volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
No, because mifepristone had specific legal issues with its approval, which is what this whole mess is about.
The FDA broke the law here, and the courts are grappling with what to do about it.
I don't know of any other drugs that are in the same situation, but only drugs approved in violation of the legal process would be similarly situated.
To say the government and tax code is broken thanks to Wall Street and whatever is to excuse voters from their responsibility for literally acting to make sure their representatives were in a position to set that tax code, and then decline to fix it.
WE voted these people into power, and we largely confirmed those choices by reelecting them, over and over again.
Forget Wall Street. WE asked for this.
And we could change it, if we wanted to, but apparently we don't because we keep reelecting the same people.
Well, it's calm, boring, responsible application of procedure that would win the battle here.
Remember, this whole issue came about because the FDA failed to follow its own legally mandated procedures. MAYBE because of politics, but we don't need to speculate.
The courts are struggling with how to deal with this situation, but really the administration just needed and needs to do its job and follow the rules to approve the drug.
Political pressure is great, but only if it's aimed at the right actor. Hopefully Biden sees more political advantage in fixing his errors than letting them linger as a political stunt.
@stopgopfox@libretooth.gr
Have you found My Pillows to be uncomfortable? What are they like?
I don't think I've ever seen one in person.
That's not how the ruling would work, though.
The administration would remain free to respond to its mess as it sees fit, even if the FDA approval had been called out as failing to follow procedure.
IF mifepristone is unavailable, it would be because the executive branch chose, for itself, to crack down on it instead of approving it properly.
@coctaanatis@mstdn.social
We don't rely on institutions to police themselves, though.
That's exactly why the US government was designed with checks and balances, specifically because conflicts of interest mean we can't rely on that.
Santos's constituents elected a liar to represent them in Congress. That's their choice, just as we we respect the choices of all voters, even when we personally disagree with them.
@yuki2501 @lowqualityfacts NASA *DOES* give useful information to Musk because the organization isn't petty and understands that SpaceX working on these technical problems contributes to the knowledgebase of humanity.
Is NASA obligated? Probably not. But they are self-interested in seeing SpaceX help solve the problems they themselves face.
Some of us aren't obsessed with the identities and personal lives and drama of people who contribute to the world.
@lowqualityfacts
We were always at war with Eastasia.
Firstly, a lot more has come out since this article in 2020.
But secondly, this article shows why people have such little respect for organizations like the NYTimes, when they themselves highlight these problematic things but brush them aside.
What is it with this obsession? Well, as the NYTimes puts it:
"The investigation found that Hunter Biden had “cashed in” on his father’s name to close lucrative business deals around the world. It also concluded that his work for Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company then mired in a corruption scandal, while the former vice president was directing American policy toward Kyiv had given the appearance of a conflict of interest and alarmed some State Department officials."
You say this, and yet when I tune in to Republican media today they're really emphasizing the need to crack down on exploitation of immigrant children.
Commentators are emphasizing it after legislators in their committee meetings publicly criticized administration officials for their supposed roles in allowing or even promoting child exploitation of immigrants coming over the borders.
It's a case of how people live in two different worlds these days.
They didn't just ban trans kids from sports.
And I'm not sure what you think legislators are going to do about Chinese police stations. That's more of an executive branch issue to respond to.
Well, their obsession comes from Hunter's really over the top appearance of impropriety, that not only does it seem like the guy did some bad things and broke some serious laws, but the administration is keeping him in the spotlight instead of downplaying his role in the story of the Biden presidency.
Normally you distance from someone who's such a lightning rod, but in this case they're keeping the figure going.
It seems a bit staged, really: the administration keeps him around for opponents to react to, and opponents play their part in doing just that.
Don't forget the song Highwayman, famously covered by the The Highwaymen, the country supergroup including Johnny Cash, Waylon Jennings, Willie Nelson, and Kris Kristofferson:
"Many a young maid lost her baubles to my trade"
Wait, what specific quid pro quo?
Yeah, answering your questions while linking to the text of the actual case is where you draw the line *eyeroll*
Different levels of the US court system operate in different ways. The judge pointed out the FDA's violation of law, that he was fairly bound to point out.
SCOTUS has more freedom to pull the ripcord, so I figured they would.
Yeah, but based on the above discussion, it doesn't sound like it actually is.
Especially once the overlaying big cookie consent popups are normalized, as they are now, they become not so exaggerated, but just the accepted cost of routine and effective web engineering in that regulatory environment.
By law and regulation the FDA has certain procedures to follow before approving a drug, and if anyone has questions about it, again by law the FDA has certain procedures for answering the challenge.
Congress set up these laws, and can change them if they're in need of change.
So, in this case the FDA itself failed to follow those procedures for over twenty years, leading to this mess.
No, courts are not supposed to be directing medical studies because that's outside the area of expertise of a judge.
Here's the Texas opinion that lays this all out:
The funny thing is that as a longtime follower of The Federalist Society, I've seen how critical they've long been of conservatism.
it almost ends up sounding like gaslighting.
Of the countless hours that FedSoc presentations have spent taking down conservative positions... wait, they're supposed to be conservatives now?
I think a lot of this idea is promoted by people who haven't actually listened to content from the organization.
@digital_wyrm@mastodon.online
Yay echo chambers!
PS: But we need to be clear that that's what's happening.
Courts do sometimes ignore broken law, but we need to call that out as we demand reforms to the law to fix them.
The Texas judge seemed to also expect exactly this. He was bound by precedent himself, so he opened a window for higher courts, with more freedom, to break that glass.
Congress needs to fix this. So far I don't think anyone is pressing the case with the people who actually have the fix.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
