Not if those distracting screens were prohibited.

That could have been the mandate. They could have mandated that be the only allowable screen. It shows what’s behind you, and that’s it. No distractions tolerated. No pop-up logos or other advertising. No driving controls on that screen. Touch screen disabled while in motion, with all essential functions actuated by physical controls.

But they didn’t. They mandated a rearview and monitor, but didn’t restrict its use. And that failure has probably caused more injuries and deaths than it has prevented.

Unless they only permitted that screen to show a rear view. They could have prohibited any other use, or prohibited non-tactile controls that required ocular attention while driving. They could have required that touchscreen controls be disabled while driving. But they didn’t.

They mandated the distracting screen, and probably killed more people than they saved.

They also put a distracting video monitor in front of the driver 100% of the time, not just the 0.2% while backing. Manufacturers have moved a lot of controls to that screen, rather than leaving them on tactile buttons and switches that could be operated without taking eyes off the road.

How many collisions have been caused by distractions from the these screens?

With a backup camera comes a video screen necessarily in view of the driver, contributing to distracted driving at all times the vehicle is not in reverse. How many kids have been killed because of such distractions?

Billionaire Burgers?

Shareholder Shortribs?

Capitalist Casserole?

These “useless bloodsuckers” aren’t the problem. The “problem class” is everyone with a 7-figure income.

There’s some things that both sides can generally agree on. Brian Thomson, for example. Seems the only people who had a problem with his death had >$10 million stock portfolios.

The F-35 was designed from the start as an export fighter. It was always intended to be sold to anyone and everyone. “Most Advanced Technology” is pure marketing wank, intended to support its $100 million price tag.

Trump’s idiocy has stopped more F-35 sales than he’ll make to the Sauds.

Look, you don’t need a JAG officer on standby to know you’re not supposed to open up on a crowd of fuckin kids.

Agreed, but the order is not always so clearly unlawful. You pretty much do need a lawyer on standby to challenge violations of Posse Comitatus. It is the servicemember’s duty to refuse to conduct domestic law enforcement activities like deportation, for example, but they can be required to support those same activities in other ways.

Least popular Democratic candidate in 2020. After Trump’s first term, any Democrat but Hillary would have won.

The incumbent party rarely does as well in the second term election as they did in the first term.

The difference between the two candidates was 2020 vs 2024.

Harris would have won in 2020. And if she had, she probably would have won in 2024.

They kinda all blend together

Fascist smoke. Don’t breathe this!

Technically, pedophilia is considered a mental disorder. it’s listed in the DSM-V. Pedophiles could be considered mentally ill.

Hebophilia and ephebophilia aren’t illnesses. They are crimes.

The whole workaholic culture you’re talking about doesn’t really apply to politics. It’s simply not the same as in other professions.

I agree fully. In most other professions, a workaholic culture is not particularly harmful to anyone but the workaholic. An exception would be “management of laborers” where the workaholic is charged with directing the lives and livelihoods of rank and file workers. A more important exception is “politics”, where the workaholic is charged with legislating policy. It is in fields like these where workaholic culture is most damaging to all of society.

This is truly ageist nonsense.

I haven’t mentioned anything about health or mental acuity or enfeeblement. I haven’t mentioned anything about making room for the next generation. All those issues came from you. Don’t lay that “ageist” horseshit on me. Also don’t lay that “authoritarian lunacy” charge at me: I didn’t say she should be prevented from running. She shouldn’t run. It should be infeasible for her to run as a freshman state senator. Anyone who ever wants to be able to retire at a reasonable time in their lives should look at her proximity to retirement age and decide she is not the best option.

My position is “shares our values”. “Working yourself into the fucking grave” is not a value that should be shared or promoted in any way among our political representatives. We should be appalled at anyone of retirement age deliberately choosing to work for others. I happen to hold that particular value in rather high regard.

Sometimes as you get older, you gain a sense of duty to the community that raised you; sometimes it’s naked ambition.

And I have no problems whatsoever with a workaholic in a philanthropic or corporate role, or working for themselves. Most are still capable, many are still willling to work. But looking around my community, most are forced to work long past retirement age. They don’t get to retire on time (or sometimes at all) because the workaholic attitudes in our legislatures have not established a culture in which retirement is valued. They set the expectation for working into their 80s and 90s. They devalue retirement.

Bernie Sanders is another workaholic. He clearly doesn’t have a personal goal of “retirement”. He doesn’t share that value. The overwhelming majority of his position is great, but his personal attitude toward work is not.

When you fill the legislative chamberwith workaholics, you should not be surprised when you get workaholic legislation.

I want to be able to retire some day. I want my representatives to share that value. Working significantly past retirement age indicates they do not. This pervasive attitude among both parties is at the root of our economic issues. We are not establishing a society that promotes and supports people in their retirement.

Her mother reached retirement age in 2005. Instead of retiring at a reasonable age, she decided to keep working for another 21 years. That workaholic attitude is a massive problem.

Christine is trying to start her public service career at age 60. California state senators can serve up to three 4-year terms, making her 72 before she is forced out of that position. And she’s not likely to end her career in the California senate.

Whatever district she ends up running for would be better off finding someone 53 or younger to serve as a freshman state senator. A 53-year-old candidate would be able to serve three full terms before reaching retirement age.

6 years from retirement age.

A workaholic attitude toward life is far worse for all of us than a right-wing ideology. Our political representatives believe it virtuous to work into the grave, so none of us get to retire.

She’s 59. She should be thinking about retirement, not running.

Sadly I could so see that happening… and some crazy stupid arguement that bypasses the term limits because democrat trump is considered a new candidate

Nah, nothing crazy. Turns out we’ve all been looking at the 22nd amendment all wrong. Here’s the relevant clause:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,

"No person shall be elected more than twice. The 22nd amendment only applies to persons. It was never intended to apply to GodKing Trump.