I used to have a VCR tape of old-timey newsreels from the 30s and one of them was a story about a dude who did this kinda thing to his car. He's showing this backward-car shit off in the city and some cop walks up to him, looks at the car, WHACKS THE DUDE WITH A FUCKING BATON, then points for him to GTFO with a "ged da fuck odda hehr!" expression. The best part is that everyone looks like they're having a great ol' time, including the dude who just got brained by Boston's finest. The guy's smiling while O'Malley the Copper looks like he's debating taking another swing.

If that dude with the car had been black, the tone of that newreel would have been a weeeeee bit different, especially the ending.

That cop's alternative being what, letting the rampaging mob have their way with the legislators he was duty-bound to protect? It's not like the officer was just wandering around and randomly shot her - she was at the front of a violent mob that had just broken through a barrier. By shooting her, he kept the mob at bay for a bit longer, which may very well have saved lives. When people on this site decry police violence, it tends to be in a context where that violence was unnecessary and excessive for the situation. The fact that more of the insurrectionists weren't shot actually illustrates incredible restraint and professionalism, on the part of the Capitol police.

I'd like to add: fucking stop with the "unarmed" bullshit. They were a RAMPAGING MOB. They were chanting their wish to kill the Vice President, who they believed to be in the building. Do you really believe a group of people with only bludgeoning weapons are incapable of causing massive amounts of harm? They had violently broken into one of the core seats of power in the US, in a direct effort to stop the democratic process and what has in *every other instance* been a peaceful transition of power.

Seriously - if you support the 1/6/2021 insurrection, you support an attempted fascistic overthrow of the US government. It isn't up for debate, that's what happened on that day. It wasn't a fucking protest, they weren't a goddamned tourist group. They smashed their way into the Capitol, at the behest of a man seemingly incapable of admitting defeat (gracefully or otherwise), with the goal of keeping him in power against the will of the voters of this country. That shit is not at all acceptable, and I hope the lot of them serve sufficient time in prison to act as a warning to all other fascists.

Depends on your definition of "need", and your definition of "stopping" climate change.

Because I'm convinced enough natural feedback loops are in effect that there's no chance at all of stopping further climate change, and only a slight chance of slowing the rate of change and only if humanity fundamentally changes first, I find the question flawed.

I find it odd that tidal energy (different from hydro) is never considered in these debates. It's simple, relatively cheap, easy to maintain, and best of all predictable and consistent. All you need is a shoreline with a relatively large tide swing, a small inlet, and a tidal flat.

At best, nuclear is a stop gap measure that trades one planetary poison for another.....largely because we aren't responsible with it....building on shores in earthquake zones for convenience, banning fuel recycling, having no long term waste plan and handling waste insanely (Japan, I'm looking at you and your plans to dump Fukushima irradiated water into the ocean)....It's far from "green" the way we do it.

Measuring the efficiency of "investment" into social programs is.. debatable.

This was the best 20 minutes on national debt I can remember to have seen or heard or read.

National debt is one of the hardest (yet closest to the skin) things to explain to people who have a lay attitude to economics. Right up there with Annual percentage rate and secondary effects of raising minimum wage.

What do you think about removing the automatic filibuster and returning to requiring a senator to stand and speak?
I don't think the minority should have the unbridled ability to effortlessly stop debate and voting on any bill they like, no matter which party they belong to, but I have no problem with them actually extending debate so long as they actually debate (or at least speak). Killing bills and debate because supporters don't have a super majority as the norm has paralyzed government and is rapidly getting worse. It makes compromise unnecessary and obstructionism a platform, and that's not working.

The whole point of the Section 230 debate is that Youtube has no liability, just like Videosift is not liable for any of our comments. Youtube would have been sued out of existence long ago if that wasn't the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

In 1968, Buckley debated Gore Vidal. Here's the most famous part of that debate:

BUCKLEY: No, I won’t. Some people were pro-Nazi and, and the answer is they were well treated by people who ostracized them. And I’m for ostracizing people who egg on other people to shoot American Marines and American soldiers. I know you don’t care—

VIDAL (loftily): As far as I’m concerned, the only pro- or crypto-Nazi I can think of is yourself. Failing that—

SMITH: Let’s, let’s not call names—

VIDAL: Failing that, I can only say that—

BUCKLEY (snarling, teeth bared): Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in your goddam face, and you’ll stay plastered—

Vidal was right about the Right, only he was about 50 years ahead of his time.

Wait, you said clearly that if the truth doesn’t help your case, it’s the right thing to do to lie, even under oath, only stupid people would tell the truth if it hurts their case. Now you think you have a leg to stand on calling someone a liar? Get a grip.

This points out in great clarity how biased and untrustworthy Rand Paul and most republicans are.

Investigations galore, multiple recounts, signatures were compared, over 60 cases tossed for lack of evidence, a few for lack of standing, only about what, +-70 votes actually in question for fraud now that the dominion lie has been quashed, far fewer prosecuted, and they were Trumpsters voting twice or more, the rest are cases of minor technicalities that Republicans thought meant since two people in one Republican county weren’t afforded the same help some people in other counties got like ballot curing or a chance to fix a signature that was missing or considered different from the one on file before election day (because the republicans in that county specifically disallowed it) they think those other counties must be discarded completely, a few million votes should be discarded to make up for two republicans that Republicans screwed over.

How many times did Paul lie about what Stephanopilous had just said? I lost count.

We had the debate, repeatedly. Paul is lying again.

We had thorough examinations in every state, full recounts in some, multiple in Georgia. Republicans are all liars who want to rehash the election in different ways and venues until they win, then stop the process. Too bad you lost so badly, in such a massive landslide with such a clear mandate across the board that no amount of rehashing, not an ocean of their tears could change the outcome.

The conservative Supreme Court heard umpteen challenges to election rule changes and found NONE to be illegal, Paul is just lying again.
If every single claim thrown out of court for lack of evidence was won by the right, Trump still would have lost bigly.

You are such a willing tool for the lying right. If lying were a crime, republicans would all be in prison for felony level dishonesty. Where you go one, you go all....into the mouth of madness.

I do like that you tagged this ridiculous lie fest from Paul as “lies”, and the reporting by Stephanopolis “news”. That’s a step back towards sanity.

They like to pretend to fight, I've decided.

They don't want to fight any real enemy, they don't want to fight in an actual war. You don't want to have a real debate with real facts. Just want to pretend to do all those fucking things.

Add to that you don't want to have a real election where you might have an outcome that you don't like.

So much fraud in so many states.
Just because fake news say it isn't so does not fake them correct.

Because of all the fraud, Congress will have to debate the validity of the electors and probably will end up choosing the POTUS,per law. At least this isn't the first time. It has happened befor.

I'm open to debate on the channels. Travel didn't really seem to fit in spite of their name, as the video has little to do with actual travel. Love seemed to fit, as this felt nothing like a commercial venture and more like a giant bromance.

After the debate Perdue cancelled the upcoming last debate.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/us/elections/jon-ossoff-david-perdue-georgia.html

Your video, Trump Leaks Embarrassing 60 Mins Interview Before 2nd Debate, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.