Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Wideleft last won the day on May 13

Wideleft had the most liked content!

About Wideleft

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Blue Bombers, movies, music, politics

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm 3 episodes in and it is fantastic.
  2. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has convened a private meeting of Democrats to discuss possible steps toward impeaching President Trump. https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1131224908229414912
  3. This appears to be a quote from someone without attribution and your link does not provide the information that supports your claim in the unattributed quote. Also contradicts what NOAA has released.
  4. Again, no such thing as post-birth abortions. That is technically impossible. Secondly, the use of the word "baby" is misapplied in this particular medical discussion. What you mean is "fetus". Thirdly, this is nothing more than an overt effort to overturn Roe v Wade: “This bill is about challenging Roe v. Wade and protecting the lives of the unborn because an unborn baby is a person who deserves love and protection,” Alabama state Rep. Terri Collins (R), the sponsor of the bill, said after the vote Tuesday night. “I have prayed my way through this bill. This is the way we get where we want to get eventually.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/15/gops-frontal-assault-roe-v-wade-shows-they-understand-power/?utm_term=.3e513421c65e
  5. There is nothing radical about a woman wanting autonomy over her body. There is no such thing as a post birth abortion program or procedure, so that dog don't hunt. Abortion rights have been increasingly restricted over the last 10 years, so it's not the "radicals on the left" (you know the ones advocating for equal rights) who are creating the action that the "equal and opposite reaction" that Alabama just approved.
  6. 'Buried' report suggests limited economic damage from carbon tax Saskatchewan paid for a report that suggested a federal carbon tax would shave less than a tenth of a point off the economic growth rate — and then sat on the results "Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Environment paid for a third-party study that suggested a federal carbon tax would do little economic damage — and then sat on the results. Dated October 2017, a Navius Research report found much to like in the province’s own plans for limiting emissions. But its economic modelling didn’t predict economic catastrophe if Ottawa imposed its carbon backstop on Saskatchewan. The province later commissioned another report that did, and announced the results with much fanfare at a press conference in June 2018." https://leaderpost.com/news/saskatchewan/buried-report-suggests-limited-economic-damage-from-carbon-tax?fbclid=IwAR2iU-OZXOuJKNYlVvCKNR6xgKVWq18-NjwdvVY8XVL_-G1p8X9Yvh-6WSY
  7. AT&T promised 7,000 new jobs to get tax break—it cut 23,000 jobs instead AT&T also cut capital spending despite promising $1 billion capital boost. "AT&T has cut more than 23,000 jobs since receiving a big tax cut at the end of 2017, despite lobbying heavily for the tax cut by claiming that it would create thousands of jobs. AT&T in November 2017 pushed for the corporate tax cut by promising to invest an additional $1 billion in 2018, with CEO Randall Stephenson saying that "every billion dollars AT&T invests is 7,000 hard-hat jobs. These are not entry-level jobs. These are 7,000 jobs of people putting fiber in ground, hard-hat jobs that make $70,000 to $80,000 per year." The corporate tax cut was subsequently passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump on December 22, 2017. The tax cut reportedly gave AT&T an extra $3 billion in cash in 2018." https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/05/att-promised-7000-new-jobs-to-get-tax-break-it-cut-23000-jobs-instead/?fbclid=IwAR2J55Zud3KMerd3MeJFypnNmvwVidmP4u85X6dhAqJvkuxNN870i2o8rZ8
  8. First of all, please provide a source for your data as I cannot find anything that resembles those numbers. Secondly, a 2-month aberration (if true) does not discount a 100 year warming trend. It's like pointing to George Burns and saying "See! Smoking is good for you!"
  9. Durham will find that the investigation was done above board, but Barr will take it upon himself (again) to provide the summary which will read exactly how Trump wants it to read. The public will likely not get to see the actual Durham findings.
  10. At least we'll have the answer to the question: "Is it possible for Jon Ryan's punting leg to get tired?"
  11. This is hopefully my last comment on this. People say this like it is something we already have and they're afraid of losing it. We don't - we can't utter threats, we can't libel people and we can't yell fire in a theatre among a whole lot of other things we can't say or do. It's really a disingenuous talking point; the goal of which is to let people with power retain their power through whatever speech necessary. If you pay attention to the loudest whiners about this, it's usually white men who are so incapable of articulating messages humanely that they need the protection of so called "free speech" that has never existed in the way they thought it did.
  • Create New...