S09.E16: Water in the West

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Main topic:  Water usage in the US West

Also: Supreme court decision on abortion; better names for the dogs from this year's Westminster dog show

Original air date 2022.06.26

[peeayebee]

Hmmm. What could he possibly talk about?

[Annber03]

Holy shit, the "annual holiday" bullshit. FUCK. YOU. As If I needed even more reason to be pissed off about this, and angry about the fact that men, ONCE AGAIN, feel the need to control what a woman gets to do with her body. That's just horrendously cruel and tone deaf on SO many levels. 

Thomas needs to be thrown out of office post-haste. And so do Barrett and Kavanaugh, who lied in their testimony at their confirmation hearings*, and who were also appointed by a twice-impeached president who has been shown to be openly involved in a violent insurrection on the Capitol. I know the Senate controls the appointment and impeachment of justices, but in this particular case? I have to think there's got to be some way to get around that, because unless the Democrats get rid of the filibuster, the chances of the Senate impeaching these "justices" are exceedingly slim AT BEST. We literally do not have time to wait around to hope that maybe we can get enough Democrats in the Senate in November to reverse this. We need to do something NOW. 

*So since Kavanaugh lied about his stance on Roe, then surely that seems to indicate we can't trust what he said about his supposed innocence in regards to those sexual assault allegations, either, right? Just throwing that out there. 

I would've been pissed about the decision to overturn Roe as it is, but if they had done it in combination with support for stricter gun control laws and support for other rulings that would benefit people's safety and health, especially the safety and health of women and children, I could've at least, at the very least, been able to say, "Okay, there's a consistency here. They're genuinely following that 'pro-life' stance across the board." 

But no. Guns and gun owners now have more rights than I and other women do. And what's more, they made that ruling on the New York gun law a mere month after nineteen children were slaughtered in a mass shooting in an elementary school. After we literally just had Sandy Hook, Pt. 2.

So yeah. Fuck everything about the SC's horrendously stupid decisions on SO MANY levels this week. "Pro-life", my ass. 

If I can find any positives in this horrific news, it's that a) this is a VERY unpopular decision across the board. It is good to know that the vast majority of Americans' reaction to this is, 'WTF, Supreme Court?" And b) I've also been reading that a lot of district attorneys and governors in various states have already said they will refuse to prosecute people who perform or get abortions, or will also give clemency to any doctors who might be criminally charged. It's something, at least, to start with in terms of fighting back. 

And now this decision comes at the same time that John's talking about water scarcity, so, y'know, that's great timing. That story about the guy who had to go to all those lengths to shower and use water for other things in his home, to the point of needing to use Craigslist to see if someone would let him use their shower, is just...wow. I did like the story about how Vegas is handling the water situation, though. 

*Deep breath* On a significantly lighter note...there's actually a dog named Jeffrey Epstein? That's just cruel... But thank you, John, for the video of the super cute dogs. After the blood-boiling segment about the courts, we needed that. 

Edited June 27, 2022 by Annber03

[scarynikki12]

Just imagine how much fun this episode could have been if Ollie had been able to devote some time to that perfect old man hound who won Westminster. You're perfect Todd (what's his real name?).

Instead he had to devote it to Roe getting overturned by those fucking guys. 

Ollie broke down the new threats well. The technological improvements like data sharing alone make the post-Roe world terrifying.

All weekend Susan Collins has been getting ripped apart and I'm glad to see Ollie briefly joining in.

Bless the Michigan Black Caucus and the alligator tweet.

Good on Vegas for their water conservation efforts. 

I know the golf course owners are big fans of them being terrible for the environment but surely they could re-landscape it to solve that problem. Local grasses and plants that don't require so much water and everyone just sucking the fuck up and accepting that some courses won't be St Patty's Day green.

I do enjoy Brian Cox playing God and lecturing everyone.

I think about this tweet daily since the bodies were found in Lake Mead:

[ahisma]

Sure, it makes perfect sense for the states to be able to “protect the lives of children” from conception up until they are killed by a gun—that, the states are not allowed to prevent. [Take it as read that the rest of this comment is just swearing.]

Yeah, the water situation in the SW has been horrendous for my entire life. John’s right that it’s possible to buy up land and just pump what they want. He didn’t even get into the agricorps that have come in and planted massive farms of alfalfa that they bale up and send to Saudi Arabia for their horses. So, yeah, the locals can’t reach the water in their wells anymore because some corporate farmer is drying up our desert to get oil money from another desert. Also, development projects are supposed to prove they have a 100 year water supply for the intended residents. Funny, their applications are never turned down, no matter how sketchy.

He is right that Las Vegas does a great job on conservation. In Arizona, Tucson uses a fraction per person per day of what gets used in Phoenix—comparable to CA drought measures in the ‘80s without even instituting any drought measures. Yet…

44 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

there's actually a dog named Jeffrey Epstein?

Those were alternate names that LWT made up. 🙂

[peeayebee]

9 hours ago, Annber03 said:

*So since Kavanaugh lied about his stance on Roe, then surely that seems to indicate we can't trust what he said about his supposed innocence in regards to those sexual assault allegations, either, right? 

I had no doubt he was lying before (re sexual assault), but the exposed lying about Roe just makes EVERYTHING he says suspect.

So so true what John said about the SC and those supporting the decision -- "We don't care if pregnancy kills you. We don't care if you don't want to be pregnant. We don't care about you at all." 

Quote

I would've been pissed about the decision to overturn Roe as it is, but if they had done it in combination with support for stricter gun control laws and support for other rulings that would benefit people's safety and health, especially the safety and health of women and children, I could've at least, at the very least, been able to say, "Okay, there's a consistency here. They're genuinely following that 'pro-life' stance across the board." 

I know what you mean, and I generally feel the same. Their recent decisions just underscore their methodology of pulling the rationale out of their butts to justify the predetermined ends.

What a nice surprised that Vegas is doing good with water conservation. Boo to everyone else. 

There was a recent article in the NYT about the disaster that is the Great Salt Lake. Here are the opening paragraphs:

Quote

If the Great Salt Lake, which has already shrunk by two-thirds, continues to dry up, here’s what’s in store:

The lake’s flies and brine shrimp would die off — scientists warn it could start as soon as this summer — threatening the 10 million migratory birds that stop at the lake annually to feed on the tiny creatures. Ski conditions at the resorts above Salt Lake City, a vital source of revenue, would deteriorate. The lucrative extraction of magnesium and other minerals from the lake could stop.

Most alarming, the air surrounding Salt Lake City would occasionally turn poisonous. The lake bed contains high levels of arsenic and as more of it becomes exposed, wind storms carry that arsenic into the lungs of nearby residents, who make up three-quarters of Utah’s population.

Sigh.

I did appreciate the segment with the dogs. That helped. A bit.

[arachne]

I live in Utah (which just made abortion illegal, BTW) and sadly, it's every bit as crazy here as John describes.

Our governor may not be calling for prayers this year, but he did declare a drought emergency weeks ago, and it's only the beginning of summer. Until last week, I was allowed to water my lawn just one day per week, but now I see the state has increased it to two days. Don't ask me how that happened.

But then, I live in the Salt Lake City metro area, That's where the mountains are, and whatever snow we get falls there. St. George is way to the south, so they may have it worse. 

[Lois Sandborne]

It brought me some brief joy to think of the writers and their pleasure in forcing John to do that Björk impression.

I'm appalled by learning that developers have long since moved to sucking up our groundwater even as the Earth cracks and buckles right under their pumps. And that guy at the Water Authority was a real prize. "Yeah, hey, people keep moving here to the Nevada desert and weirdly enough they expect to have a ton of water when they get here, so we've got to get it from somewhere!" And once it's all gone? Why, I guess they'll just make some new water for developers to pump down into the aquifers. Science will surely crack it by then.

People, particularly in the US, but in a lot of rich countries across the world, are simply not prepared for the sacrifices that the next couple decades are going to force us to make. It's a complicated tangle of corporate irresponsibility, markets, and individual choice, but no matter where the blame goes we're all going to pay.  We've been living off the fat of the land, and now the land is lean, mean, and fighting back.

[paigow]

Solution: Desalinated sea water for California farmers... Expensive... but saves the Colorado 

[JustHereForFood]

2 hours ago, Lois Sandborne said:

People, particularly in the US, but in a lot of rich countries across the world, are simply not prepared for the sacrifices that the next couple decades are going to force us to make. It's a complicated tangle of corporate irresponsibility, markets, and individual choice, but no matter where the blame goes we're all going to pay.  We've been living off the fat of the land, and now the land is lean, mean, and fighting back.

To bring both topics together: Isn't it just the time to force more children into this World when there is not even going to be enough water soon?

[peeayebee]

54 minutes ago, paigow said:

Solution: Desalinated sea water for California farmers... Expensive... but saves the Colorado 

I always wondered, What do they do with all the salt?

Edited June 27, 2022 by peeayebee

[paigow]

26 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

I always wondered, What do they do with all the salt?

https://news.mit.edu/2019/brine-desalianation-waste-sodium-hydroxide-0213

The process does not create solid salt as a by-product... but super salty brine... that can be further processed into usable chemicals

[Ceindreadh]

The 'get an iceberg for fresh water' was a plot on the TV show Salvage 1 back in 1979. 

[DoctorAtomic]

12 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I know what you mean, and I generally feel the same. Their recent decisions just underscore their methodology of pulling the rationale out of their butts to justify the predetermined ends.

Just to continue this rationale in the overall discussion here, both the NY gun decision and Roe were about 'states rights'; in one, the state can't regulate and in the other it can. That line seems to move where they need it to be. As it was said here, if they upheld NY and overturned Roe, ok, you see some consistency in the logic. Not necessarily agree, but it's there. 

7 hours ago, paigow said:

Solution: Desalinated sea water for California farmers... Expensive... but saves the Colorado 

Diablo Canyon can desalinate millions of gallons. They're shutting it down. 

I'm on a team doing legit research plans on water storage, usage, conservation in the west. Reservoirs are down below half capacity in most places. 

I wish John got more into the water rights issue. Yes, basically it's 'dibs' but it goes back really far. It's even more complicated when there's native American reservations because that requires treaties. 

[paigow]

12 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Diablo Canyon can desalinate millions of gallons. They're shutting it down. 

The Nuclear Reactor??? The facility cannot be converted if the reactor is decommissioned?

Edited June 28, 2022 by paigow

[rwlevin]

13 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I had no doubt he was lying before (re sexual assault), but the exposed lying about Roe just makes EVERYTHING he says suspect.

Except that he really likes beer. I believe that part.

The Roe decision scares me a lot. I luckily live in New York but there are crazy people out there (like Pence) who want to codify life starting at fertilization and make every miscarriage circumspect. I had a miscarriage in March and it was one of the most emotionally traumatic events I’ve experienced. I walked around for 2 weeks knowing there was no viable fetus in my uterus, waiting for my body to expel it. During this time, I had to go to work and people would ask why I was there. There’s no bereavement leave for a miscarriage. I tried the medication, which didn’t work, and ended up needing a D&C. Could you imagine how much worse that experience would have been if the republicans get their way? This country scares the crap out of me right now. How are we, a majority, seeing the fanatical minority slowly strip away our rights? And we can’t do anything to stop it, which is a feature, not a bug, of the US democracy system.

[ahisma]

7 hours ago, Ceindreadh said:

The 'get an iceberg for fresh water' was a plot on the TV show Salvage 1 back in 1979. 

Was it wearing a diaper? 
 

[paigow]

8 hours ago, Ceindreadh said:

The 'get an iceberg for fresh water'

and Earth is running out of those also...

[swanpride]

It's not pro-life. If it were pro-life, they would consider the life of the mother, too. It bears repeating: strict abortion laws KILL pregnant women, independent from the question if they actually want an abortion or not. Women who might want to carry their baby to term might die of a sepsis because a doctor hesitates to long to do what is necessary when a foetus dies in the womb. Hence in my eyes, it is completely consistent that they are against gun control, too. Because they might call it "pro life" but it is in reality the absolute opposite. 

[Annber03]

And between this and the talk of the possibility that birth control is next on the chopping block, if they do start restricting and banning that as well, then I do not want to hear a single person who supports this and the end of Roe bitching about welfare ever again. You can't force women to have babies against their will and then turn around and complain that women are having babies they can't afford to take care of. You don't get to have it both ways, people. 

[peeayebee]

10 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Just to continue this rationale in the overall discussion here, both the NY gun decision and Roe were about 'states rights'; in one, the state can't regulate and in the other it can. That line seems to move where they need it to be. As it was said here, if they upheld NY and overturned Roe, ok, you see some consistency in the logic. Not necessarily agree, but it's there. 

Although I completely disagree with the decision and the court's explanation (or whatever it's called, legal-wise), isn't the difference betw the gun and abortion decisions that SC says abortion rights are not in the Constitution while gun rights are? And that's why issues that are not in the Constitution go to states to legislate?

[paigow]

1 hour ago, Annber03 said:

And between this and the talk of the possibility that birth control is next on the chopping block,

I think Mr. Pfizer & Mrs. Merck might push back on that one...

[Welshman in Ca]

3 minutes ago, paigow said:

I think Mr. Pfizer & Mrs. Merck might push back on that one...

And as we all know it's the big companies that actually pull the strings around these parts not the politicians.

[paigow]

1 hour ago, Welshman in Ca said:

And as we all know it's the big companies that actually pull the strings around these parts not the politicians.

Decades ago, Big Tobacco used Canada to bootleg duty free cigarettes into the USA... Maybe Big Pharma will try something similar with contraceptives...

[Nellise]

7 hours ago, peeayebee said:

Although I completely disagree with the decision and the court's explanation (or whatever it's called, legal-wise), isn't the difference between the gun and abortion decisions that SC says abortion rights are not in the Constitution while gun rights are? And that's why issues that are not in the Constitution go to states to legislate?

The reasoning for the NY decision is that gun owners have the right to carry guns for self-defense, but of course that's nowhere in the Constitution. The 2nd only mentions arms in relation to a militia. It's a rule made up by theses same justices in a different case a little while ago. They made the precedent for arms being used for self-defense and then used that precedent for the new ruling.

[Annber03]

1 hour ago, Nellise said:

The reasoning for the NY decision is that gun owners have the right to carry guns for self-defense, but of course that's nowhere in the Constitution. The 2nd only mentions arms in relation to a militia. It's a rule made up by theses same justices in a different case a little while ago. They made the precedent for arms being used for self-defense and then used that precedent for the new ruling.

This. 

Though if they were going to use the Constitution as their reasoning for the gun law, that'd set a pretty risky precedent, considering there's a whoooooooole lotta rights we have now that weren't in the original Constitution that would be lost that way. 

But of course, that seems to be the whole point of their thinking, so...

[xaxat]

8 hours ago, paigow said:

I think Mr. Pfizer & Mrs. Merck might push back on that one...

8 hours ago, Welshman in Ca said:

And as we all know it's the big companies that actually pull the strings around these parts not the politicians.

This is one of the things about the Supreme Court. They have lifetime appointments, they never have to run for office, and they are accountable to no one. So when Justice Thomas says that Griswold (right to contraception) should be  reviewed, it doesn't matter what the monied interests or the majority of the population think/want.

[paigow]

5 minutes ago, xaxat said:

it doesn't matter what the monied interests or the majority of the population think/want.

They will litigate for damages, back states that will defy the ruling, support sympathetic candidates.....

[iMonrey]

Quote

Thomas needs to be thrown out of office post-haste. And so do Barrett and Kavanaugh, who lied in their testimony at their confirmation hearings*,

Technically, they didn't lie. They were very careful to say they believed that Roe and Casey were established or settled precedent. They never said they wouldn't just overturn those decisions. And none of the Senators who interviewed them just came out and asked that question either. Al Franken has commented on this numerous times; he kept waiting for someone to say "Well, that doesn't really mean anything does it? You could still just overturn it." Nobody ever did. 

[swanpride]

No, they actually did that that they respected established or settled precedent. Changing that into "but just because I respect it it doesn't mean I won't just get rid of it" is just mincing words. They lied, plain and simple. 

[iMonrey]

Quote

 They lied, plain and simple. 

Well they certainly misrepresented themselves, deliberately so. Whether you consider obfuscation a lie is matter of opinion. They were very careful with their words, they never said "I will not overturn Roe" and no Senator ever asked them that directly. I don't know why. Saying you respect something doesn't mean you agree with it. Or that you won't overturn it. They were clearly playing semantics and I think it was pretty obvious. Trump nominated these people precisely because they were anti-abortion and everyone knew it. I simply do not understand how the Democrats let them pussy foot their way around this issue during their confirmation hearings.

[Lugal]

On 6/28/2022 at 5:06 AM, swanpride said:

It's not pro-life. If it were pro-life, they would consider the life of the mother, too. It bears repeating: strict abortion laws KILL pregnant women, independent from the question if they actually want an abortion or not.

Exactly, there's some dipshit in Missouri, Brian Seitz (surely a nominee for the Ted Bundy Award), who want to ban abortions for ectopic pregnancies (which can be deadly).

On 6/28/2022 at 3:52 PM, Annber03 said:

Though if they were going to use the Constitution as their reasoning for the gun law, that'd set a pretty risky precedent, considering there's a whoooooooole lotta rights we have now that weren't in the original Constitution that would be lost that way. 

I read an article the other day (and I'm not a lawyer so I hope I'm explaining this right) that said that it's a Tenth Amendment issue because the Tenth reads:

Quote

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

And that Roe followed those last four words by giving the power to get an abortion to the people (at an individual level), and that has now been taken from the people and kicked up to the state level.

[andromeda331]

On 6/28/2022 at 5:12 PM, xaxat said:

This is one of the things about the Supreme Court. They have lifetime appointments, they never have to run for office, and they are accountable to no one. So when Justice Thomas says that Griswold (right to contraception) should be  reviewed, it doesn't matter what the monied interests or the majority of the population think/want.

Nope, it's a lot of power in the hands of nine people including a rapist and a man who's spouse tried to overthrow the election. 

[meowmommy]

On 6/26/2022 at 8:36 PM, Annber03 said:

I have to think there's got to be some way to get around that, because unless the Democrats get rid of the filibuster, the chances of the Senate impeaching these "justices" are exceedingly slim AT BEST

I wish it were that simple, but impeachment is not part of the Senate’s self-imposed filibuster rule.  The 2/3 threshold for conviction in an impeachment trial is mandated by the Constitution, and can only be altered by a Constitutional amendment. 

I know that sucks these days, but think about the chaos that could ensue if impeachment only required a simple majority.  You’d see impeachments and convictions every time there’s a party or ideological mismatch.

Edited July 1, 2022 by meowmommy

[swanpride]

Even if they had claimed that they didn't intend to overthrow it, I think they could have just claimed that they didn't lie back then, but "changed their mind" now. But none of those semantics change what is obvious for all to see who chose to see it. 

[heatherchandler]

On 6/27/2022 at 9:53 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

Diablo Canyon can desalinate millions of gallons. They're shutting it down. 

Why?

[Shermie]

On 6/27/2022 at 9:48 AM, peeayebee said:

The lake’s flies and brine shrimp would die off

Aw, no more sea monkeys?

On 6/28/2022 at 8:25 AM, Annber03 said:

And between this and the talk of the possibility that birth control is next on the chopping block, if they do start restricting and banning that as well, then I do not want to hear a single person who supports this and the end of Roe bitching about welfare ever again. You can't force women to have babies against their will and then turn around and complain that women are having babies they can't afford to take care of. You don't get to have it both ways, people.

Women are supposed to keep their legs closed and stop tempting men, dontcha know? No need for birth control if women would just be guardians of their purity, as God intended. I mean, men can’t control themselves so it’s up to the women.

[andromeda331]

4 hours ago, Shermie said:

Aw, no more sea monkeys?

Women are supposed to keep their legs closed and stop tempting men, dontcha know? No need for birth control if women would just be guardians of their purity, as God intended. I mean, men can’t control themselves so it’s up to the women.

Pretty much. It's 2022 and that crap still isn't a thing of the past.

[Lantern7]

Odd thought watching this last week . . . wasn't the drying of the Colorado River covered somewhat in the latest South Park exclusive from Paramount+?

Yes, I'm thinking the entire episode could have been on the Supreme Court, especially since they were getting ready to end their sessions. As much as I feel John preaches to those already converted, I wouldn't blame him for going 35 straight minutes dragging those that overturned RvW, those that let it happen, those that would celebrate it, and those that have dragged their feet while saying they defend it. The bit on how water is scare in the Western United State was well done, and it's great to bring out a guy to play God and cuss out people . . . but I think it could have waited until after the break.

On 6/27/2022 at 12:05 AM, scarynikki12 said:

Just imagine how much fun this episode could have been if Ollie had been able to devote some time to that perfect old man hound who won Westminster. You're perfect Todd (what's his real name?).

His name is Trumpet, and he does look like a stoned seaplane. Happily, those that contended for Best in Show this year actually resembled dogs. I was rooting for the French Bulldog whose coloring could be described as "lightly toasted marshmallow," but a big-eared Bloodhound that looks as hung over as the breed standard? That works for me.

On 6/27/2022 at 11:10 AM, arachne said:

Our governor may not be calling for prayers this year, but he did declare a drought emergency weeks ago, and it's only the beginning of summer.

Do prayers work at all? I dunno . . . it seems so abstract to see a disaster or crisis and ask people to send prayers (as well as thoughts), but that's been used too often. John was funny suggesting that the situation in Utah was dire enough to try and rope in all faiths.

John's growing animal fetish . . . are we liking it or not? Bringing up the Utah Jazz's bear mascot and muttering "crush me, king" before moving on . . . I'd want a payoff at the end of the season, but could it ever top Adam Driver chewing out John at the end for 2020?

Edited July 4, 2022 by Lantern7

[andromeda331]

On 7/3/2022 at 11:04 PM, Lantern7 said:

Do prayers work at all? I dunno . . . it seems so abstract to see a disaster or crisis and ask people to send prayers (as well as thoughts), but that's been used too often. John was funny suggesting that the situation in Utah was dire enough to try and rope in all faiths.

I've been joking to my dad that maybe God/Gods/Mother Nature are misunderstanding our prayers or we're not being clear in our prayers. Like praying for rain to refill Lake Meade and instead Las Vegas casinos got the rain. Or simply praying for rain to end the drought and getting floods instead. That's not what we meant.

[paigow]

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Or simply praying for rain to end the drought and getting floods instead. That's not what we meant.