Yellowtail

Why not just increase the tax on the people that buy it?

Who said the climate was not changing?

Not even the top ten, but to not be lying, you would still have to show that they are "...bribing right wing politicians to do nothing."

Another idiotic, unsupported claim from the left, I'm shocked.

You claimed: "The richest people are related to the fossil fuel industry and they get richer by bribing right wing politicians to do nothing." Yeah, there are a few on the list, but none at the top of the list, and none of them are "...bribing right wing politicians to do nothing." "Honesty is not a left-wing value."

None in the top 50... Forbes Billionaires 2023: The Richest People In The World

Dude claimed: "The richest people are related to the fossil fuel industry and they get richer by bribing right wing politicians to do nothing." Your article does not support that, in fact, it does the opposite. The article claims the entire oil and gas industry spent a piddly $84M to support the right, while Mark Zuckerberg alone donated over $400M to support the left. When you consider the bulk of gas and oil production is in red states, does it surprise anyone (not on the left) that that's where they donate their money? I think Hollywood and mainstream media is doing more to ruin the world than the oil industry ever thought about, and we all know where their donations go...

25% is not a huge difference?

Do you have anything that supports your nonsense?

That says a lot more about Biden's presidency than Trump.

Flux-core is okay, particularity outside, but gas is better.

I assume the Earth is warming, and I assume human activity contributes to it, but I think the bulk of what the left is doing about it is ridiculous. But I think it does win a lot of votes and make a lot of rich people richer.

Who would fund such studies?

"If you meet more than one a-hole in a day, it's you."

No broiler?

Children need direction and structure, not someone to play with.

At least until AFTER they are elected.

Why? Do you think Clarence Thomas could get a job at Harvard Law? The decisions they make and the influence they can peddle (like generals or any other high-ranking official moving on and off of defense contractor boards and whatnot) would largely determine where they could go. That is the problem. I said it was another issue, not a compelling reason.

Thank you. The DA has to have a law that has been broken, and has to have a judge and or jury to agree. By refusing treatment, you mean refusing abortion, is that correct? Do you have any actual examples that support this claim? Which hospitals seem to have a lot of, yes?

A term limit may impact their decisions, as they would generally have to plan on doing something after their term. Like generals or any other high-ranking official moving on and off of defense contractor boards and whatnot. Another issue is that they would not be allowed to defend their decisions once they were off the court.

I'm sorry, I thought when you said: "The trouble is, in most of those states the doctors don't get final say in judging what constitutes a potential threat and what doesn't. It's the state that gets final say." That you were saying that the state got the final say state can determine a mother's life is at risk.

Is it not also irrelevant to the argument whether you call the debris resulting from an abortion is called a fetus, a baby or an unborn child?

They had over six months after they knew about the ruling and did nothing.

So that's a no, you cannot support your claim that only the state can determine a mother's life is at risk. That's what I thought.

"Keeping up with the Joneses" is well over a hundred years old, yet you site it as something new, typical. Never any reason for anyone blowing smoke to go into any detail.