Recent Posts

Show posts from buddies only

[Democrats' impeachments of Trump (which were clearly justified) and Republican's discussion of maybe impeaching Biden (which was clearly frivolous).]

What a pity this country has become when the opposition party resorting to impeachment has become a norm.

What choice did Democrats have after his outrageous crimes? You're not seriously suggesting that either of his impeachments were the wrong response?

My comment is not exclusive for Democrats alone, same goes to Republicans as well who were trying to impeach Biden. It’s a shame that the congressional dysfunction will most likely become an endless cycle of retaliation by the opposing party to the POTUS, whoever he/she is, wherein they should be allocating their time and resources to issues which should benefit the american people in general. Like who would want to sit and watch fox news and cnn coverage about impeachment 90% of the time?

But in saying that, you're equating Democrats' impeachments of Trump (which were clearly justified) and Republican's discussion of maybe impeaching Biden (which was clearly frivolous).

If Trump [god forbid] returns to the White House and never commits any impeachable crimes, then no, he won't be impeached. If he does, he will be. You can at least count on Democrats to only use impeachment when forced to, not for frivolous reasons.

That premise alone makes me believe all impeachments are politically motivated, regardless of the party. That's the elephant in the room that everybody seems to be nonchalant about.

Italy: PD most likely

Meaningless to do the rest since I only vote in one country.

[Covid origin: Why the Wuhan lab-leak theory is so disputed]

Covid origin: Why the Wuhan lab-leak theory is so disputed

That idea was backed by the WHO report, which said it was "likely to very likely" that Covid had made it to humans through an intermediate host.

This hypothesis was widely accepted at the start of the pandemic, but as time has worn on, scientists have not found a virus in either bats or another animal that matches the genetic make-up of Covid-19, leading some to doubt the theory.

Nevertheless, following FBI Director Wray's remarks, many scientists who have studied the virus have stressed there is no new scientific evidence pointing to a lab leak.

A natural origin is still the more likely theory, said Professor David Robertson, head of viral genomics and bioinformatics at the University of Glasgow.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57268111


What does the science say about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic?

The Wall Street Journal added to that debate this week when they reported that the U.S. Department of Energy has shifted its stance on the origin of COVID. It now concludes, with "low confidence," that the pandemic most likely arose from a laboratory leak in Wuhan, China.

The agency based its conclusion on classified evidence that isn't available to the public. According to the federal government, "low confidence" means "the information used in the analysis is scant, questionable, fragmented, or that solid analytical conclusions cannot be inferred from the information."

And at this point, the U.S. intelligence community still has no consensus about the origin of SARS-CoV-2. Four of the eight intelligence agencies lean toward a natural origin for the virus, with "low confidence," while two of them — the DOE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation — support a lab origin, with the latter having "moderate confidence" about its conclusion.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/28/1160162845/what-does-the-science-say-about-the-origin-of-the-sars-cov-2-pandemic


I think that covers both things you might be asking for. I also put my whole post back in the quote.

neither of those quotes say "most scientists still believe COVID has a zoonotic origin more likely than not" or at least I'm not seeing it.  I see one guy saying that.  It would be weird if their was such a scientific consensus in either direction at this point in time.


People will keep digging, hopefully the truth, ugly as it may be, will come out in time.  That is if the PRC hasn't destroyed all the evidence (including humans) yet.

[Who would you vote for]

Who would you vote for? Feel free to do as many or as few as you'd like.

For my own, keep in mind that ideological consistency doesn't matter as much to me on the EU Parliament level.
Austria: SPÖ
Belgium: CD&V/Les Engagés/CSP
Bulgaria: No clue honestly
Croatia: Rivers of Justice
Cyprus: Democratic Party
Czech Republic: Přísaha and Motorists
Denmark: Social Democrats
Estonia: Social Democratic Party
Finland: Social Democratic Party of Finland or maybe the Christian Democrats
France: L'Alliance Rurale for my boi Lassalle
Germany: Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht or FW. I like Wagenknecht even if she's to my left on some things. FW's European program largely matches my stances.
Greece: PASOK
Hungary: TISZA
Ireland: Aontú
Italy: Alternativa Popolare probably? I don't like Schlein's PD, even though I like the tiny component Democrazia Solidale.
Latvia: Union of Greens and Farmers
Lithuania: Lithuanian Farmers and Greens Union
Luxembourg: Christian Social People's Party
Malta: Labour
Netherlands: CU or CDA
Poland: Third Way
Portugal: PS but maybe gonna protest vote Nova Direita like I did earlier this year
Romania: IDK most of them are bad
Slovakia: Voice – Social Democracy I guess but most of these are bad
Slovenia: New Slovenia – Christian Democrats
Spain: PSOE
Sweden: Social Democratic Party but would consider the Christian Democrats

Just like @iceman said Voter Registrations in Palm Beach County are dwindling.

According to this Spreadsheet here

PB County

D - 323,921
R - 272,967

A little of 50,000 Advantage to the D's in a core D-Base County.

Miami-Dade

D - 512,623
R - 446,400

Around 66,000 Advantage to the D's here.

Meanwhile Statewide Republicans have increased their lead to nearly 916,000. When Harris visited the State on May it was 903,000 or so.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vljDXB4r8YFNi6oWKdtEWkZ_lDEjM1BT/edit#gid=1850379568

At the outset I didn't believe Republicans could reach a 1M Registration lead by Nov 5. Now I do very much.

Jonathan Alter reporting the trial will convene early at 8:45 tomorrow morning rather than the usual 9:30 so that Merchan can squeeze in as much as possible of what's left (Cohen's cross & redirect, the charge conference, summations, & jury instructions) to ensure that the deliberations can begin by Thursday at the latest, before the Memorial Day weekend starts.

White South Africans are basically British people except the 1970s never ended.

What a pity this country has become when the opposition party resorting to impeachment has become a norm.

What choice did Democrats have after his outrageous crimes? You're not seriously suggesting that either of his impeachments were the wrong response?

My comment is not exclusive for Democrats alone, same goes to Republicans as well who were trying to impeach Biden. It’s a shame that the congressional dysfunction will most likely become an endless cycle of retaliation by the opposing party to the POTUS, whoever he/she is, wherein they should be allocating their time and resources to issues which should benefit the american people in general. Like who would want to sit and watch fox news and cnn coverage about impeachment 90% of the time?

But in saying that, you're equating Democrats' impeachments of Trump (which were clearly justified) and Republican's discussion of maybe impeaching Biden (which was clearly frivolous).

If Trump [god forbid] returns to the White House and never commits any impeachable crimes, then no, he won't be impeached. If he does, he will be. You can at least count on Democrats to only use impeachment when forced to, not for frivolous reasons.

Looks like New Jersey's own Fat Pat will be West Virginia's next governor.

Seemingly we're eternally doomed for Morrisey to win competitive primaries with 30-35% of the vote.

Do you think he would lose a runoff to Moore (if West Virginia had the same election laws as Texas or Georgia)?

Alito can't even make a point like "the Constitution doesn't say anything special about abortion" without turning it into a hundred-page culture war screed, so nobody should be at all surprised about this. The man is a half-step shy of being Reaganfan with a JD.

If Robert Bork were alive today, on the one hand he'd surely feel vindicated and gratified by the direction the federal judiciary has gone, but on the other hand he'd be kicking himself for, during his confirmation hearings, making the fatal mistake of being truthful about his views.