Nazi
Pedo
Rapist
#16 | Posted by eberly

Why do you have to turn every post into discussion about Trump?

>I need some help
>Posted by LauraMohr at 10:31 AM

Should have sought help years ago, before you thought cutting off your ding-a-ling made you a woman.
Posted by fortfisher at 2025-12-12 11:59 AM | Reply | Flagged funny by Effeteposer

US September trade deficit lowest in more than five years

Americans who are too poor to buy anything purchase less stuff! Story at 11.

Prison in Switzerland? Probably better than regular life here.

Russia Planned Terror Attacks on US and Britain in 2024

Putin's Beach says we have no one to blame but ourselves. For not giving Putin Alaska. And oral loving, as he does.

Wong Kim Ark (1898) confirmed that children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents are citizens.

Sure sounds like a black slave name.
#34 | Posted by Nixon

Wu Tang Clan ...

Yeah, we should do away with all IDs passports, drivers licenses, State/Fed ID cards No one should have to show an ID to vote! or travel, or drink alcohol, or drive, or buy firearms etc....
#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Which one of the above are absolute rights protected by the Constitution, deprivation of which would block you from exercising your right to change laws through your elected representative?

After Alabama Enforces Voter ID, Shuts Down DMVs In Black Communities

GOP suppression of the naturalized citizens vote.
#8 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

If only it ended there.

The GOP will use this to disenfranchise and discourage from voting everyone who might vote against them.

You want to vote? Prove to us that your parents were here legally, and their parents, and their parents' parents...

Disenfrachisement of all voters who oppose them was always the GOP's endgame. Just as it is with voter ID.

Just in time to inject uncertainty into upcoming elections and supress the vote. And for Trump to declare the results null and void.

I say this with no disrespect. I think you are employing a logical fallacy. You seem to be saying that in the absence of CAFE (which was created in the 70's to explicitly address the oil embargo) nothing is achievable. That we may go back to the stone age of propulsion. Steam will make a comeback (yes, that's an exaggeration).
#28 | Posted by BellRinger

Plenty is achievable. The question is whether manufacturers will put the resources into achieving what is beneficial to our society and humanity without regulatory pressures.

Since corporations are in the "business" of selling stuff, and not helping humanity, my money is on them continuing to seek profit. There is little profit to be had on a quarterly basis from cutting fuel consumption when it costs the manufacturers sales, because most consumers are far more motivated by sales price than getting a couple more miles to the gallon.

"#19. People care about those things."

They claim to care, but then don't put their money where their mouth is. And they certainly don't care enough to independently decide to pay more to stop poisoning their neighbors. They care enough to install micron air filters in their car cabin to make sure they don't breathe their own smog.

"We aren't the Soviet Union. Central planning results in abject human suffering."
It's a wonder that they didn't stick with the capitalist utopia that existed under their czars

"People still care about fuel economy because it impacts their pocketbook."
Save $10 grand over the life of the car by paying an extra $2 grand now? You're delusional if you think most consumers are going to pay that extra 2 grand.

"Trying to force crappy technology on us diverts precious resources to crappy technology and stifles innovation.
#21 | Posted by BellRinger"

"low emission/cleaner emission vehicles are Crappy Tech"
-BellRinger

And what innovation is needed? Status quo is cheaper, and that's what most consumers care about. No matter the cost to the rest of society. Internalize those costs, like by making everyone who buys a polluting vehicle pay for air filters and electricity to run those filters for everyone else, and you might have a point.

A market will still exist for fuel efficient cars and the automakers will look to seize that market share. Biden's team was trying to force EV's on us in large numbers. Those kinds of controls drive up the fleet costs. You are taking a WAY too narrow look at this.
#17 | Posted by BellRinger

Those are all more achievable in the absence of a centrally planned energy sector.
#18 | Posted by BellRinger

Yes, let's rely upon 350 million consumers to independently decide to pay a few grand extra. And poison the rest of us when they decide that immediate savings are more important. Like the MAGAts want us to rely upon private charities to keep citizens from starving to death. And we'll keep American dollars flowing to nations that want us destroyed, because freedumb demands it. Because energy independence, clean air, and curbing emission of greenhouse gases are, as you put it, "relics."

This is much needed. Congress needs to repeal CAFE altogether. It's a relic that is not needed any more.
#1 | Posted by BellRinger

Because gas is cheap and we stopped needing to breathe clean air. And because climate change is a hoax, which is why insurance companies (which care about money, and pretty much nothing else) are pulling out of Florida as sea levels increase.

But yes, let's give more of our money to nations that hate us to buy their oil, rather than having a more fuel efficient auto fleet. And avoid building green technology that would make us self-sufficient while simultaneously protecting the environment and our health.

In other news that MAGAts will celebrate:

Trump's EPA to "reconsider" ban on cancer-causing asbestos
Trump has supported use of asbestos and blamed the mob for its bad reputation.

'Liking' Another Woman's Photos can be Grounds for Divorce
The Supreme Court of Turkey ruled that likes under photos of individuals of the opposite sex on social media may be considered "trust-undermining" and constitute grounds for divorce.

Trash Pandas will replace dogs and cats within 25 years. Mark My Word!
#5 | Posted by LegallyYourDead

Not if they keep stealing our booze!

Two constitutional wrongs do not make a constitutional right.
#17 | Posted by donnerboy

The utter stupidity of you people is astounding. Costco can sell their products at whatever price they want. Why don't they just bite the bullet like everyone else is doing? Are they the evil capitalists you liberals fear?Tariffs correct an imbalance that hurts everyone else. Costco should be happy the playing field is being leveled. You people are idiots.
#8 | Posted by boaz

Is there a coherent thought in that post?

As noted in the article: "In the lawsuit [...] Costco said its business had suffered because of the tariffs [...]."

So a company that says its business suffered from Trump's illegal actions is seeking monetary relief. What is wrong with that?

And if they didn't seek that relief now, they could be precluded from that compensation later, which would open up shareholder lawsuits because the company didn't run its business prudently by protecting its rights. So, once again, what is wrong with Costco filing the lawsuit?

Mistakes were made.

"allegedly hacking more than 120,000 video cameras in homes and businesses and using the footage to make sexually exploitative materials for an overseas website."

Correction: Costco sues taxpayers for full refund of tariffs. Trump won't pay a cent, even if they win.
#2 | Posted by sentinel

"Why Is Pedo 47 Hiding Economic Reports?"

They're under audit. Like the Epstein files.

"Nick Fuentes Turns on Marjorie Taylor Greene"

TMI! But, whatever floats her boat, I guess.