I mean yeah, I didn’t claim this action was morally or even strategically acceptable, just that it seems consistent with the way past administrations have used the same power.
This is exactly the use case for not allowing cops to actively help ICE. Not only are there jurisdictional issues, but now you’re discouraging people from calling help when they need it
Similar for drivers licenses. If you get into an accident, do you prefer the other driver to be licensed and insured, and take responsibility, or do you want them uninsured and hit and run?
And SNAP. Please tell me no state requires immigration status, forcing people to starve their kids
I saw online a cool idea for “pinwheel burgers” and wanted to make them for my kids.
assembled them after work, had the younger one select and apply the spices
discovered most of the veggies were dead, and I never bought Cole slaw or cucumbers
put them on the grill but when I went to flip them discovered I’d run out of propane
restarted with a new tank but went inside because of the heat and humidity
came out to flip the burgers and discovered a raging fire, and burgers like hockey pucks.
Luckily I had sufficient backup but after anticipating a new variation of burger and a new variation of Cole slaw, we had dinner two hours late, plain burgers, no veggies
And that’s kind of a problem. As far as I see, this use of the war powers act is entirely consistent with previous uses. Trumps not wrong for once.
Maybe the part about not bothering to inform Congress because “they’ll see it in the news”.
Our outrage seems to be mainly that he chose poorly, or maybe even that we haven’t been conditioned to agree with it. Iran has been pursuing nuclear weapons for years(decades?) and I certainly agree the world becomes a more dangerous, unstable place as more countries obtain nuclear weapons. Sanctions haven’t been working, but you combine this with Israel’s assassinations and it should be effective at stopping their program.
Of course I don’t know that anyone tried negotiating from a point of respect for their sovereignty nor was this in response to hostilities against our Interests or any urgent threat (that we’re aware of). You can’t just bomb people you disagree with, but this really seems consistent with previous administrations and the only difference is the propaganda war to manipulate support
He’s always been able to afford good enough lawyers to delay any proceedings for years, and he can’t have very many left. Given his open grift and straightforward bribes, monetizing the office, I image he’s finally the billionaire he always claimed to be, so he can afford it
Fantastic! But we need more granularity. What year within that 18-64 range is the crossover where odds turn into our favor! If I’m going to die early, at least I may finally get the advantage before I ho
The problem is the propaganda. Yes it’s obviously a tax break for the wealthy. However that may be fine according to the propaganda that “it’s to support small businesses, which are the job creators of our economy”. If I believed that, I might support this giveaway to the wealth, so it’s important to not just prove this is a break for the wealthy but that the purported benefit is just not there.
I guess this is somewhat analogous to “trickle down” economics in general where it may be worth it if the claimed benefits were there. However we have huge amounts of proof that’s it’s not the kind of trickling that we want on us
I’m sure it’s just natural disasters, predominantly affecting “those” people. They should have known better. Anything else is just DEI and needs to be abolished.
The claim in the bill is that it helps benefit small businesses. The data is a fact check: the deduction is predominantly beneficial to wealthy people. The fact that most of these “businesses “ have no employees is a strong indicator that they are not “job creators” and are quite likely artificial corporations created to take advantage of tax structure.
And Bobby might just be at a base in the region at the invitation of local government helping protect regional stability, not “shooting up brown people”. He is innocent yet now a legitimate target
Innocent Americans will get killed by terrorist attacks.
Innocent shipping crews will get killed by increased attempts to close down regional traffic
I’d been go so far as to say innocent Israelis will get killed as local terrorism and assasinations ramp up, and yet more innocent lives lost as Israel overreacts even more strongly
many innocent lives will be lost if Russia decides to supply Iran with nuclear material
Thanks for the attempt, but all I see are “the 17 sustainable development goals” where the Trump administration wants to take us backwards
Hopefully I’m just being us-centric and I understand our current issues may be partly obscured by long term trends and global statistics. However we also have an outsized effect on the world and those are some of the first places cut or corrupted, changed from achievements to points of instigation
Sometimes you can be a little self-centered. While climate change is overwhelming, a huge catastrophe for society and humanity’s future, how much will it directly affect you? Most of us will really only see more of the same: more severe and unstable weather, modified seasons, times where food and power are more expensive. You can handle that.
Sometimes it’s ok not to think too much about the statistics telling the bigger story or the news detailing the more extreme effects. As long as you know they exist
What can you do about the things that directly affect you? What can you do about the things in your control?
Or how about the variant:
New doctor