You have structural problems with waves that structures not designed for, filling them solves most of this. Will likely need to reinforce outer wall to be safe.
Twitter is apparently not completely blocked in Iran because I just heard an Iranian American woman, Erica Kasraie, talking about how Trump's tweet in Farsi in support of the Iranian people WAS either "liked" or retweeted, I missed the word, to the greatest level ever by Iranians.
Of course you'll all find something about her to hate or dismiss because of what she has to say. She also made a You Tube video about how Solameini was NOT loved in Iran by Iranians in general. It's only five minutes long but you can get the gist of it within the first couple of minutes I think. Or start at 1:30.
And here is her followup video after the earlier one went viral. Hey she thinks Trump did the right thing and she thanks him, reason enough for you all to hate her of course:
OK, she has some expertise. That's one person's educated opinion,. No evidence proffered for her claims.
But it appears that Twitter is indeed available in Iran, although many sites still say it is blocked. I can't find any solid number of users in Iran. It seems to be declining; Social Media Stats Islamic Republic Of Iran | Statcounter Global Stats covers last year, and it shows 20% using Twitter in January, declining to 3.3% in December. "Percent of what?" you ask. If I don't know. The percentages for each month add to 100, so maybe percentage of social media users? But that seems stupid because social media users probably use more than one platform.
quote:Twitter accounts claiming to be located in Iran and throughout the Middle East pushed out many thousands of tweets under a handful of hashtags, such as #HardRevenge and #DeathToAmerica, promising payback against the U.S. for President Donald Trump’s order to eliminate the Iranian commander. [...]
Whether some or all of the posts were the result of a planned social media campaign also was not immediately clear, though the sudden #HardRevenge activity seems like a collaborative and coordinated effort, Karan said.
Counting Twitter users who espouse a particular current and controversial claim is unlikely to yield solid useful data.
All the details are utterly irrelevant to the simple fact that both Erica Kasraie and the Washington Examiner report that the number of positive responses to Trump's message of support to the Iranian protestors was the biggest number ever. Yes we know there are plenty of Trump haters there too, though how many there are wouldn't be easily known because they are under the gun of the government, but the "biggest number ever" still means that if all who could do so did give their positive response it would be even bigger than it was.
Trump deserved credit from US for what he did; at least he got some credit from some of the Iranian people. How many this and how many that is just a distraction from that simple fact. Trump often deserves credit he never gets. Often. And you obviously don't want to give him any now either. But I thank Erica Kasraie for her fairness.
positive responses to Trump's message of support to the Iranian protestors was the biggest number ever
Yes, largest in response to a tweet in Farsi. How many were from inside Iran? Lots of people know Farsi outside Iran.
200,000 likes is a lot more than I'd expect. But assuming that's accurate and assuming they all were in Iran, it's 0.2% of the Iranian population. If the Tweeters were a random sample of the population you could derive some very probable conclusions. But it's not a random sample. The poor won't have Twitter.
Taking the guy out made the world a better place. It also distracted from impeachment. Make whatever you will of those two facts.
Shame Trump didn't do it legally. Yet another example of his disdain for the law.
Re: Health Insurance increase due to Republicans preventing Public Option
During the Bush 43 (Schrubbia) administration there was no requirement to insure those of us with pre-existing conditions. This meant that I could no leave my then current employment without losing my insurance (I was diagnosed with cancer while there) and then paying exorbitant fees (plus high deductibles and co-pays) to cover my cancer ... if I could get anyone to take me. Curiously I call that an extreme increase in healthcare fees AND an infraction on my right to work where I want to.
My cancer story is different - yes I've been there too. A lousy 50/50 insurance plan, and no money. I was diagnosed in late 2012, I remember Buzsaw's death being on my mind at that time. 8 hours of surgery in November, and chemo and radiation all through the first half of 2013. Unable to work my regular (self employed) job, but was able to do some side work in my garage during that time, to help hold down the credit card hemorrhaging somewhat. Applied for some of the social security that I'd been paying into for the previous 40 years, but was told since I wasn't projected to be disabled for a full year, that I couldn't get a dime of it. So I often worked when I was quite sick, re-structured the remaining debt with my good credit, and paid / am paying it. No complaints.
Then I retired and got on medicare, and then the ACA was passed ... and my fees didn't change. That's what would have happened with the public option or with universal single payer medicare4all, but that was blocked by the republicans. ie -- you need to blame the republicans for your high fees, not the ACA or Obama. Sorry not sorry.
I don't know / remember just what stage the ACA was at when I was going through all that. But I was treated quickly and efficiently. Don't think I would have been in another country with its wonderful health care for all.
"Authoritarian ultranationalism" goes along with the big government beliefs of today's Democrats far more than it does with the individualistic beliefs of Republicans.
This makes no sense. There is no ultranationalism among the Democrats.
quote:Ultranationalism is an "extreme nationalism that promotes the interest of one state or people above all others", or simply "extreme devotion to one's own nation".
Promotes the climate change interest of one political party, to take over most all decisions in how energy will be produced and used?
Neither is there any authoritarianism. I think you're equating authoritarianism to advocacy of any policy you disagree with.
No, I'm worried about what new authority climate change alarmists want to give to the government. It could very much affect my life personally. Does Trump or Republicans threaten anything in your personal life?
You are buying into a false right wing narrative. That liberals are labeling conservatives fascists is just something David Limbaugh is making it up so he can compose a "no we're not, you are" piece.
Surely you've heard of "Antifa". They are a left wing hate group, that opposes right wing beliefs.
...that they only want some power, and will stop when they get only a prescribed amount, that could be true. But it doesn't square with the history of human nature.
Uh, given that both Democrats and Republicans are human, isn't it kind of a stretch to level this charge solely at Democrats?
No, because Republicans don't seek gun control, don't seek to take over energy production and use, don't seek complete government control of health care, on and on and on.
The rural poor who support Trump and Republicans in disproportionate numbers are those most likely to suffer under their policies. The much better health coverage than Obamacare that Trump promised has yet to materialize as even a proposal. The cancelling of many coal mining regulations means that the people of coal mining regions like West Virginia will suffer with increasingly poor water quality, often to unsafe levels. Rolling back clean air regulations means we'll all breath dirtier air. And a rockin' economy doesn't really boost rural areas much but does greatly benefit those already making a great deal of money in urban areas.
Rural area people obviously don't agree with you. They value freedom, and consider themselves able to monitor their own water and air qualities without additional government commands.
You have yet to explain, despite at least a couple inquiries, how trading carbon credits causes money to flow into Democratic coffers.
quote:Among the facts revealed in Morano’s book are these: The world spends $1 billion a day to prevent global warming; A UN scientist says the 97 percent consensus on global warming was pulled from thin air, presumably hot air from many politicians; scientific organizations claim climate change ‘consensus,’ but have not polled their members; climate policies are not helping, but crushing the world’s poor; The Paris climate accord theoretically postpones global warming by just four years, but will cost $100 trillion if fully implemented;
quote:But there's one thing we do know for sure: the majority of people and governments now accept climate change is real and that "something must be done" David Cameron's entire political strategy appears to centre on green' issues, and Margaret Beckett says that "achieving climate security has to be at the core of foreign policy". We also know there is a way to make money out of everyone else's climate convictions and the actions they want to take to cut emissions.
The big fallacy here is that officials are elected to serve the people who voted for them and not their entire constituency. Certainly it is true that Trump believes he is the president of those who voted for and support him, and screw everyone else, but Trump's ethical and moral compass has been adrift since long before his election. This is not the way a working democracy functions. Those elected, especially to statewide or national office, serve all their people and must take as a fundamental obligation being a unifying rather than divisive force. Trump doesn't seek to win over those who disagree with him. He seeks to delegitimize and disenfranchise them.
Which of these do you see as selfish desires: Decent healthcare? Security in old age? A clean environment? National Parks that aren't sliced up for resource exploitation? Addressing climate change? Safe food and drugs? Fair labor practices? Decent housing? Affordable public transportation? Meaningful oversight of industry? Green energy? Affordable higher education?
All of them. Democrats and their constituents want them, and want someone else to pay for them.
Seriously? You think the driving force is jealousy of Republicans? Really?
YES. Not only the rich ones, but the poor ones who, nevertheless, enjoy satisfying, FREE, productive lives.
You just said that Republican voters are hard working and personally responsible, while Democratic voters are idle. This is almost repugnantly cynical.
marc9000 writes:
So many of them don't care about liberty, they take no advantage of the liberty that is available to them.
Why do you feel moved to say such absurd things?
I know it's not politically correct, but I see evidence for it. Democrat strongholds include the slums of LA, San Francisco, Chicago, NY City.
Is this truly your view of the average Democratic voter? If so, where are you getting your information from?
Most people who have ever lived in this world have lived in bondage. In Democrat voters, I see people who take this country's liberty for granted.
Re: Sanctimonious defense of injustice by Christtianity Today
The news media controls who the FBI, CIA and DoJ investigate now? Who knew!
They don't control who they investigate, they control how much the public will be informed about those investigations. Speaking of news media omissions, have you heard about the lawsuit settlement to the Covington Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann, from CNN, who made assumptions and lied about just who confronted who? It didn't seem to make the news much. I heard about it at Fox news.
When it did get a quick mention, as we can see from this link, dances were done about just what CNN did.
You just cited an opinion piece.
And you never do that?
What corruption did Hunter Biden commit that requires investigation? Please be specific and precise.
quote:6. James and Hunter Biden sought to monetize off Joe Biden’s political standing.
In 2006, close to when Joe Biden assumed the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and launched his second presidential campaign, James and Hunter Biden purchased a hedge fund called Paradigm Global Advisors. Although neither man had a strong background in finance, James and Hunter Biden reportedly believed they could leverage Joe Biden’s political connections to their benefits.
What Trump did was absolutely legal, absolutely within the Constitutional powers of the executive branch, only there is so much ignorance of these things, so much pure political motivation, and so much blind irrational hatred of the man, they criminalize him for doing his duty as President. He has never once abused his power, not once, but there has been plenty of abuse of power in the Congress trying to criminalize his perfectly legal actions.
The Trump administration’s decision to freeze the release of security assistance to Ukraine violated the law, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said in a new report.
The independent watchdog said in an opinion issued Thursday that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) withheld the appropriated funds last summer not as a programmatic delay but in order to advance the president’s own agenda.
By doing so, the watchdog concluded, the White House violated what’s known as the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).
Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law, the report said. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)...Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.
A lousy 50/50 insurance plan, and no money. I was diagnosed in late 2012, I remember Buzsaw's death being on my mind at that time. 8 hours of surgery in November, and chemo and radiation all through the first half of 2013. Unable to work my regular (self employed) job, but was able to do some side work in my garage during that time, to help hold down the credit card hemorrhaging somewhat. Applied for some of the social security that I'd been paying into for the previous 40 years, but was told since I wasn't projected to be disabled for a full year, that I couldn't get a dime of it. So I often worked when I was quite sick, re-structured the remaining debt with my good credit, and paid / am paying it. No complaints.
™ Version 4.2
