What's an acceptable number of civilian deaths required for vilification?
#2 | Posted by LegallyYourDead

I suppose one would have to look at history:

Starting in the 1980s, it has often been claimed that 90 percent of the victims of modern wars are civilians [...] These claims, though widely believed and correct regarding some wars, do not hold up as a generalization across the majority of wars [...]

Other authors cite Ruth Leger Sivard's 1991 monograph in which the author states "In the decade of the 1980s, the proportion of civilian deaths jumped to 74 percent of the total and in 1990 it appears to have been close to 90 percent.

A wide-ranging study of civilian war deaths from 1700 to 1987 by William Eckhardt states:
On the average, half of the deaths caused by war happened to civilians, only some of whom were killed by famine associated with war...The civilian percentage share of war-related deaths remained at about 50% from century to century.

based on Israeli and US military and intelligence reports, around 17,000 of these [deaths] were Hamas fighters, but claims this has been frequently overlooked in media reports.

Its report states: "The ministry of health, operating under Hamas, has systematically inflated the death toll by failing to distinguish between civilian and combatant deaths, over-reporting fatalities among women and children and even including individuals who died before the conflict began.

The report found numerous statistical anomalies and inaccuracies. Researchers say that around 5,000 natural deaths, which would have happened even without the conflict, appear to have been added to the list of casualties, including cancer patients who later appeared on lists of those still receiving hospital treatment.

Other errors include adult casualties being recorded as children and men being wrongly recorded as women, thereby artificially increasing the number of women and children recorded as killed.

Researchers, who established that the majority of those killed were men aged 15-45, said they found a pattern of victims' ages being revised downwards by at least one year when compared to data on the Palestinian Population Register in an apparent attempt to inflate the number of children recorded as killed.

Cause if there's one thing we need, it's a cheerleader for obesity.

"I should have Invaded Ukraine Earlier, Putin tells Russians in TV Marathon"

He is correct. Going full-bore in 2014 while they were invading Crimea, before the Ukrainians had a chance to build up their defensive capability, would have been the way to go. Not like the Western nations would have done anything about it.

Heck, even now Europe is standing around with their hands in their pockets letting Poohty Pants bring in North Koreans. Will serve them right when Russia decides to roll over them.

"How much did you pay to have your daughter raped?"

And Trumpy would do it for free!

"whether they believe she could win the Democratic nomination for president in an expected competitive primary in 2028. "

I would suggest fewer pantsuited ladies in the Dem's immediate future. At least until the populace comes around on that sort of thing.

It's hard to come up with realistic scenarios of how it could have gone worse.
#18 | Posted by sitzkrieg

Well, at least a transgender person in Kansas didn't help elect Trump ... twice.

Like the world's richest man has nothing better to do with his time.

And no presidency for Leon, as he is African.

Anything to gin up the rubes while they pick their nearly empty pockets.
#9 | Posted by LegallyYourDead

Like the welfare queens and flag burning in the 80's, and the gheys in the 90's and 2000's. And now the trans.

I had a prof from the scenic Island of ------
#4 | Posted by censored

I got bleeped for specifying the name of a Greek Island. I love it!

GFY CENSORED You never hold the Democratic party responsible for anything do you??
#8 | Posted by LauraMohr

Sure I do. But helping put Republicans into office seems like an unwise strategy.

Seems preferable to primary Dems into the party you desire. Like the Tea Party and MAGAts have, chasing every reasonable and sane moderating voice out of the GOP. And now they have the SCOTUS of their dreams (also happens to be the SCOTUS of the nightmares of the next three generations).

For now, I'm done with the Dems.
#6 | Posted by Sycophant

America's Anti-Trans Panic Is a Scam

Is it panic, though? Same problem I had with the term "homophobia." Seems more abject hatred and disgust than panic or fear.

I had a prof from the scenic Island of ------ who told the class how much she disagreed with the term "homophobia." She preferred calling it "heterofascism." As an aside, she did not get tenure.

Guess AOC didn't primary enough incumbent Dems to win them over.

Just going to link to something I posted shortly after the election:

My larger point is that people allow themselves to be caught in the weeds of political bickering and convince themselves they are such victims of who lives at 1600 Penn. Yes, there is an impact but for the purpose of being high minded or partisan that impact is embellished to an insane level.
#23 | Posted by eberly

It's nice being a straight, white male with no health problems, isn't it? Even better if we stop caring about the well-being of others!

Apparently the Constitution is just a God damned piece of paper after all.
#14 | Posted by LauraMohr

The Constitution is what the SCOTUS says it is.

Which is why Ralph Nader/Jill Stein helping the Republicans win in 2000, 2016, 2024 was a problem, since they allowed the GOP to cement in place a court that will twist that Constitution to suit the GOP for the next 30 years. And that 30 years isn't even taking into account the disenfranchisement of voters that SCOTUS will encourage to prevent the GOP from ever losing control.

The head of [Russia Today] is convinced that a personal meeting between Trump and Putin will totally reverse the course taken by the Biden administration, including the sanctions that banned her propaganda network from American airwaves. Speaking on the program The Right To Know, Simonyan predicted that the incoming Trump administration would attempt to establish good relations with Russia and lift multiple sanctions. According to her, RT has good reason to believe that under Trump, it will return to the U.S. cable networks.

American Airlines walks back DEI policies

Yawn! Wake me when they start hiring hot stewardesses again.

It scares you because you know the American people do not feel the same way as progressives.
You are scared they may vote to dilute some progressive initiatives that have been imposed on a public that doesnt want it.
#4 | Posted by boaz

I guess I'd be less concerned if, for example, the MAGAts of the fine states of Wisconsin and North Carolina had not gerrymandered their minority status into control of the state house.

I don't put anything past the MAGATs and GOPhers and, as we all know, SCOTUS will do nothing to stop them. Heck, Trump's SCOTUS will probably give the Republicans explicit directions on how to go about it.

Be very thankful you are alive during Trump Presidency.
#11 | Posted by Robson

Every morning as I lay in bed I pinch myself to make sure I'm not just dreaming.

They're your "friends," Donnie, in the way sailors down by the docks are "friends" with a wildly painted old sex worker.
#8 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Three out of three Trump Wives agree!

I am all for changes to the constitution that say 1) corporations are not people and 2) money is not speech.
#2 | Posted by Nixon

That can be done with an amendment.

Concern with going the constitutional convention route, instead, is that the MAGAts/GOP can open it up to destroy pretty much every progressive legal protection currently in existence. Or widen the door for Trump's SCOTUS to do the same.

They say that Republicans could call a convention on the premise, say, of producing an amendment requiring that the federal budget be balanced, then open the door for a free-for-all in which a multitude of other amendments are considered, including some that could restrict abortion access or civil rights.

"I do not want California to inadvertently trigger a constitutional convention that ends up shredding the Constitution"