President Biden told a Democratic lawmaker and members of his Cabinet after the State of the Union address that he told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that they will need to have a “come-to-Jesus meeting.”
Biden’s comments, captured on a hot mic as he spoke with Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) on the floor of the House chamber, came after Bennet congratulated the commander in chief on his speech and pressed him to keep pressure on Netanyahu over increasing humanitarian issues in Gaza.
Lemme guess, Biden could go over to Netty’s for a little Palestinian-Baby bbq, and you’d still support Biden?
It’s fair to criticize Biden for supporting and enabling genocide. It’s also fair to point out that. Biden has been a senator for most of those fifty years.
It’s also fair to point out that corporate subsidies aren’t going to solve climate change or bring resiliency to what change is now unavoidable.
It’s also fair to recognize that Trump is an even greater asshole.
But it’s not fair to point to Trump and say it’s unfair to criticize the sitting president for their actions.
Pretty sure none of that has anything to do with what I actually said.
I guess it is easier to argue with someone if you can just decide that they’re saying “it’s unfair to criticize the president” or similar bollocks and then explain why that is wrong. 🙂
(BTW - If you scroll around in this thread, you will find me criticizing Biden)
It’s always amazing how dedicated they are at “offering criticism” completely out of context, with little to no evidence that completely ignores anything that doesn’t paint Democrats in a bad light while simultaneously ignoring any criticism of the GOP. Solutions and context are enemies for some reason…
My guy, we’re going to have an ice free Arctic by 2025. There is no more time for business as usual neoliberalism bullshit. You are deluding yourselves if you think trump is going to bring about the end of the world when the end of the world is literally currently happening lol.
What study bears out that 2025 date? Everything I’ve read regarding sea ice points at 2050-2080 at the earliest.
… so downvotes in lieu of evidence? Plain lies it is then.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s43017-023-00515-9.epdf?sharing_token=0NN56H4vvzIXbs2UgHYPftRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0NFQIAvhFvCajrKQh9Lh36bEr1sOzQGNb8DUy_OcWKHndKitcaJ4OsBQ3GmYrXDezBE5godwv3yPRrIaOAJrSX2w05OWVIefbYkLE_prkttS4UATffqfp4KExTVuY_YHqE%3D
Keep your tits on, I’m on the east coast.
And I’m central, regardless I find the downvotes rolling in before any evidence is presented flummoxing, mammary glands aside.
And that study points at 2050, 2067 as an outlier. 2025 is the number you promoted above, no?
Read harder
What you need me to define the word conditions? Do you need to read the paper again and understand what ice free means?