Important meetings? During his presidency, Trump skipped most of his daily intelligence briefings.
Forget staying awake, Trump doesn't even show up.
It's obvious that it doesn't work from the moment you first hear about it.
You don't become the wealthy elite by accident. You do it by hoarding money.
So if someone gives you more free money, you'll just hoard it like you're already doing.
Reminder that Trump doesn't endorse people because they're good for the country or even because they're good for the party.
Trump endorses people only when it benefits himself. For example, he might force them to pledge personal loyalty to him, like he tried to do with James Comey.
"I have not yet begun to defile myself."
These lawyers are trying to speak to the public through the court. It's an irresponsible use of the court.
The primary reason an MRI is expensive to run is that it has this magnetic field that must be maintained. This is a cost that is irrespective of whether they are running a scan.
So if you have an MRI for small animals and it's not being used, you might use it for a hamster.
But that inevitably leads to the next question: How did he expect to make this joke in 1949? He should have known that Jimi Hendrix hadn't even started playing guitar by then.
Really, there's nothing specifically wrong with having a low birth rate. On a large scale, we have an overpopulation problem, and there's not really a negative for each person having fewer children. Of course, smarter people will decide to have fewer kids. But eventually, it will all balance out.
This idea is a complete non-starter from a practical standpoint. Parents would complain about it either way. Either they wouldn't want girls in school early or they'd want boys in school early, too.
It's just much easier to treat children all the same.
Also, I personally think this plan would backfire. Girls graduating wouldn't want to have to be adults earlier than boys, so they'd stay in school longer. And from what I've heard, the most reliable way to reduce birth rates is to educate women more.
I think everyone also knows how to ethically increase the birth rate. Make having children easy and affordable. Lots of government assistance. Make sure everybody has access to cheap or free childcare.
And there's also the generational problems. Young adults can see the problems that the previous generations caused. You can't go back in time to fix those. It will be expensive to change this sort of thing.
But quick fixes aren't going to change the underlying problems.
Yeah, it was almost wasted hitting some shitty pavement and causing even more of a heat island problem in this city. But instead, it not only gets the honor of interacting with me, it even serves a useful biological purpose.
Because this is politics, and the US has only two possible options in November, it is good to remember that Trump told Israel that it should "end the problem" of Gaza.
Even if you don't like Biden on this issue, it is imperative to vote for him in November. A non-vote for Biden is almost as bad as a vote for Trump.
I can guarantee MAGA will have no qualms voting for Trump despite his genocidal tendencies. If you don't vote for Biden and Trump wins, you will be responsible for a lot of suffering.
More background on this "non-partisan" commission.
The CPD was established in 1987 by the chairmen of the Democratic and Republican Parties to "take control of the presidential debates". The commission was staffed by members from the two parties and chaired by the heads of the Democratic and Republican parties, Paul G. Kirk and Frank Fahrenkopf. At a 1987 press conference announcing the commission's creation, Fahrenkopf said that the commission was not likely to include third-party candidates in debates, and Kirk said he personally believed they should be excluded from the debates.
It is not non-partisan. It is bipartisan. That's an important difference. Saying that it's nonpartisan is misinformation.
Third parties have often criticized exclusion of their candidates from debates, due to the CPD's rule (established in 2000) that candidates must garner at least 15% support across five national polls to be invited to the national debates. The last candidate from outside the two major parties to participate in a CPD-sponsored debate was Ross Perot, who polled sufficiently high in his 1992 presidential campaign to debate George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton in all three debates; Perot's running mate, James Stockdale, also participated in the vice presidential debate. When Perot ran again in 1996, the CPD declined to invite him to the debates, finding that the Reform Party candidate had no "realistic chance to win" the election.
So, it's an organization run by the two major parties that explicitly tries to keep third parties from participating in the debates.
Our obsession with what celebrities think can really cause problems. There's really no reason to care what a guy like Butker thinks about social issues, other than maybe to feel sorry for his wife.
Based on McConnell's past actions, I suspect that the reason he is standing by his previous position is that he doesn't find it politically beneficial to change his opinion. I don't think there is any other type of meaning to McConnell's political positions.
Also, strange to bring up name order at all when it has nothing to do with the joke they presented.
It makes me wonder if they badly retold a joke they heard where the original punchline was that his name was Mario Itsumi.
In Japan, Itsumi is actually a common name, either as a family name or as a girl's given name.
I don't know too much about Garza, but the language used in the petition sounds biased.
“indiscriminately” pressing charges against law enforcement officials and presenting those cases to grand juries
"Indiscriminately"? Surely there must be some evidence. "Indiscriminately" would mean he targets completely innocent people and brings them to the grand jury with zero evidence. Or, less likely, it could mean that all law enforcement officials are criminals, and he's randomly choosing which criminals to press charges against.
The filing also argues Garza has refused to prosecute certain crimes, citing statements he has made on not pursuing abortion-related cases.
This is what the voters want and it's an elected position. If Garza is removed, the voters will eventually vote for another DA who will do the same thing, or at least achieve the same result.
Again, I don't know too much about Garza, but just from this article, it seems like he's being targeted for doing what his constituents want.
There should be some penalty for filing lawsuits like this that have zero merit. Like, pay the fees that you caused the taxpayers.