I’m not sure why you included it then. The open secrets link makes me think you wanted to prove
Because Greens take insane amounts of donations from right wing donors, don’t have any issues getting investments in big oil
But I really can’t confirm anything just based on some peoples’ names.
The open secret link is just showing individuals that have donated more than $200, and the morningstar link doesn’t mention the green party at all.
It’s important to know that both the FDA and the USDA are in charge of inspecting food, and which food is covered by which agency can be complicated.
FSIS [under the USDA] conducts continuous daily inspections of foods in its domain, whereas FDA inspections have no regular schedule. The FDA is more likely to inspect only after a tip about a possible food safety violation, so random inspections can occur up to 10 years apart or, in rare cases, not at all.
“It’s not that they don’t want to inspect more, they just don’t have the funding,” Raymond says.
This inspection imbalance means that pepperoni pizza, because it contains meat, has ingredients that will be inspected three times before the product hits the grocery store freezer: at the slaughterhouse, the packing plant and the pizza factory. A vegetarian pizza produced at the same facility, however, will probably not undergo any inspection.
And in regard to the FDA being not allowed to regulate:
[The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994] placed the burden of proof concerning dietary supplement safety on FDA, requiring the agency to show that a dietary supplement ingredient is adulterated rather than requiring the manufacturer to prove a supplement is safe prior to marketing. This is in contrast to new food additives, which require submission of safety information in a food additive petition prior to marketing, or drugs, which generally require submission of safety data as part of a new drug application prior to marketing.
At least with dietary supplements, they can’t make a new product guarantee it’s safe, the FDA needs to already know something is dangerous before it can force a recall.
If you’d prefer to learn more through a comedian, John Oliver covered this topic a while back https://youtu.be/Za45bT41sXg
The agencies are problematic because they generally aren’t allowed or don’t have the budget to properly regulate things. Eliminating departments isn’t going to help anything, and I really don’t think the guy that picks up roadkill for a snack will improve the overall quality of food in the country.
This is the third election in a row that Trump ran for president. Are you saying he wasn’t fascist before?
But the electoral college is dumb and pointless. This is the first time a Republican won the popular vote since 2004, or since 1988 if you don’t want to count an incumbent victory. That alone should tell you plenty about the state of the country right now.
But how do you count “didn’t vote”?
I didn’t, that’s voter turnout and probably won’t be fully available till all the votes are counted. If you’re impatient though, here’s the washington post comparing 2024 voter turnout to 2020.
Across the country, it was Trump: 71,825,780 Everyone else: 69,303,000
It says at the top of the page it was last updated a day ago, but I kind of doubt the numbers will change too dramatically.
Taking the data from here and throwing it in a spreadsheet, Trump got more votes than everyone else combined, including the Libertarian party, RFK Jr, and Write-ins.
The key to defeat fascism is not voting for fascism.
Are you implying Harris was also fascist, or are you just complaining that not enough people voted for her? If it’s the first, then fine. But if it’s the second, what do you think Harris could have done to earn more votes?
Or are you saying that racism and misogyny in the US is just that much stronger than our anti-fascist beliefs? That there’s no amount of good policy and campaign promises that a woman could give that would ever be enough to beat fascism?
Supporting Israel is what Trump did too and even worse than Harris.
So the key to beating fascism in your mind was to platform the same policies, but a little less? What do you actually think Harris should have done differently that would have helped her win the election? Because clearly, doing the same thing but slightly less bad didn’t work this time.
They don’t have the morally high ground. They chose to help a fascist get to power.
Kamala Harris, the Democratic Presidential Nominee, lost. Because of her poor campaign tactics, she allowed a fascist to get into power. Are you equally upset with her for not doing what it takes to stop fascism?
If not, why was the “right answer” for this election to support Israel when we know that she lost following that tactic, and not supporting Palestine?
In many balanced literacy classrooms, children are taught phonics and the cueing system. Some kids who are taught both approaches realize pretty quickly that sounding out a word is the most efficient and reliable way to know what it is. Those kids tend to have an easier time understanding the ways that sounds and letters relate. They’ll drop the cueing strategies and begin building that big bank of instantly known words that is so necessary for skilled reading.
But some children will skip the sounding out if they’re taught they have other options. Phonics is challenging for many kids. The cueing strategies seem quicker and easier at first. And by using context and memorizing a bunch of words, many children can look like good readers — until they get to about third grade, when their books begin to have more words, longer words, and fewer pictures. Then they’re stuck. They haven’t developed their sounding-out skills. Their bank of known words is limited. Reading is slow and laborious and they don’t like it, so they don’t do it if they don’t have to. While their peers who mastered decoding early are reading and teaching themselves new words every day, the kids who clung to the cueing approach are falling further and further behind.
These poor reading habits, once ingrained at a young age, can follow kids into high school. Some kids who were taught the cueing approach never become good readers. Not because they’re incapable of learning to read well but because they were taught the strategies of struggling readers.
Another reason cueing holds on is that it seems to work for some children. But researchers estimate there’s a percentage of kids — perhaps about 40 percent — who will learn to read no matter how they’re taught. According to Kilpatrick, children who learn to read with cueing are succeeding in spite of the instruction, not because of it.
Maybe your kid is one of the lucky ones that can read fine regardless of how he’s taught. But not everyone will be. That’s the point of changing how reading is taught, to be more effective for the highest number of people.
But you could also try giving him a reading test like the ones presented at the top of this website https://readingtests.info/ and see for yourself how well he reads an unfamiliar story.
He brought up the example of a child who comes to the word “horse” and says “pony” instead. His argument is that a child will still understand the meaning of the story because horse and pony are the same concept.
I pressed him on this. First of all, a pony isn’t the same thing as a horse. Second, don’t you want to make sure that when a child is learning to read, he understands that /p/ /o/ /n/ /y/ says “pony”? And different letters say “horse”?
He dismissed my question.
Goodman rejected the idea that you can make a distinction between skilled readers and unskilled readers; he doesn’t like the value judgment that implies. He said dyslexia does not exist — despite lots of evidence that it does. And he said the three-cueing theory is based on years of observational research. In his view, three cueing is perfectly valid, drawn from a different kind of evidence than what scientists collect in their labs.
“My science is different,” Goodman said.
It really shouldn’t surprise me at this point that people that think like this are in charge of how kids are educated.
Could have said something specific then, rather than “literally anything acute”. As it is, I don’t know why you’d assume your magical elf that’s known to cause cancer could also be so benign as to only give people a cold.
Any time you vote for a candidate that loses, this is the case. And of your preferred candidate wins in a landslide, every extra vote they didn’t need might as well have been blank.
choose between having an acute health condition and cancer
The ironic part is you just might be better off with the cancer. An acute problem could be anything, from broken bones or an infection to a heart attack or acute radiation poisoning. At least with cancer you know what you’re going to get and should have time to seek treatment.
why do people have this innate ability to underestimate what we might be capable of?
Because we can see what we’re currently capable of in terms of climate change, and the outlook is pretty bleak
why do you think its impossible for us to become masters of our own genome?
Because even in the best case scenario, this is dangerously close to eugenics
not getting off this rock means our species is doomed regardless of how ‘perfect’ we keep earth.
If we can’t keep earth livable, an entire self-regulating planet that’s been livable for hundreds of millions or billions of years, what are our chances of keeping anywhere else livable?
I’m not actually trying to argue one way or the other, but
No, the cart always has to be voters. Actually showing up to the polls has to be the cart. Anything before that is nonsense.
You’re literally putting the cart before everything else, including the horse. Work on your metaphors a little.
You’re barely even paraphrasing, that’s almost a direct quote.
Trump: ‘If We Stop Testing, We’d Have Fewer Cases’
Trump: ‘If we didn’t do testing, we’d have no cases’
If we did very little testing, we wouldn’t have the most cases. So, in a way, by doing all of this testing, we make ourselves look bad.
Trump on coronavirus testing: ‘If we stopped testing right now, we’d have very few cases, if any’