How very postmodern of you.

Then again, I'm going to venture a guess that your kind of people are those who denigrate law & order generally, and wonder why we even have borders, man.

Gross expansion of federal power over constitutionally-protected power of the states.

Obamacare ITSELF wasn't the problem; it wasn't even a terrible idea (as many democrats at the time pointed out, it was basically the same program Romney (a republican) had established in Massachusetts previously).

There would have been absolutely nothing wrong with 50 different states implementing exactly the same program. That would have been fine.

No, the problem was that there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL power of the federal government to dictate health care insurance. None. This was the GROSS overreach, if that's not too subtle a point for you to comprehend.

In fact, there's that pesky 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"

It hurtss uss when our echo chamber is broken open. It BURNS! It BURNS!

Personally, I see Trump as a symptom, no much cause.

In the same sense Bush II was the result of Clinton, and Obama was the result of Bush II, Trump I was the normal backlash against Obama's overreach. Think about what it means that Trump - a pretty poor president the FIRST time - was selected a SECOND time by a majority of Americans?
Biden's admin was seen as so grossly partisan, so sclerotic that every single demographic except white women swung rightward.

(Some of us might suggest that the vote was ultimately cultural, not political; an instinctive revulsion at the Left's very Gramsci-an post-covid victorylap/overreach into even redefining reality - what is a woman, indeed?)

The result is militant ossification on the left in turn. The centrists have no voice. I'm not sure there are many actual centrists left.

Corporate media is no longer an oppositional 4th estate; they've picked a side. (They're oppositional NOW because their side is out of power. That's contextual not fundamental.) I *much* prefer a media that tears apart everything a president does than the craven lickspittles running cover for the wealthy and powerful.

I saw an anti-ICE post the other day "Eisenhower deported 1.3 million illegal immigrants with only 750 agents"
Yes that's because in 1950, the statement "Illegals should be deported" would rank up there with "The sun rises in the East" and "Water is wet" as so obvious NOBODY would have disagreed.

Yet - many of the tactics Trump's floating today about countering the Supremes' ruling against his tariff were first employed by Mr Obama. His administration had one of the lowest Supreme Court win rates for a modern presidency (~50%) - the lowest since Zachary Taylor with a notably high number of 9-0 losses, totaling nearly 50 over his two terms.

(taps foot)

(taps foot)

(taps foot)

Me? I'm just standing around waiting for all the scolds who INSISTED nobody could ever call places shithole countries to come back out of the woodwork.

(Yeah, I guess I'll be waiting a while)

Well, er: yeah she hires clerks, not AI?

https://insider-gaming.com/xbo...

"....created her Xbox account just one month ago, and since then, has racked up more than 10,000 Gamerscore across a variety of games.

The problem is, the pseudo-detectives analysing Sharmaâ(TM)s profile have uncovered some strange behaviour, such as hitting 100% in Firewatch and Ball x Pit, the latter of which she played 43 hours in a single week. She has also unlocked rare achievements in Minecraft and has bounced between ârandom gamesâ(TM) at what must be an extremely busy time for her..."

We call it Climate Ouroboros.

The models are tuned quite literally to create today's weather from yesterday's inputs.

This is how they calibrate them.

And then the 'climate scientists' turn around, run today's weather through them and - voila! - warming!
"Proved" by models.

If these models didn't show warming, you would throw them out as broken models and look for another.

The early IPCC reports didn't even regard water vapor and clouds as - essentially - too complicated to model.

This paper from 2024: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7418...
"...Nikolov and Zeller conclude that the observed decrease of planetary albedo, together with variations of solar output or TSI (total solar irradiance), account for 100% of the global warming trend as well as 83% of the interannual variability in global surface air temperature....Shaviv found that total solar forcing of the earthâ(TM)s climate, which includes indirect effects, is 5 to 7 times larger than that associated with direct solar warming. Such a large amplification factor would imply that the climate is much more sensitive to the sun than to CO2"

It's absolutely a DRAIN on the economy, as expected?

Right. "actively"
And the torrent of prosecutions happened when?

Before you proudly point out that Maxwell was arrested during Biden, I'd point out that Epstein finally saw a jail cell under Trump.

...I have been told for months by /. posters insisting that the US Supreme Court was Trump's lapdog, simply doing his bidding?

I look forward to the rationalizations about why the Supremes would flip on a MAJOR Trump initiative. To score points? Kavanaugh distracted by running rape gangs? Just to try to shut DEI SCJ KBJ up for a moment?

By that you mean the one that's actually releasing documents?

Don't get me wrong: this took way too fucking long, the 'censoring' part was necessary to try to protect victims but took too long AND was done completely incompetently.

And ultimately, I'm pissed because nobody's IN FUCKING JAIL. (Ghislane or her body-double excepted.)

So yeah, lots and lots wrong with the process but let's not let our TDS prevent remembering that Biden *also* had all these documents but he was uninterested in releasing them at all.

By that logic, the EPA should be confiscating lakes, and imposing limits on how much everyone has to drink (but cannot exceed) every day.

Hell, in your worldview maybe making people drink water but not too much DOES fall in the responsibility of govt.

Semantic nonsense.
By that definition water could be a pollutant. Oxygen could be a pollutant. Humans certainly are a pollutant.

The 'harmful effects' are speculated, not actual. Warming? 7x-10x more people die from cold weather than heat. Net warming of the planet will SAVE lives.

The mandate of the EPA and the 1970 clean air act have nothing to do with climate change and CO2 isn't a pollutant. They never did and it never was.

That the Left feels anyone is buying this little exercise in bureaucratic land-grabbing is funny; that they insist a 2007 Supreme Court ruling proves it so simultaneously claiming that the same Supreme Court ruling it otherwise today would just be a conservative court playing politics makes it hilarious.
Well, nobody ever accused the left of excessive self-awareness.

Since the 1970s, the left has relied heavily on courts to advance their agenda they couldn't pass democratically (you know, because everyone's dumber than they are). That this court is undoing that vast overreach isn't politics, it's housecleaning.

So pretend it's a genuine question instead of trying to be clever?

If 90% of the span of a system's resting state is MUCH warmer, but it has been slowly cooling over time, how theoretically will a small increase in that system's warmth suddenly "set off uncontrollable warming"?

Let's walk through an example:
I have a beaker of water at 140F. T=seconds.
If I let it cool/warm as follows:
T= 0 140
T= 50 40
T= 100 120
T= 150 0
T= 200 -40
T= 250 110
T= 300 60
T= 350 50
T= 400 80
T= 450 140
T= 494 40
T= 499 -20
T= 500 0
I'd love to understand how when T=500.001 if it goes to +10 that will somehow set off uncontrollable cascade of warming?

ELI5, professor.

Yes, this is essentially the path of earth's climate the last 500m years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...