Hodad

The president's fake news network knew he was FOS and laughed about it off camera. His cases were laughed out of court about 60 times--sometimes almost literally. The most MAGA friendly SCOTUS ever didn't even think the cases were worth hearing. He never produced even a shred of evidence of any kind. And still you believe, lol. Might want to have those senses recalibrated.

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US this question isn't much of a mystery. Urban voters are younger, better educated, have higher incomes, more racial and social diversity, more immigrants, arts and culture, etc. Rural areas are older, whiter, less educated. There's nothing wrong with enjoying a rural lifestyle, but choosing it is sort of like saying "I don't want to change, I don't want things to change, I don't want new and different, so I'm staying right here." It's why small towns suffer from brain drain. The people who grow up there who are interested in new experiences and challenges leave. Sometimes they come back, but in general it's a shrinking, aging population. They just don't have much in common and are looking in different directions.

You have no idea what deficit and debt are. You have no idea who or how or why debt was created. Biden did not triple the debt- that's preposterous.. And his deficts have come down from the Trump levels. Trump, again, who managed to add as much to the debt in 4 years at Obama did in eight. And that's a big task. To say nothing of the top notch debt accumulation of Reagan and W. The history of our modern debt is owned by Republicans. Crack open a damn history book.

Can't tell if this is trolling or a real question. Regardless of party, billionaires (or the wealthy in general) will always have an outsized voice in politics. There's one party though that, as a matter of policy, is dedicated to serving the rich, and they managed to convince almost half of the peasantry that supply side economics was good for them. Cut taxes on the wealthy and some of it will trickle down to you! Sure it will. Just don't mind the smell.

My goodness. Just as expected, you cannot link to the statement you claim the FBI released, nor can you quote it. Yet instead of acknowledging that fact, you try to paper over it with links that do not support you claim. Totally dishonest. You're in no position to throw stones.

You are like a broken record. Why don't you ever support your claims? You say the FBI released a statement calling the laptop Russian disinformation. You say they are liars. How about you provide some substance. How about you link to the statement you say they released and quote the text? I think you are confused, hoodwinked again by your garbage media, or are yourself lying again.

Why would you think that? They undertake a journey of incredible hardship to seek asylum here. You really think one minor obstacle will change that calculus? Honestly, the wall is a fantasy sold for the sake of politics. It's not and never had been a practical solution. The cost, the maintenance, the property rights, the inefficacy and on and on. Nobody who seriously studied it had and expectation that it would work. And indeed it didn't. Trump built hundreds of miles of new wall and took a victory lap, and still illegal crossings soared. It just doesn't work. It's a simplistic idea to score political points with a certain type of voter. https://www.cato.org/blog/border-wall-didnt-work

A fence would be super useful if we had a national dog and wanted to keep it in the yard. But it seems *incredibly* naive to think that people who are willing to journey thousands of miles through hellish conditions at great personal pain and risk are going to turn around and go home instead of going over, under, around or through a border "wall." That's just not realistic.

It's like you wanted to start a thread, but forgot to add any content.

That's not reporting, man, it's propaganda, and was always meant to be. That's why this segment features a single Republican rep. The intention is for to provide her a platform to take shots at Biden. Fox doesn't employ journalists. They've never won any of the journalism prizes. If you want conservative news, look at the WSJ or something. -- To be clear, this is not hyperbole. It's literally not journalism. And I'm sad for you that you don't recognize that. URLs as appalling as that don't happen accidentally. They know they're selling hate, and they know the audience is buying in bulk.

Jeebus. Just READ that URL. Why are you pouring this garbage into your brain?

As you intend it, that's a bit of false dichotomy. Or, to look at it the other way, your views about what is best for the USA are not fully informed. Virtue signaling has a negative connotation because it's focused on the self. But "walking the walk" sends other signals as well, signals that are all for the benefit of others. If a company has 10 senior executives and 9 of them are white men, that sends a signal to the entire workforce (and marketplace) about how they assess and promote talent. It sends the signal that minorities and women aren't going to have a fair shot to advance. That talent will never feel comfortable, will never feel invested and engaged, and most of them will eventually leave for more diverse and inclusive companies. Those signals hurt the company. Whereas a company that is meaningfully diverse and inclusive sends the opposite signal and will reap the benefits. In terms of the country, our institutions are still dominated by straight, white, cis, christian men. It's not even close. So deliberately opening the aperture beyond that narrow demographic has multiple benefits. The first is the inclusion of more diverse perspectives in the decision chain. Diverse perspectives serve a diverse society. The second is that we have access to a broader talent pool. That too is good, for obvious reasons. But the third is the signal sent to the rest of the population, a signal that a government that is of, by and for the people is of, by and for all the people. People engage and invest differently if they perceive that a society does represent them and does care about their needs.

No it's already happening. An impact has been made and it isn't pretty. The increasing frequency and ferocity of extreme weather events and things like rising sea levels and the megadrought in the Western US are, among the science community, understood to be symptoms of anthropogenic warming. If you want a calendar date for extinction or something, I don't think we have a good model for that.

I sometimes think people who like kale have brains that aren't right. Then rational thinking kicks in and I remember that different than me is not automatically wrong.

I have no interest in watching Tucker make a mockery of journalism, but it doesn't seem that anything is radical about that appointment. And they were dismissed after the theft allegations, so I don't see anything radical about that either. You seem really hung up on what a nuclear engineer wears or who they sleep with. WTF does that have to do with their qualifications as a nuclear engineer? I don't know a single thing about the person in that role before Brinton, or the one before that, or any one every, not even how they dressed or whether they were attracted to men or women or both. Has it ever mattered before? No. So why are you hung up on it now?

Nah. We're in the bigot zone. So deep in that zone that you made up (or more likely parroted) some nonsense story about how and why Levine holds the rank of Admiral. Oh, and assuming you're talking about Satcher, no, he didn't "come up" through the ranks. That's not how it works. He was direct commissioned as a vice admiral when he got the surgeon general gig and direct commissioned as an full admiral with the asst. sec. gig. You don't know anything about any of this, but you surely believed FOX news or some other craphole when they decided to rile up the rubes with news of Biden's "super secret plan" to turn Levine into an admiral. Bravo.

You're full of it. Everyone who gets that assistant sec. job can elect to become a direct commissioned officer, and most of them do. None of them are coming up through the service. Everyone in that organization is a DCO and there are no non-commissioned personnel. They've been direct commissioning people like doctors since the 19th century. Biden didn't sneak Levine into admiralty any more than Trump snuck Giroir into admiralty. "Poof!" And neither of those commissions were made to spite you or anyone else. Turn down your victim complex.

Eh, sounds like pure bigotry to me. Levine appears to be well qualified for the position. That should be the end of the story. A person doesn't have to share your skin color or your gender or your sexual orientation to be an effective professional. This is how, BTW, diversity initiatives deliver value. Short-sighted folks like yourself will pass on good talent because of irrelevant characteristics, whereas organizations committed to inclusiveness will outperform yours because they have access not just to diverse perspectives, but to the entire talent pool.

Holy crap. Biden must have totally invented this special extralegal appointment to spite you, personally. OR, nearly everyone who holds that job becomes a direct commissioned officer in the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps with an automatic rank in that service as a 4-star Admiral.

No. I'm not much fussed about about what people wear. I've had doctors who wear dresses and doctors who wear pants and I never spent any time worrying about what genitals that clothing covered. The only thing I want from a doctor is a high level of competence, which Levine has to have both medically and as an administrator. So what's the issue?

21/01/19/rachel-levine-transgender-biden-hhs-pick/ Rather...radical...no? How so?

Well, yes a president should be knowledgeable, experienced and qualified. But that wasn't the point. A party's presidential nominee is the survivor of the primary and ostensible leader and representative center of the party. So it's pretty easy to look at the last two election cycles and see which party has radically shifted. There's no mystery to unpack.

Great. Let me know when she's a presidential candidate.

Well, the Democrats ran the exact same people who have been in public service for 40 years in the last two election cycles. The Republicans ran a reality TV star and WWE heel turned political heel. I don't think there's much question about which party is radically moving.

Well, there are the conservatives that existed before Trump, and then there's the MAGA movement which Trump didn't necessarily invent, but certainly took advantage of. Trump's campaign was willing to abandon a huge chunk of traditional conservatives in exchange for stitching together some of the ugliest constituencies in America. He said ugly things. He did ugly things. And the uglier it got the more his new base loved it. It became professional wrestling. From an electoral perspective, it seems to have been successful. But the consequence of embracing those diverse flavors of far-right radicalism is that the conversation focuses a lot more on hate and spite than on actual values. Suddenly the most Republican Republicans are being called RINOs and Obama and Clinton should be executed for treason and PWN the LIBS! It's why the Republican party hasn't formalized a platform in ages. The party doesn't collectively stand for anything anymore except beating the Democrats.