Exactly….Pol Pot was a leader too….and Mussolini, and Charles Manson, Jim Jones, David Koresh….there was a German guy I recall people called a “leader”….they all had more than “leadership” in common with the ex president.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-americans-wearing-masks-show-disapproval-not-as-preventive-measure-2020-6

https://apnews.com/article/health-donald-trump-ap-top-news-virus-outbreak-understanding-the-outbreak-227fa2d005b3923157b9eb736c12e6c5

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-tells-allies-his-wearing-mask-would-send-wrong-message-n1202001

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cdc-recommends-americans-wear-cloth-masks-in-public-white-house-says

Coronavirus: Why is there a US backlash to masks? - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52540015

https://time.com/5815615/trump-coronavirus-mixed-messaging/

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mandatory-mask-rulestrump-insists-personal-choice/story?id=71519019


-------------------
-------------------

And right around this time,
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-launch-opening-our-country-task-force-global-deaths-pass-n1181796

April 11, 2020
President Donald Trump said that his “opening our country" task force would start work next week, ...the virus has as of Saturday killed more than 20,000 people in the United States

----------------------
----------------------

----------------------
----------------------

Hey @bobknight33 ! Here's a question for you: Can the GOP successfully gerrymander its way out of killing large swaths of its own constituency ?

-------------------------------------
Pro-Trump counties now have far higher COVID death rates. Misinformation is to blame - December 5, 2021
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate

"People living in counties that went 60% or higher for Trump in November 2020 had 2.73 times the death rates of those that went for Biden. Counties with an even higher share of the vote for Trump saw higher COVID-19 mortality rates."
----------------------------

I'll just leave this here, let me know if u see anything they all have in common https://www.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/
(BESIDES being fucking idiots)

Democrats are denied even a hearing for even their centrist picks (Garland) outrageously unconstitutionally, then Republicans pick FAR RIGHT politicos to replace moderate leftist judges. That was new, never before seen in our history.
Sotomayor and Karen are centrists, dumb shit. Kavenaugh and Barrett are extremist far right wingers….Barrett is barely even a judge, rushed in by a lame duck traitorous seditionist and his lackeys, directly contradicting their own excuse for not hearing Obama’s nomination. They actually admitted they rammed her through as fast as possible with the barest minimum of examination in order to pack the court in anticipation of them contesting the election results….admitted it before the election.
Kavenaugh and Barrett are both extremist Far right wingers, political activist judges, who lied in their confirmation, one is a multiple rapist, never investigated, the other a religious extremist with zero experience who said she would recuse herself on any issue of faith, but hasn’t recused herself from any.
Throw down the gauntlet?! Opposition to his nomination centered on his perceived willingness to roll back the civil rights rulings of the Warren and Burger courts, and his role in the Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal. On October 23, 1987, the Senate rejected Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court by a roll call vote of 42—58. Bork's margin of rejection by the Senate remains, by percentage, the third-largest on record and broke a 142-year record for largest defeat of a Supreme Court nomination. A historic immediate bipartisan rejection because he was totally unsuited, and had undeniably tried to help Nixon cover up Watergate as acting AG by firing the special prosecutor at Nixon’s direction (the AG and deputy AG had quit when Nixon insisted)….*.
Absolutely nothing similar to Obama being denied a hearing for his picks for a year until his term ended….*. Holy shit! What stupidity.

There are far fewer “conservatives” today, the Republican Party is 26% of the population, not a majority.

Yes, they are throwing cases to the packed court as fast as possible before their stolen majority evaporates. I support a 15 justice Supreme Court with a constitutional amendment halting any further additions without a 2/3 majority….add 6 hyper liberals…no judicial experience necessary or even preferred…AOC would be great.

Why bring a case you might lose? Because cases are supposed to be heard on their merits, not based on political affiliation you ignorant cow. You think the Supreme Court should be a political wing of the right, choosing and deciding cases based on political affiliation, not the law, science, common sense, ethics, or precedent….but only when it serves you.

So, gun rights should be up to states? That’s the next step if you win that fight…the constitution dies and states decide everything….as civil war erupts. Great plan, so patriotic. Remember, California is big enough that when they require fingerprint scanners on all guns sold in the state, manufacturers will add them to all guns….when semi auto guns are banned, manufacturers will move to single shot guns….just like auto manufacturers changed their cars to meet our requirements. Is that your plan? Had you even considered what individual states being in control means? It means California becomes the leader of America, controlling the other states by means of our size, wealth, and international clout. Enjoy.

Not like this, it hasn’t. Never in American history has the court been politicized and weaponized against the will of the majority to ignore precedent (contrary to their oaths and confirmation statements) in order to overturn established law and constitutional rights as a political act. Never.

A 2012 United Nations report summarized 65 different estimated maximum sustainable population size and the most common estimate was 8 billion. Advocates of reduced population often put forward much lower numbers. Paul R. Ehrlich stated in 2018 that the optimum population is between 1.5 and 2 billion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_population

Since we are at or near 8 billion and are far from sustainable, haven’t been for over 50 years, I think the 1.5 number is far more realistic, maybe even high. I think the 8 billion estimates assume international cooperation, constant advances in farming tech with constantly increasing yields (that aren’t happening), and don’t account for climate change disrupting supply chains and production at various levels….so wishful thinking.

War sucks for population control. It’s messy, expensive, destructive of both infrastructure and ecology, and just crap at killing meaningful numbers. We need to reduce by billions, the worst war killed a few million and destroyed much of Europe. A war that kills 1000 times more people….yikes. Forget global warming, hello planetary disintegration.

The only acceptable method IMO is quit having children, then you don’t kill anyone to achieve sustainability. For some idiotic reason, average people find the idea of not having excess children horrific and totally out of the question, but the idea of starving their children to death seems to garner a “shit happens”.

Agreed, we need something like an airborne infectious prion where there could be no vaccine, no sterilization, no escape…..only that would wipe out everyone so maybe not that.

Your video, The Most Common Allergy In The World, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Maybe I can illustrate better.

The 'answer' they give is less clear than it could be for illustrating that purpose. That is to say, the very small electric current that is transferred 'wirelessly', would work exactly the same if your wire were never connected to each other period. Making it a loop as the example, then ignoring the transmission of force on the electrons along that connected wire is unduly complicating the example. If you want to illustrate that current in a wire generates a mag field, and that mag field in turn can induce a current in another wire is much better done by pointing out the result is the same if the wires are not connected.

It also avoids re-inforcing the very common misconception people have about electricity in wire not being subject the the speed of light...

And yeah, if it's a choice between someone getting beat up and someone getting fucking killed, must be the Buddhist in me but I'd rather the former.

Speaking of not letting people die. Tell more of your flunky Rs to get vaccinated. And tell me what all these Hermann Cain awards have in common https://old.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/

Almost like all of them are getting a steady stream of misinformation.

@newtboy,

thanks for clarification.

So in your view, do you see the left objecting to any of the following things that kinda speak to Maher's point, and I think fits to the point of the 'left' being upset with him,

-Defending Chapelle which left would decry invoking their definition of dog whistle, transphobia...
-Pointing out a correlation between violence and Islamic extremism which left would decry as islamophobia
-Believing sports/olympics should divide competitors based on biological sex rather than gender identity == Transphobia
-(Big any famous celebrity accused of sex crimes) and suggesting they deserve a fair trial == failure to believe victims/survivors

Those are all things that have been pretty commonly defended by large groups of the left from what I've been seeing. Am I wrong?

The EPA just today announced plans to set actual enforceable limits for drinking water contamination by the two most common variants, hopefully well below the 70/1000000 unenforceable recomendation they previously issued, before the 2023 deadline, and to study the health effects of other variants and regulate them.
They also announced plans to force polluters to clean up the places where they dumped, which seems to be impossible considering the size and mobility of these molecules, and the fact that they've already migrated everywhere so can't possibly be fully removed.

You didn’t explicitly say it, but you are incredulous that they would go after something small. Same argument, different angle imo….and a common misconception.

In the wild, or in captivity with others, yes. They would absolutely compete for a mouse. In my monitor’s later years I got a second monitor, I had to feed them separately because they would both go for the same mouse and end up accidentally biting each other’s heads in the process.

Fight?….that depends on your definition. Not like movie dinosaurs, but watch any clip of Komodo dragons feeding, or gators going after a single chicken carcass. Reptile mass feeding is rough, but rarely deadly. It’s not uncommon for gators to lose limbs in a feeding frenzy, for instance.

Howdy - I don't know if "addressed" is the right word. Commented on, but not given sufficient perspective. Having said that, the problem is incredibly complex, so there should be no expectation that Mr. Oliver's video or any other single thesis on the topic could possibly suffice.

Your "one chemical bond difference" is an appropriate consideration, but with recognition that once we reach on the order of C20-C40 length dispersable or emulsifiable molecules as surfactants / surface energy modifiers, the insoluble polymers come into play, with not 30'ish bonds growing one at a time, but leaping to 20,000 or more. No doubt the pool has already been irreversibly pissed into by the irresponsible producers that convert small molecules into very, very large ones, but with some control, responsibility, and integrity in our industrial process owners (yes, hell just froze over) there is no reason why we could not safely continue to produce the polymeric forms of PFAS. We do so for substantially more toxic chemical conversion processes today.

It's interesting to note the (usual) examples brought forward by others in this post (Teflon cookware), just waiting for someone to mention Gore-Tex, but by far the biggest impact won't be on consumer goods that we all touch regularly and recognize the name brands of, but will be on the industrial / commercial uses of these polymeric families that are pervasive in the systems / processes that we all derive benefit from every day. Ironies exist, that perhaps confuse the "all PFAS are bad" premise ... consider - effectively every seal, gasket and control valve in a water purification plant is most commonly made of a PFAS polymeric compound, PTFE included, all tested to rigorous specifications and compliance by specific agencies that do nothing other than deal with potable water (thankfully not the EPA - it's National Sanitation Foundation (the other NSF), or Water Research Advisory Scheme (WRAS) in the UK etc.) .

So my contention and the view of many in the end user community is that it's not the final form of some of these compounds that are bad, it's the horrendous messes we leave producing them. We can't unwind our Clock of Dumb, but killing the entire crop just to get rid of the long ago seeded weeds doesn't solve the actual problem, it makes it much, much larger.

Thanks for your comments.

Well those are very common I was thinking past those.

But yes those are also good
Also like the MTV unplugged with Willy nelson / Cash .

The words of :
Mercy Seat,
Hung My Heart,
Hurt,


just cut into you.

It's fanatism that leads to these crazy conflicts & posturing. Nationalism, Patriotism, Fascism, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, etc... basically absolutism to any kind of theories & religious practices that disregard moderation & common sense and human's selfish tendencies all leads to unnecessary conflict, suffering, and especially for religions, hypocrisy.

Absolutely not, why are you lying? I stated that contraceptives aren't perfect, and fail at much higher rates than most think. There is no contraceptive that's 100% effective, and on average the most common are well over 8% failures according to the CDC, but there is abortion that's 100% effective. I never said anything approaching an implication that people are too stupid to use them, it's insanely stupid to think what I said was assigning blame to end users for not using other contraceptives.

They do use contraception, and still need secondary methods when contraceptives fail, which some do for over 1/4 of people who use them. No contraception is 100% effective....not even abstinence if you believe the bible.
BTW, the church has repeatedly tried to stop contraception from being available....Don't try to pretend you're still sticking to your religious arguments when you say that, the church/Christianity opposes contraception just like they oppose abortion, clearly because they like having power over others, not because we need more people.

Maybe she paid them, it's not clear nor is that relevant. The passage listed sentences for crimes done to her, but says if violent abortion was the totality of the "harm", then there was no harm and no crime. They couldn't be more clear that the unborn child wasn't capable of being murdered or harmed.

No, it hasn't been smashed. You claim it was, you look it up and prove your own position if you can. It's already been asserted successfully by people much smarter than you.

To kill something it first had to live. To live, it has to breath. No breath, no life, just a potential life.