Hanaguma

Yes they will. This is just a shibboleth that insults Americans' integrity and work ethic. Unfortunately employers have gotten lazy and taken the easy road, which is using illegal labour. Low pay and bad conditions. Americans do plenty of "dirty jobs" from trash collection to sewer repair. No reason they won't do these jobs as well, as long as the pay is fair. The majority of illegal immigrants work in the service and construction industries anyway, not in agriculture. These are jobs that millions of Americans already do.

...all of which are good reasons why illegal aliens should be deported. Pay Americans and legal residents fair wages to do the work. Do some actual real work on reforming the immigration system, perhaps by implementing a guest worker program out of the various consulates and embassies abroad.

Why is any of this bad? Illegal aliens shouldn't have driver's licenses, nor should they be a burden on the public health system. They should be going home.

The most egregious are already devilishly hard to get- automatic weapons for example. According to the article, there are about 81 million gun owners in the USA. There are also about 15 school shootings per year. I am sure you can do the math.

To me, a "general gun ban" means nobody can have a gun - except of course police and military. It doesn't mean the same to you? In that case, my apologies. Could you be specific about what kind of weapons you would allow people to have, and how they could obtain them?

Can you tell me any country that has a "general gun ban", as you put it? I can't think of any. Firearms ownership is possible anywhere except dictatorships like China or North Korea as far as I know.

No doubt. But I made no claim of Florida being such a paradise as the other poster did. In any case, the article you referenced stated that there were just over 2,000 homeless in the three counties of the metro Orlando area. Just for contrast, San Francisco is in the 38,000 range. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/the-ongoing-crisis-of-homelessness-in-the-bay-area-whats-working-whats-not

Glad your real estate is doing well, we all need something to fall back on. And yes, California DOES reek, but maybe not how you meant...

Taxpayer money is already used to feed and house illegal immigrants from the minute they cross the border until they leave. DeSantis is just highlighting the hypocrisy of politicians whose words write checks that their actions can't pay for. Newsom declared California a "sanctuary state"- he shouldn't complain when people take him up on it. With the thousands of people leaving California every year, he should THANK DeSantis for helping to repopulate his state.

What would you consider a "small step" and how much of a decrease in mass shootings would result? The fact that they want so much and seem a bit ignorant of what is entailed takes away from their seriousness.

According to the article, this is what the protestors want; The plan was for the sit-in to continue until Gov. Jared Polis signed an executive order declaring a 30-day state of emergency, suspending the sale of guns during that period and ordering “a total ban on all guns and a comprehensive, mandatory buyback program.” Lofty goals. Completely unobtainable and unrealistic, not to mention unconstitutional. Does any country in the world have these restrictions? With the exception of North Korea and possibly China. Something tells me these ladies are in for a loooooooooong summer.

Somewhat ironic that they choose to protest during Pride Month, when the shooter who motivated their action was a member of the 2SLGBTQQIA+ community.

God, I love this spin. The president IS on call 24 hours, it is part of the job. I seem to remember political ads from days gone by saying, "if the phone in the WHite House rings at 3;00am, who do YOU want to answer it?" Joe is old. Very old. Older than any president in history. Older than others who sought the presidency but were decried as "too old" (John McCain?). He falls down a lot. You can tell by the way he walks that he is unsteady on his feet. He mumbles (not due to stuttering). He forgets very basic things (the details of his eldest son's tragic death). He refuses to meet the press in any meaningful way. He refuses to sit down for interviews with anyone who might ask a tough question. His press availabilities are more scripted than May Day in Beijing. He needs to go and the Democrats need to have an open, honest primary to pick a candidate. Even a large number of Democrats agree.

Not exactly an unbiased source of information there...

Yes and no. Yes to banning the ridiculous phrase "gender affirming care". Yes to banning hormone treatment and chemical castration. Yes to banning surgery to remove otherwise healthy body parts. No to banning counselling and mental health care for troubled youth who are confused and need help.

Yes, only doctors can prescribe these drugs. Is there a problem with that? These drugs alter and destroy your body.

Actually, the bill has an exception for prescription renewals. Only the signing of the consent form has to be done in person. After that it is not necessary.

The video was shot by an embedded journalist working for Global News, a Canadian news organization. The ship was the HMCS Montreal. Anyone familiar with maritime law knows that the principle at sea is "give way right". That is, the ship to the right has the right of way. Much like at a four way stop when you are driving. So, the PLAN ship was obligated to alter course, slow down, do whatever it takes to not impede the American warship. And it didn't. The passing distance was less than 150 meters. Sounds like a lot, but at sea that is seriously danger close. These ships generally are about 150 meters in length, so it is just one ship-length away.

I am trying to figure out what the objections are to this law. Doctors are needed to prescribe powerful, potential life altering drugs. The article seems like the usual fear-mongering that accompanies any issue related to Florida these days.

At the heart of the article, finally, is the actual legal change that is being done: The new law that bans gender-affirming care for minors also mandates that adult patients seeking trans health care sign an informed consent form. It also requires a physician to oversee any health care related to transitioning, and for people to see that doctor in person. That seems like common sense to me. These are literally life altering decisions and cannot be reversed with any degree of success. What is so terrible about getting direct care from a doctor before allowing a person to mutilate themself or take chemical castration medicine?

She polled at zero percent in the 2020 primaries. Her own party rejected her.

Ukraine spending (which should be zero IMHO) is less than 200 billion, or in other words less than 5% of the deficit. Inflation drove interest rates up, which in turn raised the cost of servicing the debt. Which both parties gleefully add to when in power. Again, the increase is small- less than Ukraine. Before Biden, the only president to run a non pandemic deficit of over a trillion dollars was Obama.

Not at all. I am no fan of government overspending, no matter who is in charge. Previous guy screwed up on this as well. The point is that Biden is in charge NOW, and did little to reign in the excesses of government largesse. He is at 4 trillion dollars added to the debt and counting so far in his term.

Biden can own 2021 onwards. He had the Congress and the White House. 2.8 trillion in 2021, 1.4 trillion in 2022 (less Covid spending) , ytd in 2023 nearly a trillion. If you insist on the inevitable comparison to the Bad Orange Man, Trump also ran stupid high deficits. To repeat, I am no fan of his fiscal policy. So if you are content that Biden is merely following Trump's tradition of overspending, I am happy for you. I say a pox on both, but especially Biden because he is the current president and did nothing to stop the overspending.

...and, given that, you think it is sufficient that Biden manages to clear that standard and that standard alone? You have very low expectations for Joe Biden, don't you? And I have to be honest with you- 2017-19 were pretty good years. No new wars, low gas prices, good economy. My investments in the US markets were doing quite well. I could fly round trip from here to LA for 700 bucks. So I honestly don't get the level of purple-faced rage that Trump generates. How was YOUR life in the days of Trump?