I Know Generalizations Are Dangerous And Frequently Wrong But I Can't Help Myself
This article and the additional thousand I've seen prove that all conservatives, libertarians and repukes are stupid a-holes (redundant, I know. Atypical)
Georgia Republican’s bill would do away with driver’s licenses.
A Republican in Georgia's House of Representatives has introduced a bill to eliminate driver's licenses, arguing that the documents are an unnecessary infringement on personal freedom.
Rep. Bobby Franklin, who represents the Atlanta suburb of Marietta, defended the bill to skeptical reporters on Monday, who questioned whether it would be a good idea to eliminate oversight of Georgia's drivers.
"One of your inalienable rights is the right to travel, the right to move about without needing your papers," Franklin told WSB in Atlanta. "You shouldn't have to have permission from the state to exercise a right that has been inalienably given to you from your creator."
Franklin took tough questions on the bill from a CBS Atlanta reporter who questioned what it would mean if children were allowed to drive cars.
CBS Atlanta's Rebekka Schramm asked Franklin, “How are we going to keep up with who’s who and who’s on the roads and who’s not supposed to be on the roads?”
That’s a great question," Franklin said. "And I would have to answer that with a question, ‘Why do you need to know who’s who?’” (WTF - Atypical)
“What about 12-14-year-olds who want to drive? What would stop them?" Schramm asked.
“Well, what’s stopping them now anyway?” Franklin answered.
"Let us answer Franklin’s question right away: Millions of parents are stopping them, in the name of a law that’s unlikely to change anytime soon," Jim Galloway wrote at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "Another roadblock: The constant fatalities ... that remind us that driving is serious business."
Franklin has been in the Georgia House of Representatives since 1996, and his Facebook profile describes him as "the most conservative member of the Georgia General Assembly." (I told you conservatives were stupid. Atypical)
"Representative Franklin has been called 'the conscience of the Republican Caucus"' because he believes that civil government should return to its biblically and constitutionally defined role," his House website states. (WTF - Atypical)
Franklin's legislative agenda appears to mirror many of the causes taken up by the tea party movement, including the movement's concerns about the Federal Reserve and fiat money. Last month, Franklin introduced a bill that would require all transactions with the state of Georgia to be paid in silver or gold. (typical repuke idiot - Atypical)
The proposed law, intended as an effort to move the US towards a gold standard for its currency, would have "catastrophic consequences" for Georgia, Ian Millhiser wrote at ThinkProgress.
Among other things, the U.S. Mint simply does not make very many gold and silver coins — the Mint has even suspended sales of precious medal coins when demand rises above very low levels — so it is unlikely that enough coins even exist to allow Georgia taxpayers to pay more than a fraction of their tax obligations if they are required to do so in U.S. minted gold or silver....
Gold or silver standards leave a nation completely powerless to control its own monetary policy, often tying inflation rates to completely arbitrary factors such as the rate that gold is mined in South Africa, rather than to the interests of a national economy. Worse, it leaves a nation without one of its most important tools to push back against economic downturns. In the 1930s, the United States was one of the last major nations to abandon the gold standard, and this failure to act was one of the principle causes of the Great Depression.
According to CBS Atlanta, Franklin co-sponsored all of the first 21 bills introduced in the new House session. Among the bills are one that would criminalize abortion in the state under all circumstances, and another that would prohibit mandatory vaccinations. Yet another bill proposes abolishing the state income tax.
Daniel Tencer/ Raw Story
Okay, I got carried away. But they are incredibly stupid!
Limbaugh Jokes About Detention of NYT Journalists,
Until He Learns Fox 'News' Reporters Hospitalized.
Rush Limbaugh is a disgusting human being. But you probably knew that. If you didn't, audio from his show today --- which is broadcast over our public airwaves to some 15 million Americans a day, and even over U.S. Armed Forces Radio --- makes it as clear as ever.
First, as highlighted by Media Matters, Limbaugh made light of foreign journalists, including two reporters from the New York Times, being rounded-up in Cairo today because being detained while covering a story of huge import to this nation and the world, by a regime that has spent decades torturing such people is, of course, hilarious...
LIMBAUGH: Ladies and gentlemen, it is being breathlessly reported that the Egyptian army --- Snerdley, have you heard this? The Egyptian army is rounding up foreign journalists.
I mean, even two New York Times reporters were detained. Now, this is supposed to make us feel what, exactly? How we supposed to feel? Are we supposed to feel outrage over it? I don't feel any outrage over it. Are we supposed to feel anger? I don't feel any anger over this. Do we feel happy? Well --- uh --- do we feel kind of going like, "neh-neh-neh-neh"?
I'm sure that your emotions are running the gamut when you hear that two New York Times reporters have been detained along with other journalists in Egypt. Remember now, we're supporting the people who are doing this.
Next, later on in the very the same show, after he's learned that two Fox "News" reporters had been beaten and hospitalized following detention in Egypt, suddenly Rush gives a damn, and says he was just "kidding before about The New York Times"...
LIMBAUGH: According to Mediaite, Fox News' Greg Palkot and crew have been severely beaten and are now hospitalized in Cairo. Now we were kidding before about The New York Times, of course. This kind of stuff is terrible. We wouldn't wish this kind of thing even on reporters.
Moral depravity. As appalling as it gets.
For the record, as White House correspondent Paul Brandus tweeted last night as the round-up was beginning, "79 journalists were killed around the world last year - just for trying to tell a story."
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 849 journalists have been killed since 1992.
Isn't that hysterical, Rush?
Clarence Thomas Appears to Have 'Knowingly and Willfully' Violated the Rule of Law
FOR TWENTY YEARS!
The words "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW" are famously chiseled above the main portico of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. But is one of the Justices seated in that building, with a lifetime appointment, now receiving special treatment under the law instead?
Evidence is mounting that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas violated federal law by failing to report his wife's annual salary of more than $120,000 per year from conservative political organizations by checking "NONE" on the box for "Non-Investment Income" for his wife Virginia on judicial Financial Disclosure Reports for the last 20 years.
According to the "self-initiated amendment" letters [PDF] signed by Thomas as dated Friday, January 21, 2011 and stamped as "RECEIVED" by the Judicial Conference of the U.S. Committee on Financial Disclosure on a Saturday, January 22, 2011, the Justice failed to reveal such sources of spousal income even on his original nomination disclosure forms during his contentious 1991 confirmation hearings.
One of the amendments hastily filed last week by Thomas states that he "inadvertently omitted" spousal income from as far back as 1989 "due to a misunderstanding of filing instructions". Though it has also been reported that he did report other spousal income on some disclosure reports up until 1996.
Virginia Thomas' income from The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, totaling $686,589 from 2003 to 2007 according to Common Cause, was omitted from the forms entirely, as was her Heritage Foundation employment from 1998 to 2003 and other sources of "non-investment income" from as early as 1989.
When reached by phone for comment on Friday, two different officials at the Judicial Conference were particularly hostile in response to questions from The BRAD BLOG in regard to what appeared to be special treatment afforded the Supreme Court Justice, allowing him to deliver the amendment letters for twenty years of inaccurate financial disclosure forms on a Saturday when the federal government office is not usually open to the public. The swift processing of Thomas' documents, carried out as the news of his false filings was about to break in the media, allowed subsequent news reports to downplay the issue as having already been handled, old news.
Moreover, Thomas' 'inadvertent omissions' appear to be in violation of U.S. federal law, in contradiction to suggestions from the Los Angeles Times' original reporting on this matter last weekend. That report, breaking the story publicly, quoted a judicial ethics expert from Northwestern University School of Law as asserting that Thomas' failure to report his wife's income was "not a crime of any sort."
It would appear that the law professor was wrong.
Closer examination of the original disclosure forms that Thomas filed and signed year after year, quite directly suggest crimes were committed, though none of the mainstream corporate media reports on this issue, to our knowledge, have bothered to focus on that point. According to the statute clearly printed on the disclosure reports filed by Thomas, just below his signature on each, the Supreme Court Justice could be held accountable for his omissions by penalties under the U.S. Code including as much as a $50,000 fine and up to one year imprisonment, or both, for each violation of the federal law. Even stricter penalties are also a possibility --- at least if one believes that even U.S. Supreme Court Justices are subject to the Rule of Law...
[DOCUMENT at BRADBLOG]
'Not a Crime of Any Sort'?
Thomas has maintained that the omissions of his wife Virginia's "non-investment income" salary --- from the Heritage Foundation, the Liberty Coalition, a "Tea Party" political group she founded in 2009, and a number of Congressional Republicans for whom she work --- were "inadvertent". He quickly moved to file amendments to years of false disclosure reports as the governmental watchdog organization Common Cause sent a letter [PDF] to the Secretary of the Judicial Conference just over a week ago, seeking an investigation and possible referral to the Attorney General, and as the Los Angeles Times worked on breaking their story that weekend.
The Times article included a quote from Northwestern University School of Law professor, Steven Lubet, downplaying the seriousness of the apparent violations of law, by stating his belief that they were "not a crime of any sort":
"Steven Lubet, an expert on judicial ethics at Northwestern University School of Law, said such an infraction was unlikely to result in a penalty. Although unfamiliar with the complaint about Thomas' forms, Lubet said failure to disclose spousal income "is not a crime of any sort, but there is a potential civil penalty" for failing to follow the rules."
However, the disclosure forms (here is the one he filed for 2009 [PDF], for example, as submitted in 2010) as signed by Thomas in the final "Certification" section, attests that the information provided on the report, "including information pertaining to my spouse", was "accurate, true, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief".
The penalties for falsifying those documents are noted in ALL CAPS on the Financial Disclosure Report itself, just below the Justice's own signature as follows:
"NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY FALSIFIES OR FAILS TO FILE THIS REPORT MAY BE SUBJECT TO CIVIL AND CRIMINAL SANCTIONS (5 U.S.C. app. § 104)"
The rest is at this link. Read it and be disgusted at this pukes arrogance. Scalia's toady is above the law apparently - and he is on the "Supreme" Court. So much for ethical behavior from this conservative and respect for law and order. And he JUDGES US!
For those interested, read something about the court's change in legal behavior over the last 10-15 years. The conservatives in charge of this institution are destroying it.
Read This And See What they Are Doing To This Country
GOP Presidential Hopefuls Are Alienating the Rest of the World by Fusing Christian Superiority with Blatant Revisionist American History
Fusing American exceptionalism with Christian superiority, Republican presidential hopefuls act to alienate our allies -- just when we need them most.
January 10, 2011 AlterNet / Andrew Belonsky
Generations of American politicians have long proclaimed the United States the greatest nation in the world to win over voters. And it very often works.
Now a new breed of Republican leaders -- politicians like former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, Sen. Jim DeMint, Rep. Mike Pence and Sen. Marco Rubio -- are working overtime to reclaim the well-worn idea of "American exceptionalism" as their own.
Rather than using a traditional “we’re number one” cheer, however, these and other GOP leaders, all potential 2012 contenders, have created a new hybrid narrative, one that fuses blatantly religious ideology with fiscal conservatism. While it’s a practical tactic for securing elections here at home, this brand of American greatness puts our nation in a precarious international position.
Tea Party leaders are fusing a notion of Christian superiority with revisionist American history to create a new exceptionalist narrative. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., who led the Tea Party insurgency in the midterm elections for U.S. Senate, proclaimed the Tea Party movement to be a “spiritual renewal” in an interview with David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network. And in a November 2010, speech to the Detroit Economic Club, Mike Pence of Indiana, who is said to be exploring a White House bid, made an explicit connection between American free enterprise, exceptionalism and Christianity.
"The free market is what made America’s economy the greatest in the world," Pence declared. "To renew American exceptionalism, we must recognize that our present crisis is not merely economic, but moral in nature... As we seek to build national wealth, we must renew our commitment to the institutions that nurture the character of our people -- traditional family and religion.”
DeMint, meanwhile, offered his own take on the same idea: "You cannot be a real fiscal conservative if you do not understand the value of a culture that’s based on values," DeMint said in his speech at the Values Voter Summit in September. "When you have a big government, you’re going to have a little God. You’re going to have fewer values and morals...."
And former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, also a GOP presidential hopeful, had this to say last August: "To deny American exceptionalism is in essence to deny the heart and soul of this nation.” In these politicians’ collective view, exceptionalism isn't only about our country's unique character; it's a divine calling.
Pastor Tony Campolo, the liberal evangelical preacher who served as an adviser to former President Bill Clinton, told Newsweek's Lisa Miller, "The marriage between evangelicalism and patriotic nationalism is so strong that anybody who is raising questions about loyalty to the old, laissez-faire capitalist system is ex post facto unpatriotic, un-American and by association non-Christian." Fiscal and social conservatism have become one.
Nowhere has the alignment of American exceptionalism and right-wing Christian theology been more dangerous than in the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. Since the free market includes the entire globe, conservatives claim, our biblically inspired, capitalism-driven democratic values must be exported, an idea that threatens our international standing.
It’s this theology that drives the international exploits of a secretive group of Capitol Hill elites -- including Jim DeMint and Mike Pence -- known alternately as the Fellowship or the Family. The Family made rare headlines last year, when it was revealed the group had supported the Ugandan lawmakers who proposed an anti-LGBT bill that would make certain practices punishable by death.
The organization also operates the C Street House in Washington, where, according to Jeff Sharlet, author of C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy, DeMint is "ideologically influential." And that ideology, as the senator told the right-wing magazine, World, in August 2009, includes the belief that "[t]he decline of America's power and prestige has been directly related to the secularization of our country."
But the Family’s influence on U.S foreign policy doesn’t begin or end in Uganda, or on the subject of LGBT rights. The group has also helped former Somali dictator Siad Barre buy arms, and facilitated U.S. support for various other despots, including Indonesia’s Haji Muhammad Suharto and Papa Doc Duvalier of Haiti. And now the Family’s congressional members are ascendant in the U.S. Capitol; most of them are allied with the Tea Party movement, and in an unprecedented position to shape our nation’s policy.
Still, the Family and its members don’t have a monopoly on American exceptionalism-spouting evangelicalism, even in Uganda.
Huckabee likewise has links to the forces behind the African nation’s “kill the gays” bill, thanks to his friendship with Rev. Lou Engle, an outspoken opponent of LGBT people who last year, at the height of the controversy, invited one of the bill’s foremost proponents, Pastor Julius Oyet, onto the stage at a revival he headlined in Uganda’s capital city, Kampala.
Meanwhile, in Florida, Tea Party insurgent Marco Rubio of Florida shaped his electoral stump speech around the idea of American exceptionalism, a theme he trumpeted again during his victory speech, insisting, “The vast majority of [Americans believe] that the United States of America is simply the single greatest nation in all of human history, a place without equal in the history of all mankind.”
And, like his party peers, Rubio’s Christian Americanism has worrisome roots: Glenn Beck's "historian" friend David Barton, leader of the conservative Christian group Wallbuilders, which frequently questions the validity of global warming and contends that church and state were never meant to be separated.
"Christianity is the religion that shaped America and made her what she is today," Barton wrote on his Web site. "In fact, historically speaking, it can be irrefutably demonstrated that Biblical Christianity in America produced many of the cherished traditions still enjoyed today."
Religion Is Just A Business - A Very Big And Profitable Business
Americans United/Joseph L. Conn
Senator’s Report Seeks No New Laws To Rein In Predatory ‘Prosperity Gospel’ Preachers – And Recommends Repeat Of Church-Electioneering Ban
Texas-based TV preacher Kenneth Copeland takes in millions in tax-deductible donations each year. He and his wife Gloria live in a $6.2 million “parsonage” on 25 acres of land by a lake. He has a private cattle ranch, a power plant and oil and gas wells and drives several Harley-Davidson motorcycles, a Mercedes Benz, a Cadillac and a Corvette convertible. His tax-exempt Kenneth Copeland Ministries (KCM) has a fleet of airplanes and its own private airport.
Copeland has told associates that he is personally a billionaire, and his Pentecostal colleagues gave him and Gloria a $2.1 million cash “gift” to celebrate his 70th birthday and their 40th anniversary in ministry.
Operating as a church and almost entirely outside the purview of federal tax authorities, Copeland answers only to a KCM board stacked with family members and friends.
And, soon, if U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and his Religious Right allies have their way, Copeland will be able to use his mega-ministry to intervene in partisan political campaigns.
In a move that shocked many observers, Grassley and Senate Finance Committee staffers concluded their three-year investigation into the financial irregularities of tax-exempt television ministries with a report that makes no recommendation for additional governmental oversight. And, to compound the controversy, the staff report recommends repeal of the federal tax law ban on church electioneering.
The report, posted on the Finance Committee website, details staff interaction with six multi-million-dollar “prosperity gospel” ministries. Two of them – Joyce Meyer Ministries and Benny Hinn’s World Healing Center Church – cooperated with the investigation. But four offered limited cooperation or none at all – Randy and Paula White’s Without Walls International Church, Eddie Long Ministries, Kenneth Copeland Ministries and Creflo Dollar Ministries.
Turning to other sources, committee staff documented a pattern of lavish lifestyles and dubious use of donated funds by several leaders of these outfits. Top officials live in palatial homes, often owning more than one. (The Whites, now divorced, had a $2.7 million house in Tampa and a $3.5 million condo in the Trump Tower in New York City.)
Ministry officials take tax-free “housing allowances” for themselves and often classify staffers, friends and relatives as “ministers” so they too can protect income from taxation by the Internal Revenue Service. Top pastors sometimes pocket “love offerings” – huge sums of cash collected from supporters – and no one knows whether the money is reported as income.
This Finance Committee information was obtained despite stonewalling from some mega-ministry leaders. According to the report, employees of the ministries were threatened with retribution – divine and otherwise – if they cooperated with the investigation.
Even former staffers told the committee that they were afraid to provide statements for fear of being sued.
Said one ex-employee, “The Copelands employ guerrilla tactics to keep their employees silent. We are flat out told and threatened that if we talk, God will blight our finances, strike our families down, and pretty much afflict us with everything evil and unholy.”
Despite these findings, Grassley and his staff recommended no immediate changes in federal law to rein in the apparent ministry abuses. Instead, they called for creation of an independent commission led by an evangelical Christian agency to study a variety of tax issues. Among them: a proposal to repeal the ban on campaign intervention by churches and other religious groups.
Said the Grassley report, “The electioneering prohibition…should be repealed or circumscribed with respect to churches and other Section 501(c)(3) organizations (other than private foundations) because ‘the game is not worth the candle.’”
Tax law experts and civil liberties activists were aghast.
“I have to wonder what these Senate staffers could possibly be thinking with this breathtakingly wrong-headed suggestion,” said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “It’s a sign that this investigation has gone seriously off course.”
Lynn noted that the probe got under way because of widespread allegations that several high-profile TV preachers were abusing their church status by living lavishly while raking in millions of dollars tax-free every year. Issues of church-based politicking had not been raised during the investigation.
Lynn said if these ministries were abusing their non-profit charitable status, then more accountability and oversight might be in order. Yet Grassley’s staffers have recommended doing away with the “no electioneering” rule, which would only turn these same ministries loose in the world of partisan politics to do what they will with little or no oversight.
“If these multi-million-dollar ministries are already misusing their donations for personal gain, imagine how much more dangerous they would be operating in the world of partisan politics,” said Lynn. “I don’t want to see Pat Robertson and other TV preachers using their tax-exempt empires to give backing to favored candidates, and I don’t think most other Americans want that either.”
Americans United has led the fight to maintain the federal tax law ban on partisan politicking by houses of worship and other religious organizations. A phalanx of Religious Right leaders has aggressively fought to repeal it or undermine its effectiveness so that fundamentalist churches can be forged into a disciplined voting bloc.
AU’s Lynn testified in Congress in 2002 when U.S. Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) and his allies attempted to get Congress to scrap the restriction. The move drew support from TV preachers and a few ultra-conservative religious groups, but most religious denominations did not support it. After several forays in the House, Jones finally gave up the battle and so far has not introduced the bill in the current Congress.
With Grassley’s new move and the change in power in the House, however, a renewed push in Congress is almost certain. U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), a Tea Party favorite and Religious Right stalwart, has assailed the tax law ban.
In addition, sectarian lobbies and right-wing political forces have waged a relentless crusade to undermine the law.
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a Scottsdale, Ariz.-based legal group founded by TV preachers, sponsors an annual “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” that encourages pastors to break the law by endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit. Each year, a handful of clergy have done so.
ADF lawyers organized a May 2008 meeting with Grassley’s staff to demand that the electioneering restriction be lifted and to insist that religious organizations be kept free of any significant new governmental oversight. Among the attendees were representatives of the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the National Religious Broadcasters and others.
Observers believe Grassley and his staff wilted under the Religious Right pressure.
Grassley is a conservative Republican with historically close ties to the Religious Right. He has a 100 percent “true blue” rating from the Family Research Council’s lobbying arm for his votes in the 111th Congress.
But Grassley’s TV preacher inquiry, launched in November 2007, soured his friends’ view of him. Things got so bad that Grassley, a five-term senator, was denied a seat in the Iowa delegation to the 2008 Republican National Convention. The GOP party apparatus in the state is dominated by the Iowa Christian Alliance and its cronies.
This Is Where We Are Headed - Guess Who Likes It That Way
Idaho pharmacy board is OK with pharmacist who was OK with woman bleeding to death
Remember the Idaho pharmacist who was OK with letting a woman bleed to death? To recap:
Last November, a nurse at Planned Parenthood called a Walgreen's pharmacy to fill a methergine prescription for her patient. Methergine is used to prevent or treat bleeding from the uterus. It is prescribed following procedures involving the uterus, including childbirth and abortion.
Rather than do her job and fill the prescription so the patient would not risk bleeding to death, the pharmacist demanded to know whether the patient had undergone an abortion. This information is, of course, irrelevant to counting pills and putting them in a bottle, as is a pharmacist's job, and an invasion of the patient's right of privacy.
The nurse says she cited federal patient privacy laws and refused to answer.
"The pharmacist said, 'Well, if you're not going to tell me that and she had an abortion, I'm not going to fill this prescription.' And then our practitioner said, 'Why don't you tell me another pharmacy that I can call or another pharmacist that can dispense this medication for my patient?' And the pharmacist hung up on her," said Kristen Glundberg-Prosser of the Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest.
Planned Parenthood subsequently filed a complaint with the Idaho Board of Pharmacy, which investigated the matter to determine whether the pharamcist's refusal was indeed protected by Idaho's newly minted Freedom of Conscience for Health Care Professionals law, which allows medical professionals, including pharmacists, to refuse to do their jobs if it offends their oh-so-delicate conscience.
Well, the Idaho Board of Pharmacy has made a determination:
The Idaho Board of Pharmacy will not take action against a Nampa pharmacist who refused to fill a prescription ordered by a Planned Parenthood nurse.
In a letter issued Thursday, Executive Director Mark Johnston wrote that the board had concluded its investigation into the incident and found no violations of state laws the board is tasked with enforcing.
But here's the kicker:
But according to the Board of Pharmacy’s response, the Idaho Pharmacy Act does not require a pharmacist to fill a prescription. Even if the conscience law was used incorrectly, the pharmacist did not violate the Idaho Pharmacy Act by refusing to fill the prescription, the board found.
And as for the pharmacist putting the patient's health in danger? The Board disagreed:
The board's investigation confirmed that the patient received treatment elsewhere and therefore no 'grave danger' was realized...By your own account, the pharmacist was not presented with any information that would have reasonably led the pharmacist to believe that any type of emergency existed.
So in other words, since the patient ultimately received the medication she needed, and didn't bleed to death, the pharmacist did nothing wrong. Not that the pharmacist knew at the time whether the patient would be able to get her prescription filled elsewhere. The pharmacist didn't care. But according to the Board, the pharmacist did nothing wrong, but shame on the nurse for not explaining that the patient could be in grave danger if she didn't get the medication she needed. If only the nurse had said, "No, see, she really needs this medication..." Well, then, the pharmacist still had the right to say no.
So apparently, pharmacists in Idaho, whose job is supposedly to provide medication to patients, aren't actually required to provide medication to patients. Don't approve of the medication? Or the doctor prescribing it? Or the patient who needs it? No problem! After all, in Idaho, there's no law that says you have to actually do your job -- even if it means putting patients' lives in danger.
(h/t) Amie Newman at RH Reality Check)