The reasoning was that in the old style of filibuster no other senate business was possible. In theory was supposed to help the senate be more productive. In practice, it’s made the filibuster even more powerful. If a party was holding up all legislation and other functions of the senate by grandstanding for something stupid, that could hurt them politically, especially if it got bad enough that the military was being impacted or there were government shutdowns. So maybe they would think twice if it was worth a filibuster. Now they can kind of do it risk free. I think if you saw, government shutdown caused by Republicans trying to prevent abortion protections, well it’d be pretty unpopular with most Americans. And they’d pay for it in the polls. Or maybe not even do the filibuster in the first place.

I suppose if we had way more judges who worked on a much quicker timeline and retained independent qualified experts in all these areas, and the judges weren’t just partisan hacks, then Chevron being struck down might not be so bad. But that’s not the world we live in. Slow decisions by corrupt judges that don’t know anything about what they’re ruling on. Just look at some of the ridiculous fda related rulings trying to go after abortion.

But that’s basically why at the time it was originally ruled on you had liberals upset about Chevron and conservatives happy (basically a more conservative executive and more liberal court at that time).

One slight silver lining is that it may make it easier for judges to strike down Trump admin regulations if he wins the election. But that is kind of cold comfort. Probably have worse issues than that if Trump is re elected.

I agree. I’m also worried about the lack of incentives for testing. Currently you get $75 for being tested. That’s fine, but they should get more if they test positive. They will lose more money from that from missed work time, they could even lose their job after a positive test. So many refuse. We don’t have a complete picture of what’s happening right now with the lack of testing participation.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/05/26/bird-flu-spreading-dairy-farm-workers-but-not-testing/73842450007/

Or we could even have something like nationwide paid sick leave and none of this would be an issue. But no, that would be crazy.

Also, many of these farm workers are likely undocumented immigrants, further complicating things.

“I’m almost anti-gay,” Dorman told The Post. “It’s an embarrassment to see this kind of behavior… I’d really invite them to go to Iran or Gaza. See what that does for you. See how fast they throw you in prison or kill you.”

The internalized homophobia is strong with this one. It’s honestly really sad. I mean, he’s an ass. But it’s still kind of sad.

I don’t think anyone’s bothered because of how obviously wrong what you’ve written is to anyone with a decent memory.

Inflation had already peaked when the inflation reduction act was passed in August 2022. It had already blown past 9%. Predicted means guessing something before it happens, not after. Inflation decreased steadily after the act passed. If you’re trying to argue that it stopped it from slowing down faster that would be pretty silly when America had a relatively better recovery from inflation than most countries. You’re also blaming more inflation on a mass student loan forgiveness that never even happened. Unless you’re blaming public service loan forgiveness and stuff.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_08102022.pdf

https://www.statista.com/statistics/273418/unadjusted-monthly-inflation-rate-in-the-us/

But no, go on about how something Biden did magically created global inflation. /sigh

Such a misleading way the story is written. Also a failure to mention that inflation was a global phenomenon, that it was brought down faster in America than most other places, that it was able to be brought down without a recession as was widely predicted which would have been far more devastating, that wage growth has compensated for inflation and then some, that wage growth was highest for hourly and low income workers, and a failure to mention the responses made by congress and the president to help inflation. So much important context left out.

Barely a mention of the fact that all of Trump’s polices are the exact opposite of what you would do to help inflation. That his tarrifs alone will raise this person’s costs by $1700 a year. Why don’t they ask her what she thinks of Trump’s tarrifs costing her $1700 more a year if he takes office? They could mention how his first term policies including pressuring the federal reserve for unnecessarily low rates created a dangerous environment for inflation before the pandemic kicked it off.

But all they can say is, just, I dunno, inflation was fine when Biden took office. In March 2021 prices were already increasing by 0.6% a month from the month before, a 4.8% annualized rate. Comparing to the year before is an average of the past 12 months of change combined. The month to month rate is a much better way to see how it’s changing when it’s changing rapidly. They were begining to accelerate before Biden did much of anything, and not to mention this occurred simultaneously around most of the globe.

Anyways, journalists can’t be bothered I guess. Everyone always wonders why people think Republicans are better for the economy despite all the evidence to contrary. I think a lot of it is lazy journalism that just regurgitates opinions and polling instead of researching facts.

A lot of “rules” taught in high school writing classes are more stylistic choices. They’re not necessarily wrong. Some of them might help to improve clarity, or a rule might help encourage new word choices so writing doesn’t sound so repetitive. Lots of reasons. But many are more for style. Hey I did it! I even made a sentence with only an implied subject and verb, naughty.

I would also argue that sometimes a period followed by a conjunction can be the best stylistic choice. Maybe the sentence was already getting too long and a break was needed, but you still wanted to draw contrast. Maybe you could have put a comma but wanted an increased emphasis on what comes after but. A lot of these things are just preference or style though. Like “never ending a sentence with a preposition.” Of course you can end a sentence with a preposition, but you might want to make sure what the preposition is referring to is clear to the reader too.

Weird cause I’ve got the FTC act right here. Says this:

(a) Declaration of unlawfulness; power to prohibit unfair practices; inapplicability to foreign trade (1) Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful.

And then later on it has this whole entire section where it lays out the process for how the FTC is supposed to make rules in regards to unfair or deceptive practices

Except as provided in subsection (h) of this section, the Commission may prescribe– (A) interpretive rules and general statements of policy with respect to unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce (within the meaning of section 45(a)(1) of this title), and (B) rules which define with specificity acts or practices which are unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce (within the meaning of section 45(a)(1) of this title)

And more sections about how they can enforce those rules on individual rule breakers.

Sure sounds like congress was trying to give the FTC the authority to make rules about unfair competition. Both general rules and with “specificity” apparently. Specifically here, non compete agreements have been declared an unfair practice and they followed all rule making procedures as laid out in the law.

https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/statutes/federal-trade-commission-act/ftc_act_incorporatingus_safe_web_act.pdf

Except the means of helping to get them homes of course.

I ate the onion on this one for a second.

Whaaaaaaa??? But I thought Israel totally didn’t have any nuclear weapons

Oh gotcha, no worries! I was just kind of like whaaa?? when I read the comment at first.

It’s mostly been conservatives that have a problem with this, not progressives for the most part. I mean sure some progressives are against but they’re by far the minority.

I know progressives and democrats, and conservatives and Republicans, aren’t the same thing, but you get the picture. I think most on the left would prefer to stand up to authoritian genocidal governments, whereas many conservatives crazily see a lot they like in Russian government and want the US to embrace them.

Also in the northern district of Texas. I smell some judicial venue shopping. Northern district of Texas is basically now the Mordor of the legal world.

I wonder if valve is planning on bringing the driver level implementation of frame generation to the steam deck as well. Theoretically should be able to support it I think, since it’s an RDNA 2 gpu.

I have a wild idea here. What if, they didn’t build an entire Olympic sports complex with multiple stadiums and other infrastructure every 2 years around the globe? Maybe that would save a bit on carbon emissions. And hey, the billions that would have gone to building that complex? Maybe that could go toward building up renewable energy resources instead.

But no that’s crazy, it’s the portable air conditioning units for some athlete’s apartments that are the problem. /s

Though some props to Paris, it sounds like they didn’t have nearly the amount of insane new constructions that some Olympics have had. Sounds like only one major new venue with most venues being used already pre-existing.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2024/02/11/paris-2024-unveils-only-purpose-built-olympics-venue-in-city-five-months-ahead-of-summer-games/72561147007/

Churches should be required to have supervising drag queens, would help prevent abuse. Priest you need to meet one on one with a kid? Fine, but only if this fabulous queen here sits in the room with you both.

Presidents don’t make laws, congress does. There would have to be something in the constitution or in a law already passed that gives the executive branch the power to do that. An executive order is just an enforcement, a more specific guidance of application of already existing laws or powers. If the law the article is talking about is passed, he could issue executive orders to delineate more specific actions to help make sure it is enforced.

If Biden just sat down in a chair one day and wrote “I declare state laws and state constitutions restricting ivf are void!” like some kind of dictator it would do literally nothing.

Go on to the federal register and look at some executive orders. You’ll find most of them pertain to things the president directly controls, like the operations of executive department agencies. When it’s not something the president clearly controls in the constitution, it will cite the authority of which specific laws it’s basing this on.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/03/2021-26459/the-national-space-council

Purpose.

The National Space Council (Council), as authorized under Title V of Public Law 100-685, advises and assists the President regarding national space policy and strategy. This order sets forth the Council’s membership, duties, and responsibilities.

So for an example, here’s what law passed by congress this executive order is fulfilling, here are my more specific instructions about how we as the executive branch are going to fulfill that law. Clearly the authority to establish a national space council does not come from the constitution, so it’s a law passed by congress that makes this order possible.

If congress passes a law protecting ivf and gives some power to the executive branch to enforce those protections, then maybe there would be situations where an executive order would be helpful.

And Biden clearly supports this law, has repeatedly urged congress to pass it, and headlined the issue in his state of the union address.

https://time.com/6898688/biden-ivf-abortion-state-of-the-union/

France, Germany and the ECB worry about Russian retaliation targeting European assets, and also the potential impact on financial stability and the euro’s status as a reserve currency. There’s concern that depositors from emerging economies may be encouraged to pull money out of western banks, fragmenting the global financial system.

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen downplayed such risks in February, arguing that “there are not alternatives to the dollar, euro, yen.” She said that if the G-7 acted together then the group would be representing half of the global economy and all of the currencies that really have the capacity at this point to serve as reserve currencies.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/why-seizing-russian-assets-to-fund-ukraine-is-fraught/ar-BB1jHeKz

I agree with you, they should just be able to tap the assets directly. Basically some European countries are worried about the effects seizing assets could have on the Euro. Most of these assets are held in Europe as euros. The loan is actually an improvement over the original proposal though. Originally France Germany, etc were pushing only for the 3 billion in interest a year on the assets to be given to Ukraine. The loan solution was pushed by other countries who wanted to give them more cash from the Russian assets as a way to give $50 billion in cash immediately, with those yearly interest payments from Russian assets being used to pay off the loan.

Or this one:

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.