“If this was not the most perfect death penalty case, then why do we have the death penalty at all?” she said.
We shouldn't have a death penalty. While there are some people who commit truly heinous things for which a good hanging, shooting, helicopter ride or similar may be warranted (and this kid falls into that category), I do not trust the government to have that kind of power over someone. Especially given the government's demonstrated ability for years to target people for less than straightforward/valid reasons.
“I’m relieved because had the death penalty been awarded, it would have been a decades-long process of appeals until the shooter was executed.”
And that's another issue. In cases of a death penalty sentence, you're looking at years for work and ridiculous amounts of money before it ever happens.
It is indeed quite odd that the Dominican Republic is (I think?) the most prosperous Caribbean nation when the country right next door is a total garbage fire. I wonder why that is? I'm sure it's not anything to do with demographic makeups or anything verboten to discuss. It must just be a weird coincidence
No, the why is that OPEC's decision hits Biden in multiple ways.
-
Increases gas prices in the US a month out from an election - bad news for the party in power (and makes Biden's increased draining of the strategic petroleum reserve even more of a waste)
-
Helps Russia some, because they can now keep selling their oil to other countries at a higher price, thus keeping their economy going
-
Is a diplomatic snub to the US and the EU, both as their own energy sectors continue to have massive inflation due to their stupid domestic policies and as they keep begging people to sanction Russia.
and probably more reasons.
Basically, the Saudis told Biden "**** off, grandpa, we don't want to listen to you anymore, we'll do what we want", and now Biden is on the porch yelling at the Saudis to get off his lawn.
Primarying them out has been working some on paper. The real test will be, though, what happens if/when republicans get back in power. Am I optimistic? No. But it is possible and a better option than another 2 years of unrestrained Brandonism
Yes, but it's also a sign of Wokeness. Up until 20 years ago, it was BC/AD, but in the early 2000s proto-Wokies (for lack of a better term) started insisting it be written as BCE/CE since BC/AD (even though it is exactly the same dating system) might offend non-Christians.
This has been known for years.
Article from April 2020 about how Chinese reps bought up Australian PPE in bulk and sent it back home.
Sorry, but the court decision is a good thing. Canceling someone's talk (even when it is a miserable, pointless talk lie listening to Julie Bindel talking about "feminist campaigning against male violence") just because some random people start whining about their feelings being hurt is wrong. Full stop.
The only injustice in this is that I highly doubt that this will be used as a legal precedent to stop the UK police arresting people because they said mean words on Twitter. Which it should be, but I doubt the double standard is going away anytime soon.
Ownership issues aside, the Wayback Machine has on multiple occasions pulled down archives of pages that people found ... inconvenient. While it is still somewhat useful, any archive that removes content when people ask them to inherently untrustworthy.
Hammer previously won the Martin Luther King, Jr. New Hampshire state award for anti-racism in schools in 2000 and is the co-founder of People Against Racism in Education.
And the cannibalism continues. Trannies insist they need to run everything.
Well, given that the early impressions of Overwatch 2 are that they just made it Generic Team Shooter(tm), and their monetization scheme is infuriating a lot of the fanbase, surely only this Stunning(tm) and Brave(tm) move will get the game back on track.
I was thinking Rafał Gan-Ganowicz. Supposedly someone asked him once what it was like to take a human life. His response is the first one on the list here
I'll preface this with the following: Since you mention essay I'm assuming this is school-related? If so, do not - under any circumstances - say that Obamacare increased insurance prices. Because that is (virtually) impossible to prove unless you can somehow get a letter from some insurance company executive outright stating that. And without some solid proof, a biased professor will just slap a "correlation does not equal causation" stamp on that section of your paper and start taking points off.
That said, Obamacare did increase costs. And while you can't say that in an academic setting what you can say is something like "Obamacare did nothing to address increasing insurance costs and in a number of cases those costs have increased faster than pre-Obamacare". Because that is easily provable by looking at trends over time. One source, for example, is right here Health care costs in the US have been going up faster than inflation for decades, and if you look at the graphs towards the bottom of that link you'll notice there is no slowing down in the growth and a suspicious spike from 2010-2011, almost as if some bill was signed into law in 2010 which impacted things greatly.
If you want actual firm data, probably the best way to do it is how Ahaus667 suggested - grab single HMO plans from several health insurance companies from several years over the last few decades and compare prices over time. Only potential issue there is that what the plans cover will have changed, in large part due to a number of laws - most notably Obamacare - mandating more things be covered and more people be covered. But, there's not much you can do about that.