Oh, was the looting in self-defense?

An oddly positive portrayal of the sort of protest culture that I think residents of most other countries are glad not to share. Even French people aren’t happy with it - the main political consequence of the protests so far has been increased support for Le Pen by people who want forceful government action against the protestors.

It would be nice if this was a scheme for which only a few lawbreakers at the top were responsible but actually the “little people” had a choice and they’re the ones who voted to entrust Trump with the power to pardon.

I suspect that the majority of voters would prefer a policy of tolerance over the Republican party’s performative cruelty, but “we should treat these harmless eccentrics with basic human dignity” is one thing while transgender participation in sports or permanent procedures done on children are another.

There has to be some balance between promising the voters what they think they want and actually doing what is a good idea.

Ashley Moody, the Republican candidate, was elected by a 21-point margin last time. If only the people voting in the Democratic primary vote for the Democrat in the general election, the Democrat definitely loses. So yeah, in this case I trust establishment leaders to do what might have won the election. Vindman still probably would have lost, but at least he had a chance.

Yeah, this is just self-destructive. There’s a good reason that the Democratic party tried to prevent it.

The one I had was actually pretty tasty, but it tasted like ordinary (but well made) fried tofu. I suppose I should be grateful that it didn’t taste the way it smelled, but I admit I was a little disappointed.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I was in Taiwan. It did smell so bad while the vendor was still out of sight that I thought my friend was pranking me by leading me to an open sewer or something.

I’ve had stinky tofu from a street vendor, which is both a fairly normal food and absolutely something that might cause a person to gag.

(As for the grossest thing I’ve eaten: one time, I found that beetles had infested my stash of buckwheat, so rather than letting them have it, I cooked it and skimmed them off when they floated to the top. I wouldn’t do that again because I’m a vegetarian now…)

Forcing medical procedures on detained hunger strikers is seen as torture by many human rights groups and medical organizations.

So do these human rights groups and medical organizations advocate a policy of letting hunger strikers starve to death? Do they extend this to allowing prisoners to commit suicide by any means, or is it specific to refusing food? I don’t think that would necessarily be unreasonable but the article doesn’t specify.

The same place you do for people without a terminal diagnosis - you have to have a system for doing that anyway.

I have to say, that doesn’t seem unreasonable. My understanding is that one can get a terminal diagnosis long before one becomes too sick to work.

I’d say that this actually illustrates one of the strengths of the American system. In a context of bitter partisan division, the delegation of authority to individual states prevents an all-or-nothing national outcome and gives people places to go where the government is aligned with their needs and their values. Obviously relocating is expensive and disruptive, but the most powerful right a citizen can have is his exit right.

They don’t have a majority in the Senate for it even if the Senate accepts it as a budget bill, which is not guaranteed.

But whatever you do, don’t call him an extremist.

The author of this article seems to be arguing against an attitude towards Elon Musk which doesn’t actually exist. There’s no widespread perception of him as a moderate, and no taboo against calling him an extremist. Major newspapers aren’t making a big deal of his endorsement of this film because it isn’t surprising, not because they tacitly approve.

I don’t even know what the good outcome here would be, given the terms of America’s surrender. Maybe it would be better if Iran pushed too far and forced Trump to re-enter the war.

What I don’t get is why prices aren’t already rising more than they have. It seems like literally everyone except the Trump administration itself expects the strait of Hormuz to remain blocked for a long time, so shouldn’t that be priced in already?

This is the correct thing to say, no matter what he might actually think. The less that he appears to be concerned about the cost of the war, the stronger his negotiating position against Iran is.

I mean, the article seems to do a pretty good job of answering the question in the headline. There isn’t strong evidence in the files (which have been released) that anyone else was involved in sex trafficking.

The lack of arrests in the U.S. contrasts to the fallout in the U.K., where investigators have pursued charges related to corruption, not sexual abuse, in their dealings with Epstein. Two former government officials — former Prince Andrew and ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson — were arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office.