All true, but that doesn’t disprove my point. The risk was non-zero, so it was still worth investigating.
All true, but that doesn’t disprove my point. The risk was non-zero, so it was still worth investigating.
Yes but the difference is that there were reasonable grounds to suspect that prolonged exposure to RF waves might possibly cause some harmful effects. The WHO didn’t categorize radio frequency radiation as a potential carcinogen based on no evidence at all:
https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf
The possibility of there being a link was not absurd, per se.
To be fair, the evidence about a link between cell phone radiation and cancer has been inconclusive for quite some time. After all, a series of inconclusive or null results doesn’t mean there is categorically no link – it could equally mean that more research is needed.
That said, I do agree that if there were a casual link in this case then it would have made itself apparent by now, given the huge increase in cell phone usage over the past few decades.
They allowed the family of an Israeli hostage on stage. Why not afford Palestinian Americans the same courtesy to have one of their own represented? Hell, they could have stood alongside the hostage’s family to show solidarity and hope for peace in the future.
The Uncommitted movement did everything the “right way” – they went through the official channels and offered the DNC a list of speakers and gave them permission to vet the speech however they wanted. But apparently that was still too big of an ask.
It’s a perfectly good source. Is there anything about their argument that you find unsound, or is it simply because it makes you uncomfortable?
I’m not advocating either way, although the horrors I’ve seen committed in Gaza are on a whole other level than anything I’ve witnessed before.
I wouldn’t blame anyone who votes third party, or even sits this one out.
I’m not advocating either way, although the horrors I’ve seen happening in Gaza are on a whole other level than anything I’ve witnessed before.
I wouldn’t blame anyone who votes third party, or even sits this one out
Sorry, that’s completely wrong. Israel is still extremely reliant on the US military hardware – tanks, planes, missiles, guns, you name it. The vast majority of the bombs being dropped on Gaza come from the US, also.
https://www.npr.org/2024/04/04/1242911786/a-closer-look-at-u-s-military-support-for-israel
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/11/us/israel-gaza-bombs.html
Also, the Biden administration merely delayed one shipment of 2,000 lb bombs. Netanyahu claimed that the Biden administration was holding back more, but this was just a PR move. The US is still happily sending tank engines, planes, guns, and smaller bombs to Israel.
Al in all, the Biden administration has done very little to effectively restrain Netanyahu. The “bear hug” strategy has been an unmitigated failure.
Huh, not paywalled for me but here’s an archived version anyway:
Smacking a muslim woman protesting a genocide on the head with a WE LOVE JOE sign is a very specific type of irony.
Did any of the main news channels in the US even cover this panel? I haven’t seen any.
The media and online punditry seem far more happy to obsess over a few Hamas-flag-waving protesters outside than to listen to experienced doctors relay the horrors they saw in Gaza. What a shocker.
An arms embargo in some form is literally the only leverage the US has that could change Netanyahu’s mind, at this stage. Personally, I don’t think Kamala has the guts for it.
… at a police association, of all places 🤦♂️
Absolutely. Add capping campaign spending, overturning Citizens United, and making it easier for alternative political parties to get on the ballot to that list, too.
Except Kamala crumpled under pressure and dropped her support of a fracking ban and M4A.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/08/14/kamala-harris-changes-policy-positions/
These days, no one knows what she stands for. Her campaign seems happy to be riding on pure vibes for the time being.
Humans are perfectly capable of dividing themselves into factions and fostering hatred of the other without religion, don’t you worry.
It’s possible, but I personally don’t buy that argument. He didn’t have to sit down and write that letter, but he did. That, plus the interview where he said that “giving it his all” was “what it was all about”, seemed obvious to me he was all for holding on tight despite everyone’s concerns.
Less than two weeks before he dropped out, he wrote an open letter to congressional democrats in which he wrote:
I want you to know that despite all the speculation in the press and elsewhere, I am firmly committed to staying in this race, to running this race to the end, and to beating Donald Trump.
I have heard the concerns that people have — their good faith fears and worries about what is at stake in this election. I am not blind to them.
I can respond to all this by saying clearly and unequivocally: I wouldn’t be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in 2024.
The voters of the Democratic Party have voted. They have chosen me to be the nominee of the party. Do we now just say this process didn’t matter? That the voters don’t have a say?
I decline to do that… I have no doubt that I — and we — can and will beat Donald Trump.
Unless this was all part of an elaborate hoax, it’s clear he had no intention of dropping out at that time.
I wouldn’t go that far. Don’t forget that the main reason Biden had to be pressured to step down in the first place was that he had effectively been foisted on lukewarm voters and that his cognitive decline had been purposefully hidden for quite some time before the infamous debate.
Yes, it’s good that he finally agreed to bow out of the race, but he only did it after weeks of massive pressure from the media and from within his own party. Without that, he would most likely be the presumptive nominee today and the Democrats would still be getting creamed in the polls.
According to this YouGov poll of least <> most trusted news sources , CNN lands bang in the middle of the pack. So not as bad as FOX, but not as high as PBS or ABC.
As for my own 2¢, all the US cable news channels are varying degrees of bad. Best to avoid, generally speaking.