Audio Of The Week: The Changing Nature Of Women's Healthcare

Gee, women’s health care? Is there really something new there and a good VC opportunity? Amazing!I’m all for “women’s health care”.Last time I heard about that was a few days ago from NY senior Senator Chuck “Crying tears” Schumer as athttps://www.npr.org/templat…with textSCHUMER: For every American who cares about women’s health, about protections for people with pre-existing conditions, about civil rights, labor rights, LGBTQ rights, environmental rights, now is the time to fight – now. and as athttps://www.youtube.com/wat…with video.So, Chuck is all fired up, ready to fight for “women’s health” at the SCOTUS and, thus, in particular “do all he can” or some such to block the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh since he might be a threat to “women’s health”.Kavanaugh, who obviously cherishes women, had dozens of female friends in high school, is still friendly with at least 65 of them (i.e., from their recent letter of support) who claimed that he was always a perfect gentleman or some such, is a threat to women’s health? Boggles the mind!!!Or, maybe “women’s health” is what is sometimes called in politics a dog whistle and in this case short for overturning Roe v Wade, that is, women’s health wants Roe v Wade not overturned.Uh, Judge Gorsuch went into some detail about how reluctant the SCOTUS is to overturn precedent, and IIRC Roe v Wade was decided 40 or so years ago.So, maybe the interest in “woman’s health” is in case the SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade. Yup, some women will be afraid.To me the Schumer quote is important far above the issue of “woman’s health”. Schumer has a list of political topics, and he wants the SCOTUS to take his positions on those political topics.Well, the last few times I read the US Constitution, I didn’t see much if any mention of those topics. In particular it would take some really strong Schumer glasses to find all those topics, or even just “women’s health”, in the Constitution.But, suppose Schumer could get some political judges on the SCOTUS, that is, judges ready to find, with strong glasses, support for Schumer’s political positions; that is, suppose from the process for confirmation of judges for the SCOTUS Schmer is able to politicize the SCOTUS to his liking.Then suppose the Congress passes a bill, the Enabling Acts and the POTUS signs it. Suppose right away legal cases are filed saying that the Enabling Acts are unconstitutional. Well, with a political SCOTUS, the Enabling Acts could stand.Then the US government no longer has three branches with checks and balances but has just two branches, both political, with the SCOTUS just a rubber stamp of the Congress and POTUS. No more nasty, old, stiff, out of date Constitution!!!!Schumer is really happy!!!!Now we get President Adolf and his buddies Goering, Himmler, Goebbels, etc. pushing through the Reichstag, oops, I mean the Congress, lots more special laws, and Schumer finally has the power to get his agenda through without any fooling around with voters, opponents, etc.Naw, nothing like that could ever happen, at least not in a major country. I mean, what country would so easily destroy its constitution and replace it with a dictator???Now, THAT’S a way for Chucky to get what he wants as in his list above including “women’s health”. And, for the SCOTUS to find “pre-existing conditions” mentioned in the Constitution, Chucky’s glasses are plenty strong enough for that, too.So, what Chucky can’t get through Congress and the POTUS, maybe he can politicize the SCOTUS and then wait for the next Democrat White House and majority on Congress and, finally, get the dream government he has long had in mind!!!

Comments (Archived):

sigmaalgebra Sep 30, 2018

Gee, women’s health care? Is there really something new there and a good VC opportunity? Amazing!I’m all for “women’s health care”.Last time I heard about that was a few days ago from NY senior Senator Chuck “Crying tears” Schumer as athttps://www.npr.org/templat…with textSCHUMER: For every American who cares about women’s health, about protections for people with pre-existing conditions, about civil rights, labor rights, LGBTQ rights, environmental rights, now is the time to fight – now. and as athttps://www.youtube.com/wat…with video.So, Chuck is all fired up, ready to fight for “women’s health” at the SCOTUS and, thus, in particular “do all he can” or some such to block the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh since he might be a threat to “women’s health”.Kavanaugh, who obviously cherishes women, had dozens of female friends in high school, is still friendly with at least 65 of them (i.e., from their recent letter of support) who claimed that he was always a perfect gentleman or some such, is a threat to women’s health? Boggles the mind!!!Or, maybe “women’s health” is what is sometimes called in politics a dog whistle and in this case short for overturning Roe v Wade, that is, women’s health wants Roe v Wade not overturned.Uh, Judge Gorsuch went into some detail about how reluctant the SCOTUS is to overturn precedent, and IIRC Roe v Wade was decided 40 or so years ago.So, maybe the interest in “woman’s health” is in case the SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade. Yup, some women will be afraid.To me the Schumer quote is important far above the issue of “woman’s health”. Schumer has a list of political topics, and he wants the SCOTUS to take his positions on those political topics.Well, the last few times I read the US Constitution, I didn’t see much if any mention of those topics. In particular it would take some really strong Schumer glasses to find all those topics, or even just “women’s health”, in the Constitution.But, suppose Schumer could get some political judges on the SCOTUS, that is, judges ready to find, with strong glasses, support for Schumer’s political positions; that is, suppose from the process for confirmation of judges for the SCOTUS Schmer is able to politicize the SCOTUS to his liking.Then suppose the Congress passes a bill, the Enabling Acts and the POTUS signs it. Suppose right away legal cases are filed saying that the Enabling Acts are unconstitutional. Well, with a political SCOTUS, the Enabling Acts could stand.Then the US government no longer has three branches with checks and balances but has just two branches, both political, with the SCOTUS just a rubber stamp of the Congress and POTUS. No more nasty, old, stiff, out of date Constitution!!!!Schumer is really happy!!!!Now we get President Adolf and his buddies Goering, Himmler, Goebbels, etc. pushing through the Reichstag, oops, I mean the Congress, lots more special laws, and Schumer finally has the power to get his agenda through without any fooling around with voters, opponents, etc.Naw, nothing like that could ever happen, at least not in a major country. I mean, what country would so easily destroy its constitution and replace it with a dictator???Now, THAT’S a way for Chucky to get what he wants as in his list above including “women’s health”. And, for the SCOTUS to find “pre-existing conditions” mentioned in the Constitution, Chucky’s glasses are plenty strong enough for that, too.So, what Chucky can’t get through Congress and the POTUS, maybe he can politicize the SCOTUS and then wait for the next Democrat White House and majority on Congress and, finally, get the dream government he has long had in mind!!!
jason wright Sep 30, 2018

A tangential comment;”Founding a company is the nearest a man can come to giving birth. Emotionally rather than physically obviously – but it’s your baby.” – Martin Sorrell.
1. Twain Twain Sep 30, 2018
  
  Founding a company isn’t like-for-like as parenting, though. A company at its core is a set of number cells in a balance sheet and, as a founder you’re serving your investors.A baby is a confluence of cells from a lot of ancestors and, as a parent, you’re serving your child — not any third parties.
Twain Twain Sep 30, 2018

People having agency and freedoms over their own bodies and health is really important. Any tools that support our decision-making in this area is welcome.