Vivian Jungels among the #Badgers graduates back in town to celebrate natty #9.
Her fellow PWHL draftees couldn’t make it, but Jungels totes the trophy onto the LaBahn ice.
Birthright citizenship belongs to the children of American citizens, not those who broke our immigration laws to come to the United States.
I introduced a Constitutional Amendment to end birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens.
I avoided commenting on the Lindsay Clancy trial because its nuanced and emotional but the implications are enormous so I am going to say something now. A lot of people are calling that one juror who wouldn't join the other eleven irrational. But, that juror is probably the only one asking the right questions imo: where is the evidence that she lacked the capacity to know it was wrong or to stop herself? And, maybe, where do we draw the line on what an ostensibly insane person is allowed to do when the doubt the defense manufactured rests on nothing in the record before the killings? It seems that the entirety of the defense position rests on improbable probabilities and that's a low bar for such a heinous act.
1. Postpartum psychosis is rare, and almost always happens in the first 4 weeks. The idea that some psychiatrists extend the postpartum window to a year is true, but for depression and anxiety. The evidence isn't strong for psychosis, and its latching on to improbability
2. The strongest risk factor for postpartum psychosis is preexisting bipolar disorder or a prior psychotic episode. She had neither before her third child. The real time evidence from her doctors/providers indicate this. The bipolar label that showed up was after significant polypharmacy, and any good psychiatrist will tell you that you cannot diagnose primary disease when multiple drugs could be offending agents. Drug-induced psychosis would show better temporal correlations with her medications and should be a mitigation argument at sentencing. Again, very improbable alignment
3. The proxy for intent is planning, and she clearly planned... she sent her husband to some restaurant they don't normally go to, checked the drive time, texted a specific order at 5:07 pm... she killed her children in sequence. That's demonstrating real time decision making. I don't understand how they circumvented this. Again, very improbable that she was able to make decisions up until it becomes a liability
4. This idea of a "voice" that commanded her is so post-hoc as a defense. The ltierature on command hallucinations show most people don't obey them and the compliance occurs when the voice is familiar. This was a first time voice she only ever reported 2 weeks after killing her kids. And this first time voice asked her to... kill all her children AND she listened to this unfamiliar voice? Again... very improbable
The improbability is so stark that it's almost undeniably a sympathy verdict from the jurors conflated with a misunderstanding of postpartum disease. The easiest way to demonstrate this is to take a father with the same chart, months of documented depression, insomnia, suicidal ideation but no psychosis then strangles his kids after arranging for his wife to be away from the house. 100% guilty.
Everyone knows postpartum disease is real and important. Everyone knows she's sick and needed help, possibly much better management. You can even argue she is insane. What I see to be the most important is where we draw the line of what we allow under the "insanity" rule. Massachusetts forces a binary verdict of guilty or not criminally responsible but this is a case for the third that other states have and which is guilty but mentally ill. We have a responsibility to speak for the unheard voices of these children and future children and say we draw the line at murdering children.
I work the front desk at a small doctor’s office, and I wish people could see what happens on the other side of the phone. Every day, older patients call us confused.
They are told to use the patient portal, upload documents, check lab results online, fill out forms before the visit, and confirm everything through a link. Some of them do not know what a portal is.
Some do not have a smartphone.
Some have one, but they are afraid to click the wrong thing.
Last week, a man in his late 80s called about his test results.
He said, “Ma’am, I don’t mean to bother you, but the computer says I have a message and I don’t know how to open it.”
He sounded ashamed.
That broke my heart.
He should not have to feel ashamed for needing a human being.
Technology can be helpful. I understand that.
But when people who built this country are made to feel helpless because everything became a login and a password, we have gone too far.
Not everything needs to be an app.
Not every answer should be hidden behind a screen.
Sometimes people need a voice.
A patient person.
A real human who says, “Don’t worry, I can help you.”
Progress should not leave seniors behind.
Because one day, the world will move faster than us too.
And I hope someone is kind enough to slow down.
In 1967, I was one of four women on the university’s table tennis first team. I would sometimes practice with the worst player in the men’s fourth team. He would always beat me as he was larger and more powerful.
Nowadays, he could’ve replaced me if he identified as a woman. That’s just not fair. Keep men out of women’s sports.
The rich get rich at the expense of the poor?
No!
@CaroljsRoth points out, "as we've increased the number of billionaires around the world, extreme poverty has actually shrunk."
Life is not zero-sum. When some people do well... that usually helps everyone:
I'm not backing down from this one.
You can support people's rights AND believe biological men shouldn't compete in women's sports. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.
My issue isn't hate. It's protecting women, protecting girls, and asking why a WNBA coach chose to inject herself into a controversy that could hurt the very league she's supposed to represent.
Common sense still matters. That's where I stand.
My full remarks are on YouTube.
Reminder to go touch grass
A scientist in Japan demonstrated that the air inside a forest strengthens your immune system for a full month
The study is incredibly fascinating:
Qing Li, an immunologist at Nippon Medical School in Tokyo, took 12 men on a 3-day forest trip. These were slow walks with no breathing exercises and no set route.
Then he tested their blood and found a surge in natural killer cells -- the immune cells your body uses to fight cancer and virus-infected cells.
Remarkably, the effect didn't fade when they went home, it was still measurable 30 days later.
A control group that walked the same distance through a city showed no change at all.
Pine, cedar, and cypress trees release compounds called phytoncides to defend themselves from insects and bacteria. You breathe them in, and Li believes they switch your immune cells into high gear.
He estimates one forest walk a month may be enough to keep those cells elevated all year.
The best medicine might not even need a prescription -- just a walk among the trees.
Madison is drowning in nonstop media coverage. There are bullhorns, national activists, professionally printed signs, and candles in every hand. But let’s be honest, this outrage is selective, opportunistic, and driven by cameras, not community.
Read the article here:https://t.co/GARGN2MAPP