placeholder

There's a difference between getting it wrong and lying.

The harsh reality is that natural gas plants, even relatively modern ones, are proving to have the worst failure rate when faced with extreme weather compared with other generation methods. During last year’s Arctic Blast, gas units accounted for 63% of the failures while representing just 44% of the total installed capacity. The country’s vast network of gas plants and pipelines--the largest in the world--and the regulations that govern them simply were never designed or built without the realities of extreme weather in mind. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-The-US-Has-Become-The-Blackout-Capital-Of-The-Developed-World.html

"Screwed the pooch" is a very mild way of putting it. Fox News knowingly fostered and supported slanderous lies.

And the reason for that was that the evidence was overwhelmingly against them.

Roberts makes this claimed based on an extremely innovative broadening of the major questions doctrine. Very odd for a conservative justice who stresses the importance of textualism when it suits him. There are major arguments against it: "These include arguments that the major questions doctrine is a symptom of "judicial self-aggrandizement," that it is inconsistent with both textualism and originalism, and that it is at odds with normal tools of statutory interpretation.[4][5][6] In an article for the Harvard Law Review summarizing this transformation in the major questions case law, Professor Mila Sohoni wrote that the "first crucial thing to understand about the major questions [doctrine] is what it did to administrative law."[7] She continued, "[w]hile ostensibly applying existing major questions case law, the [Supreme Court] in actuality altered the doctrine of judicial review of agency action in its method and content, in ways that will have momentous consequences." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_questions_doctrine#:~:text=The major questions doctrine is,major political or economic significance.

True. It wasn't a fine. And the reason Fox decided to pay over 3/4 of a billion dollars rather than take the case to trial?

I guess you use the word implication to escape the obvious points that the issue I raised was "difference". Can you point to the sentence or phrase in which the issue of better was implied?

Once again you prove my point. The stance that people take on issues is what counts. .

It's not about better. It's about different. That you even raise this issue shows that fundamentally you agree with me. Their stances on various issues are different. I like to think that most people choose candidates because their stances on the issues are different and they think that one candidate or the other has a better stance.

Are you seriously claiming that you don't see significant differences on the issues between Joe Biden and the persons you mentioned? Really? It is to laugh.

The answer to the question was VP Biden there is it really simple one. No VP Biden was not there because Biden was no longer VP.

You must be living in an alternative universe or experiencing some cognitive disorder. Every news report? Every public debate? As for media outlets and forums, there's a wide range of issues featured on them. Are you maintaining that there's near exclusivity featuring only lgbqt issues on this forum or on social media?

What you need to understand is that random snapshots aren't diagnostic of anything except possibly the mindset of the person who offers them as evidence.

In what way? There's this little thing called issues. You know like climate change, voting rights, workers rights, etc. Something you've apparently never heard of.

This is awful. Are they strapping you in, in front of a TV, and forcing you to view these events? Or is there an endless gay parade being conducted in the street your home is located on? I guess I'm lucky so far because no one has come to my place to force me to view or hear much about events that don't interest me. I'm still able to choose what I want to see and hear on the media. But how knows how much longer that will last?

Thank you for bringing our attention to this important issue. Even more so now that it has been decided not to fund rainbow crossings.

But you defended the claim that 'Monster" appears in the NY Times article. Did it? And tell me, what are the qualifications of the person who called Biden a monster that establish that we should take their evaluation seriously? I'm sure you wouldn't cite a partisan source as being significant so who exactly is this fair-minded individual please tell us more about? Please tell us more about them.

I understand that, if Hanaguma is to be believed, this poor child, well, not literally poor because she seems to come from a well-to-do family, had to eat government cheese while her mother received $20,000 per month in child support payments from Hunter Biden. In fact, according to her lawyer, before the payments were lowered to $5000 per month, she had received over $750,000 from Biden. What kind of monster is Hunter Biden that he would let Navy's mother feed her government cheese while she's rolling in the bucks? What's more, I suspect that the cows who provided the milk for the government cheese were also abused by Hunter Biden.

Does it really have to be explained to you that the word "Monsters" nowhere appeared in the New York Times article and that the evidence,( if what you provided to support that claim can be dignified with that word,) is utterly irrelevant?

Speak for yourself. International opinion of Joe Biden in 6 charts https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/07/25/international-opinion-of-joe-biden-in-6-charts/ft_2022-07-25_bidencharts_01/

Mind-reading from a snapshot? Actually, that snapshot is saying a lot about your mind and nothing at all about King Charles or Joe Biden. I suspect if you were to take a Rorschach test it would be populated with Joe Bidens.

Nonsense. It's actually the opposite of political expedience. What would work better for Biden's image than playing the fond grandfather to the child that Hunter Biden neglected.

Wow. Another amateur gerontologist. On the one hand, the claim is that Biden suffers from dementia. On the other, apparently he is capable of learning answers in advance to scripted questions. In fact, for his entire political career, Biden has been known for making gaffes. So what the right is claiming is that his behavior is consistent with what he's done his whole life. That's not a sign of dementia. Quite the opposite.

Let's see. He had reporters whom he considered unfriendly investigated by the Justice Dept. The same thing goes for members of Congress who were leading investigations. He fired James Comey. He had Andrew McCabe fired just before he was eligible for his pension. (McCabe ultimately prevailed and his pension was restored) And there was the failed Durham investigation that come up with nothing that cast an further significant illumination on the Inspector General's report about theJustice Dept's Russia investigation. And, of course he publicly called for the investigation of his political opponents. Trump’s ever-present — and still growing — exploitation of the Justice Department. https://archive.ph/ygMSy https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/11/trumps-ever-present-still-growing-exploitation-justice-department/

What don't you understand about the gravity of the situation? As Hanugama pointed out, it's all about the "government cheese", that apparently poor little Navy's mother forced her to eat while getting $20,000 per month in child support payments.