I believe it had something to do with poor performance and not enough money in my opinion

Well put. But what's the % of Western (or the whole World in general except the Middle Eastern region) population who can make the distinction? It's really depressing.

Here in Canada, IMO the political landscape is very much the same as in the US. It is firmly drilled into people's mind that anyone criticizing the government of Israel's constant harrasement, military action, and land grabs in Palestinian territories are automatically branded as Anti-semitism by the likes of the JDOs (Jewish Defense Organizations). There are many legit Anti-Semitism incidents in Canada that need to be condemned, true, but there are also real over-reaction and subpression of objective opinions by the JDOs. These "false branding" hurts people's lives. And we almost NEVER hear the word Zionist (or anti-Zionist) in the media, mostly isolated to academic circles only.

Nobody would be offended hearing someone criticize any country's policy and military incursion (say, you don't like Trump/Biden? No one will say you're anti-American), but any negative comment involving Israel? Damn it boy, you're begging for trouble. As if Isreal, Likud, Netanyahu and the Jewish people are one and the same. Criticize one, you criticize all. But why is that? What makes Isreal, above all other countries, well above any reproach?

Now, I'm not pro- or anti-Semite nor pro- or anti-Zionist. Such generalised sentiment is wrong to me. I'm just pro-peace, the history of that land is way too complex and the blood spilled between its peoples ran for generations and gone on for centuries. It's unrealistic for any leaders to settle anything between their peoples in a political term or two (and not even factoring outside influences that DON'T want them to settle). There are too many hate and zero trust between the peoples right now. Just let peace reigns for a decade then it'll be time to talk settlement of statehood. Give Isrealites & Palestinians some peaoce & prosperity first. Everyone, including the media, politicians inside and outside of that land, the UN, etc. just need to recognize that and not be just so lopsided in their support.

ok, you're right. everything is CGI. i definitely don't know what i'm talking about. i defer to you, king of "mount stupid". long live the king.


"If the term is so meaningless, why argue against it?"
because it is the source of so much confusion and stupid opinions by laymen. see above.

>1230 of them died. The number permanently disabled is much larger. Permanent brain fog is pretty serious if you’re 10.
Also, Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children is also pretty bad.

In your opinion….ok. I’ll accept that, but in reality the risks from getting covid, even for children, outweigh the minimal risks from vaccination by far. 1231 verified US child deaths from covid… https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-Focus-on-Ages-0-18-Yea/nr4s-juj3 …how many verified deaths from vaccinations? Cite sources please.

For children covid is just not bad at all, almost no chance of serious complications. Taking a vaccine based on brand new technology never before used in humans is, in my opinion, just not worth the risk for them.

https://www.history.com/news/the-hindenburg-disaster-9-surprising-facts ...

Goebbels wanted to name the Hindenburg for Adolf Hitler.
Eckener, no fan of the Third Reich, named the airship for the late German president Paul von Hindenburg and refused Goebbels’ request to name it after Hitler. The Führer, never enthralled by the great airships in the first place, was ultimately glad that the zeppelin that crashed in a fireball didn’t bear his name.

also...

Frau Eva von Zeppelin was offended by the group's name (Led Zepplin) for "dishonouring the family name". The direct descendant of Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin demanded the band to change their name. On 28th Feb, 1970, the group performed one show in Copenhagen as The Nobs but decided to retain their original name afterwards due to popular and critical opinions that favoured their original name.

https://www.thesound.co.nz/home/music/2018/09/Led-Zeppelin-Facts-2.html#:~:text=Frau%20Eva%20von%20Zeppelin%20was,band%20to%20change%20their%20name.

Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

- Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]

I’ve actually changed my opinion…I now agree with Republicans that we should ignore the leak…for now. It will be easier to maintain the outrage until November if we put off being outraged until July.

I almost hope the Democrats fail in their efforts to write new federal law limiting limits on abortion access, and don’t change filibuster rules to once again require only 50 votes to pass a bill as that might drive Republicans to the polls just like this decision will drive democrats and independents and many Republicans to the polls to vote against Republicans across the board.
Between the sedition caucus being denied a place on the ballot and this outrage, the outlook for the midterms has never looked better.

Your ‘nothing to see here’ opinions, red herring arguments, and dismissive comments have also been noted.

Enjoy your moving on.

Not sure what you’re afraid of. Maybe being called out for your own changes of opinions you won’t admit to? (Like happened here-https://videosift.com/video/A-Better-Way-to-Tax-the-Rich)

Your opinion noted. Enjoy your discussion!

I am moving on. I believe I can rely on you to "un-hide" any relevant discourse; and to note in detail any/all changes to the opinion. Or whatever else you may fear.

The leak is significant but the point of this video is the lack of discussion from your political party around the leak's CONTENT, not the leak itself.

You might see little point but I do not, hence the discussion. You can exit if you see no point here (but you do not exit LOL). If you would like to keep this on the DL till its approved then you are trying to hide discourse and a potential change of the opinion... why?

Your opinion about perjury duly noted. I assume that you are a lawyer, and know exactly what you are talking about. Since all of their testimony is public record, shall I expect to see the appropriate prosecutor convening a grand jury to address this crime?

Your other opinion as to "how it works" is also duly noted. I guess SCOTUS should not have overruled Plessy vs Ferguson (decided in 1896) when they heard Brown vs Board of Education (1954).

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

Precedent is just that until evidence proves otherwise.

Pluto was a planet until it wasn't. Truth evolves over time.

1857 Slavery was fundamentally ruled legal under Dred Scott. Truly a wrong decision and a study in judicial overreach.

In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment overturned the Dred Scott decision by granting citizenship to all those born in the United States, regardless of color.


Finally this is just a leaked draft opinion. One must wait to see if overturned and on what grounds .


That being said The left waited decades to get abortions. The right has waited 50+ years to get a legal argument that might overturn that decision.

50 years later and finally have a conservative court and a case that might alter Roe V wade.

The leak itself is newsworthy, but not 10% as newsworthy as what they leaked, which is proof that every single Republican Supreme Court judge lied outright under oath in their confirmation hearings when they all said “roe v wade is settled law and established precedent and will not be overturned by me”. The first chance they got, they took off that paper thin mask and revealed their agenda to legislate from the bench based on personal opinion not science, fact, or established law. They should ALL be impeached tomorrow for perjury during their sworn hearings.

Time to add 5 more liberal judges to the bench by June 1 and rehear the cases. It’s legal, and the only way to negate the liars, rapists, and religious zealots that Trump improperly installed by stealing two seats with McConnells help and filling a third with a drunk rapist. Turnabout is fair play.

MAY!? This IS the decision, they may rewrite the explanation slightly, but without a few assassinations, “accidents”, or criminal charges, this is how the vote will be reported next month, they already voted in Feb as I understand it, it’s just not official until it’s published but rarely are votes changed, and soon abortion will likely be 100% illegal in any state led by Republicans. Anybody know Barrett’s address? What about Kevanaugh? They, and any state representative voting against personal autonomy, should be doxed at every abortion clinic entrance so the now choice less women, many rape or incest victims, can make themselves martyrs and not just suicide statistics. There will be no exceptions now that they can write the laws that way.

We know this is a real draft because they instantly started looking for the “leaker”. You can’t “leak” a fake decision.

I hope women will start a sex strike in every red state. No nookie until they can control their own womb and it’s contents. It’s the ONLY logical move unless they want to be incubators with no autonomy.

Pretty certain that, if you disagreed with their decision, “wait and see” would not only be a terrible idea to you, it would also be an insult to your intelligence.

I’m petitioning Newsom to boycott any state enacting new laws restricting abortion, “new” meaning in the last decade. California does a shitload of business, we shouldn’t be doing it with states that are removing rights from women.

I just can’t fathom, with overpopulation being the root of all major problems humanity and the planet face, why so many idiots still think they should “be fruitful and multiply”, and should force that on their neighbors too. It’s the height of stupidity, and their children will pay the price for the lack of thought their parents put into the decision. We need to abort 9/10 embryos (or get 10 times better at stopping fertilization in the first place), not increase birth rates by double.

(Before you try the “but it’s murder” nonsense, legally and scientifically those things inside wombs aren’t people, and even if they WERE, one person cannot enslave another even in life or death situations. If they could, we would force live organ donations, transfusions, etc with the donor having no right to refuse.)

Yes, they are talking about the leak. If you don't see how such a rare event (an entire draft SCOTUS opinion leaked to the press prior to actual release has NEVER happened before) is newsworthy, I don't know what to say.

I do imagine that it MAY also end up being a "potential massive victory", but it isn't right now. I see little point in speculating about what may happen, when there will be plenty of time to discuss the actual decision, once it has actually been released and becomes part of Federal jurisprudence.