here. The only thing they have in common is they are both Ford Mustangs, that's it.
1967 Mustang GT500 "Eleanor" as seen in "Gone in 60 Seconds (2000)"
Unfortunately, the fact that this vehicle is NOTHING like the original 1974 Eleanor did not deter Denise Halicki and her "Eleanor Licensing" from harassing ANYBODY who tried to make a car that looks similar to the "new" Eleanor. Remember, this vehicle has nothing to do with Halicki other than it was named Eleanor in an authorized 2000 remake of the 1974 movie. Somehow, Denise Halicki and her company believed this is enough for her to claim the design as their own...
Technically speaking, Denise Halicki knew the remake will feature a different car, and she didn't trademark THAT car, when she authorized the remake in 1995. The movie finally came out in 2000. Shelby trademarked the Eleanor Mustang in 2002. THEN Halicki sued in 2004 claiming the trademark belongs to her, and it was awarded to her in 2008 by US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In fact, Halicki's lawyers went as far as threaten to sue or have sued ANYONE who made a Ford Mustang GT500 that even remotely looked similar to the Chip Foose / Steve Sanford design above, the car she had no rights to even if it's NOT called Eleanor! They were called GT500E, and GT500CR respectively. Then they had the temerity to send letters to the auction houses and owners, warning them to NOT sell those unless they want to be sued as well! (Yes, this was all in the court paper, which will be linked below)
Even Shelby Licensing / Shelby Trust had enough and they sued to have the previous ruling reversed, and in December 2022, they finally prevailed. A judge watched all relevant movies, and ruled that the car CANNOT be a character and thus does not deserve the copyright protection that was granted by previous courts, because, in short, the Halicki lawyers lied to the court. The decision can be read here.
I won't go into details, you can have Steve Lehto explain that to you.
But I'll include a juicy quote:
"unfortunate practice on the part of the Halicki Parties to embellish facts in their briefing [to the court]."
Ouch, what a smackdown.
Does that mean people now can build their own versions of Eleanor? Seems to be "yes".
Will this stop Denise and her lawyers? Unlikely. They *can* appeal. The question is will they?
