At least some health insurance companies are temporarily easing up on denials or pausing shitty policies like limiting anthensia coverage during surgery.

That alone could save a few hundred lives, even if just for a little while.

Don’t worry I’m sure the next administration will get right on that.

The president is then in turn checked by the legislature, who hold the power to impeach and remove.

Just that everything that works in theory stops working when you have 250 years to break it.

And holding one side to a standard while letting the other side do whatever they want is also hypocrisy

Because like the comic is pointing out as the issue and that OP has just done that exact thing - steering the conversation of topic away from the focus.

In a discussion about women by a woman, it sounds crazy but maybe they want the focus to be on women. That doesn’t mean men issues don’t matter or don’t exist. There are an infinite number of venues to discuss it that are not in a thread regarding women issues.

The entire premise is BS because Biden has a list of accomplishments from infrastructure to debt forgiveness, progressive drug guidance, progress in gender/race equality, departments like the ftc and irs being competently run again with actual resources, to judge appointments. Hmm I wonder to who’s benefit it is to ignore all that and label him “not Trump”?

You’re hired! - Valve

And most people decided that, rather than spend a lot of money to own a collection of movies in tech that will eventually be obsolete, they’d rather pay a subscription for a bigger library that meets most of their needs.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

The problem is pro-Palestinian side trying to claim that illegal detention and collateral damage from war is equal to terrorist operations that intentionally targeted massacres of civilians.

That doesn’t work for anyone with a sense of nuance and common sense.

The world will continue to side with the group that isn’t hunting down innocent people in their homes and at festivals.

Ignoring the false statements you are making. If you want the world to support you, don’t commit acts of terror on civilians.

This should never be a “benefit” nor is it a “benefit” to any other group of people.

Then don’t harbor terrorists. It obviously wasn’t a “benefit” to the Israelis who were murdered now was it?

If they actually cared about that? What is that supposed to mean? Sounds to me like you are making shitty generalizations about Palestinians.

If Hamas cared about civilian casualties, they would never have kidnapped and executed civilians. If they cared about civilian casualties, they would negotiate their surrender.

If you’re trying to spotlight Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and hoping to garner sympathy, you’re not going to have much success when the current world event topic is “Palestinians (Hamas) murdered and taken hostage innocent Israeli civilians.”

In your example above, Israel takes all while Palestinians just get “prisoners” back (prisoners that are not really being tried for anything, a literal war crime, so for all intents and purposes they are not detained under any reasonable law and they don’t have the most basic of rights)… and Palestine gets nothing.

Palestine also get the benefit of not having their cities ravaged while Israel troops hunt down enemy combatants. They get to keep some semblance of an autonomous nation. They also minimize civilian casualties in their end, if they actually cared about that.

Seems to me like maybe Israel should negotiate with terrorists if it means less dead civilians. But Israel doesn’t care about that. And this is why we are here today.

It’s very hard to make the argument that Israel should care about less dead civilians when the other side specifically targets civilians. I’m not sure why you keep expecting Israel to negotiate with restraint when they have no incentive to negotiate at all.

What will happen if Israel does not come to the table? Hamas will kill innocent people? And if Israel negotiates and comes to peace with Hamas, the killing will stop? History shows otherwise.

And since that killing innocent part already happens, there’s nothing left to bargain for is there?

I also take issue with the fact that bringing accountability to Hamas for what happened is considered one sided negotiations for Israel. How is justice for a terrorist act considered a total victory?

I didn’t suggest any plan leading to a joint county solution.

You know what would not even remotely lead to such a solution? Kidnapping and murdering civilians.

Just so we’re clear, everyone loses here. But Israel is not going to negotiate with terrorists, nor should they.

Well since Hamas has already executed civilians, and Israel has both the military advantage and support of world leaders, they are not exactly negotiating from a position of strength.

You know what. Sure. I think Israel will go for this.

Release of all illegally detained Palestinians.

In return, Israel gets

• safe return of all hostages taken
• complete surrender of all Hamas leadership
• complete surrender and custody of all Palestinian combatants
• including anyone who conspired or otherwise assisted in the recent act of terrorism

How do you negotiate with someone that just kidnapped and executed or planning to execute hundreds of civilians?

What do you ask for here? And what do you give up?

The article is confusing but it sounds like the union wants both C and G at the table, but C and G both agree that C should be the employer and G doesn’t need to join the talks. So C is saying, if you really want G to join, you’ll have to wait until the appeals are finished.

I’m guessing the union doesn’t want to negotiate with C, have C go to G with the terms and G refuse and just causing endless delays in a game of telephone bargaining.