Yeah, it's the Jewish space laser broad, of course.
You didn't think she was crazy then, just now she opposes the sex offender.

Maybe learn to not pull QAnon lunatics into your ranks.
It's all fun to accuse Democrats of having a pdf file ring,
until you vote for a president who was very much part of it.
Then the people you turned crazy, might turn against you.

Of all the reasons to abandon a politician you once supported, that is a good one.
Don't you think?

How many Trump supporters does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
None.... Trump says it's fixed, so they sit in the dark and cheer.

He is giving orders to have people murdered by the military.
He doesn't have to face anyone personally. He doesn't even see the death bodies.
The most cowardly person in the world can do that. (and is)

No, dumb-ass, it's the corruption that makes some Democrats switch party.

Also, being a Republican politician is SOOOO EASY.
You lot don't want anything and believe such childish lies.
Hurting people is your ONLY demand, and that's EASY.

Marjorie Taylor Greene or Rachel Maddow?

Thanks, but it's just sad that some foreigners have to tell Americans how they are screwed.

We just had an election in the Netherlands. Healthcare was a very important topic. We had at least 6 parties debate their healthcare plans clearly. All parties had their programs analyzed, so the Dutch people can clearly understand the impact of their vote on healthcare. Some parties invest in lower costs for the people, other parties cut expenses and reduce what the basic insurance will cover.

MAGA Americans don't know shit. They refuse to understand that cutting billions
from taxes funding healthcare will make their insurance premiums higher and their coverage lower. Either they believe in fairy-tales or they just like to be lied to.

They voted for a president who clearly does the opposite of what he promised,
and they like it. I come from a country where promises matter.

They are talking about the Milankovitch cycles, which I explained about in the
'YouTube can be educational too (let's share videos)' topic.

There are three main cycles:
1) ~100,000 years for changes in orbital eccentricity (shape of Earth's orbit)
2) ~41,000 years for changes in axial tilt (obliquity)
3) ~23,000 to 26,000 years for the wobble of the Earth's axis (precession)

They are completely irrelevant for human made climate change, that has the potential
to decimate humanity in a few HUNDRED years, from increasing the temperature,
many thousands of years before the next ice age is due, if humanity DOESN'T ACT.

The reassuring article from Bill Gates, that you posted a while back, takes into account
that humanity DOES ACT, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN WE ARE ACTING NOW.

September 2015 – “60 Minutes” interview with Scott Pelley on CBS 60 Minutes,
Trump said: “Everybody’s got to be covered … I am going to take care of everybody.
I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.”

When asked who would pay, he responded: “The government’s gonna pay for it.”

He added that his plan would still involve private plans, with competition:
“It’s going to be a private plan … people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans … they can have their doctors … they can have plans … everything.”

As president-elect, Trump told the Washington Post:
“We’re going to have insurance for everybody. … There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.”

Feb 13, 2025 – Trump signed an Executive Order to establish the “Make America Healthy Again Commission.”. According to the White House fact sheet, the commission will investigate major causes of chronic disease in America, “prioritize gold-standard research,” and develop strategies to improve health coverage flexibility.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” includes about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years.
According to ITEP, more than 70% of the net tax cuts go to the richest 20% of Americans.
ITEP also says the richest 5% alone will get 45% of the new tax cuts.
For the top 1%, ITEP estimates they’ll receive total tax cuts of $1.02 trillion over 10 years.

The Americans for Tax Fairness group claims Trump’s plan would cut “nearly $2 trillion from health care, mostly Medicaid.”
The CBO estimates those changes could leave 10+ million people uninsured.

Conclusion: Trump is taking away healthcare for 10+ million Americans,
to give the richest people in the US some more money.
Is that what he promised the American people?

I know you don't care about anything bad happening under a Republican
and you don't care about anything good happening under a Democrat.
I just don't understand what you are voting for then.
Do you understand that politicians should represent you, not the other way around?

Trump did achieve something; he angered all the other countries, who have now found other trading partners than the US, and made them consider to abandon the dollar
as the world's principal reserve currency.

By the way, do you want to sell me some fine Canadian products?
You can also come to Europe for your winter vacation.

China makes everything from ridiculous scams to complete competition busters.
Some of their good products are kept from you, by your government.
There are often good reasons for it, like China using forced labor.
But, some of it is just protectionism. That might not even be a bad strategy.
However, if they have access to the cheapest electricity in the world, because
they make the best solar panels at the best price, it is not smart to keep them away
from our manufacturing, because then they pay more for electricity. That's a setback
that puts us further behind.

There is no dignity to the people who work in motels, it's exploitation. No American can life of that wage, but immigrants are forced to, out of desperation.

If you want Americans to do those jobs, you need to exploit them less, because that is bad for the economy. Those people cannot spend anything, can only live in slums, cannot afford children or if they have them accidentally, they cannot afford a decent education. Then you are losing against China even more, because they have armies of well educated, highly motivated, young people, to fill any technical position.

I'm saying this about the US, but it's getting more applicable to my country fast.
We are not educating our young people enough for the highly technical jobs.
Young people more often choose Business Administration, Commercial Economics, Finance, Medicine, Nursing, Psychology, Communication, Marketing, HR, Social Studies, Design, Media, Music, Gaming, Tourism, Pedagogy, Cybersecurity, Embedded Systems, AI Engineering, etc.
They keep pulling away to those educations, while the demand for technically educated people is skyrocketing, because we want to be less dependent on China.

I see it in my own work environment. Many of my new colleagues are from another country. I'm surprised if one gets introduced in Dutch to me. I speak more English
than Dutch at work. If the right-wingers in my country win big, and actually stop immigration and sends these people back, my employer can close up shop.

Meanwhile, the right-wing has NO strategy to invest in automation for when they stop the refugees from the horrible countries, who do the lower skilled work now, nor do they have a strategy to invest in technical education, to replace the expats who are filling
the technical jobs now. It's just blind short-term thinking: "We don't like immigrants!".

Melania Trump: South Park vs. Reality
only registered users can see external links

Sorry to hear that. We're not all 'blessed' with good health by nature.

Some things that are 'natural' like milk and butter, are not better for you, than the 'fake stuff'. Some margarines are made from oils with lots of poly- and mono-unsaturated fatty acids, just like olive oil.

Hopefully your soil isn't polluted. If not, nothing can beat home grown veggies.
Having a few chickens can also give you more healthy eggs, if you feed them good food. My government now warns against it though, because PFAS is everywhere, and ends up in the eggs at high concentrations.
only registered users can see external links

Bon Appйtit

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) which is the autoimmune disease, or osteoarthritis?
I never heard of RA resulting in vascular problems though.
There are biological inhibitors for RA inflammations, but they are incredibly expensive and most insurances don't cover it, or only in the worst case, even in the Netherlands.
Celecoxib is said to help with RA. I'm sure it's less expensive.

Sure, if you throw out the immigrants that did it, Americans should.
Or you say goodbye to the small bit of production industry, you still had.
It's only 10% of the GDP, who cares? You cannot compete with China anyway.

You don't disprove leopoldij to be independent from a car,
by showing he is dependent on walking, biking and public transit.

The question is: which specific independence makes your life better
and which doesn't. Being independent from the supermarket might
make some people happy, but to me it would be just a shit ton of labor,
that I can direct to more productive uses.

Personally, I'm not dependent on a car, but it's comfort is worth it's money to me. However, I'm not dependent on any transport, 3 of the 5 working days, because I work from home then. It does mean that I'm dependent on my self-discipline and failing a lot, and dependent on my own electricity,
but you cannot have everything. If you think you will become happier by becoming as independent as possible, you have my blessing to try.
I'll warn you that it will probably suck balls though.

"IS there light,if there are no eyes to see it?
IS there sound,if no one hears it?"

People have asked those questions for millennia, and of course many other questions. Philosophers have gained some ground on answering those questions, but it has been the scientific method, of a continuous, evidence-based, self-correcting process of asking questions, testing explanations, and refining refining those explanation, that has resulted in our most useful understanding of reality.

There is almost nothing left of reality that scientists have no explanation for at all. They have found logical processes that explain almost everything. Never has science come to a complete halt, requiring the conclusion "something unnatural is occurring".
Meanwhile, science has disproven many of the claims about reality proposed by religions. The religions have either doubled down in pushing a literal interpretation of the texts that forces proponents to reject all evidence against it, believing lies and just sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting "Lalalalala!" if someone tries to correct their lies or mistakes, or they say the texts are just meant figuratively. Well, even the figurative parts of religious texts are all contradicting each other, and the only way to explain that is saying all other religions wrong, which means all of them are wrong. When science comes up with explanations, it doesn't matter where in the world the scientist is born and what their parents believed. The explanation works everywhere.

Science knows what light is and knows what sound is. They still occur, if there is
no observer. It's only philosophical babble, if we call that 'light' and 'sound'.
Don't blame scientists for talking about such metaphysical ideas.
They do often inspire new metaphysical ideas. That's why there are now creationists asking "Oh yeah, then what was there before the big bang?".
The answer is: "Science is working on that. You didn't discover the big bang, your explanations were disproven, so shut up and let the grown ups do their work.".

"You leave a little space for things that might appear as explanations for what we don't understand yet"
True. There are lots of things that we don't fully understand yet.
However, I personally do not know of anything that justifies considering explanations of a non-material nature.

The proposal of 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' are originating from measurements that show a big inconsistency between the calculations how a galaxy should keep together, based on the gravity of the observable matter and on how the whole universe should expand, if there is no force that expands it. They have not found the type of matter yet, that can explain how galaxies stick together, so they call it 'dark matter', simply because they cannot see it. They have no explanation for why the universe keeps expanding at an increasing rate, so they call it 'dark energy'. They are just placeholders for explanations, not explanations itself.

I agree that there is a materialist view behind that practice. However, why shouldn't they? Do they have any reason to suspect any spiritual cause behind how galaxies stick together and how the universe keeps expanding at an increasing rate? And if they were to do so, how would they research that?

The 'god of the gap' argument is indeed a bit childish, but the reason for rejecting
'god of the gap' arguments is valid. If scientists would just say "god did it",
for something we don't know, nothing would ever be explained by science.

Funny! That was wide open goal, wasn't it?

I have no problem with being called stupid, if you can show me to be wrong on anything.
Instead, you show you don't understand basic concepts.

"Celecoxib, sold under the brand name Celebrex among others, is a COX-2 inhibitor and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). It is used to treat the pain and inflammation in osteoarthritis, acute pain in adults, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, painful menstruation, and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. It may also be used to decrease the risk of colorectal adenomas in people with familial adenomatous polyposis. It is taken by mouth. Benefits are typically seen within an hour."

Is that applicable to you?
If inflammations are the main cause of your health problems, it's good to treat them.
It's not treating the root cause, because you need to know what is causing the inflammations, but it's a layer closer to the root cause, than treating the effects
of the inflammations.

I understand why the doctors are hesitant. Celecoxib may pose higher risk for people with heart disease or stroke history. However, if your heart and vascular issues are originating from an inflammation issue, I would think it's good to treat the cause.

Republicans are not excluding r@pe from their ban, so your support is moot.

Timing and partner reasons are mostly financial too. That's where the 75% comes from.

That mostly of them COULD be prevented is probably true. That's not reality though. Women get pregnant unintentionally, and the reason can be an argument for who pays for it, but not for it being illegal.
Do you think having children should be punishment, for being stupid?

I sort of agree that careless people need to pay for their own abortion,
but look at it this way: the people who cannot pay for it are in the worst position to take care of a child.

Why do you want all those unwanted children, being raised by stupid people,
in desperate financial need? Don't you think your country has enough losers?

You are complaining about your drugs problem, but that is not a supply problem, that is a demand problem. And your idea of putting more losers on this earth
is creating the demand.

Interesting. Stress, anxiety and depression are at least very unhealthy.

I know that Jehovahs can enter your property, without it being trespassing,
that was the whole argument. I'm explaining the slippery slope argument to you, because you didn't understand it the first time, and it's going right over your head again.

I am arguing against pharts argument "where do you draw the line?",
saying "oh this baby may have a iq lower than 125, abort abort abort!"
The "line" that we draw is the law. The same law that defines the limit between Jehovahs entering your property and trespassing, which you specified.

So, there could be al law that keeps abortion legal, but excludes the reason that it's IQ would be lower than 125, or whatever other nonsense phart makes up.
We we talking about abortion for a fetus that develops without a brain, like the woman from the article that phart shared. Do you you have an opinion on that?

Do you think that every fetus with abnormalities or genetic diseases should be born, even if they are sure to live like a vegetable or will likely die immediately after birth? That's what Republicans are enforcing now, so your primitive thinking about who funds it, is a bit unsatisfactory for all those women who must deliver a baby that has no chance at a normal life, and the parents who have to care for it, the rest of it's life (if it dies young) or the rest of their life (if it doesn't die young).

We are talking about abortion being legal or not, not if it is funded with tax-dollars.
It was YOU who said that elective procedures shouldn't be funded by tax-dollars. That includes joint replacement and other serious medical procedures.

But, since we are talking about money. Do you understand the energy, time and MONEY that a severely disabled child costs? With your broken healthcare system, a child like that is unaffordable. If parents cannot meet that burden, is your government stepping in? Are you OK with your tax-dollars funding all those severely disabled people, because Republicans took away the CHOICE to abort them?

Is it a false equivalence to compare abortion with joint replacement and other serious medical procedures? It fucking well isn't, when Republicans are excluding abortions for DEAD fetuses. The total abortion ban has already caused 59 deaths of women with abnormal or death fetuses, and the ACPM estimates potentially 210 additional maternal deaths per year in certain states as a result of abortion bans. That makes abortion more important than a joint replacement, in a lot of cases. How can one function, when they are DEAD?

No, pregnancy is not 100% preventable. Many girls and women get r@ped. Republicans in some red states are already banning abortion for r@pe victims.
Do you think every fertile female should be on anti-conception, in case they get r@ped? Also, anti-conception is not 100% effective. The end result is that many women get pregnant unintentionally, without any fault of their own.

Let's throw insulin into that mess. Who is grasping at totally unrelated medical ... , here? (it's not even a procedure)
I think it should be either 100% covered by insurance or funded by taxes.
With your attitude, I expect you don't.

Again, no one was talking about who pays for abortions, until YOU did. We were talking about abortions being allowed by law, or not. Most abortions can be performed with some pills. I am fine with people paying for them out of pocket.

In 75% of the cases, abortions in the US are performed because the woman
is not financially secure enough to take care of it. So, if you don't like abortions,
maybe start thinking about solving that. Even giving birth itself sets people back on average $2,743. Do you think giving birth is an elective procedure?

And even if some women are getting pregnant due to their own stupidity, do you think that those dumb-asses should be parents? How about having people wait with parenting, until they have some idea that they are up to the responsibility?
Why do people like you always support ideas that fuck up your country?
It's very clear that you don't have an IQ limit for abortions. DAMN!

What Trump wants to do, is replace Maduro with some friend,
who takes your bribes and sells out his people, by selling off
the rights to the oil to some American oil company.
The Venezuelan people will get nothing, because
the American oil company and it's shareholders will
take everything. That's what your country always does,
when it goes into some country, 'to fix the place'.

The drugs story is just an excuse to take take their oil.

Remember how Trump said "I would have taken the oil" about Iraq?
The US had no fucking reason to attack Iraq, but Trump wanted
to take their oil, to pay for your war against an innocent country.
That speaks a lot about his morality and his intent with Venezuela.

The US doesn't want to fix the place, but to rob it blind.

Thanks, and back at you.

Being pure materialist would be shutting your brain for anything miraculous.
I've had personal experiences that felt like making brain contact. In my head, I said something to another person, and they reacted to it. I'm very sure that I was completely silent. It just happened only 2 times in my life, both women. That makes it very likely just a coincidence. Still, I'm not just dismissing it as evidence, it's just very weak evidence.
I would need much more, to be convinced.

And that's my attitude towards everything, from the purely materialistic up to the fully spiritual and religious. My confidence in an idea is entirely dependent on the confirmation of the idea. I can switch my idea of something on a dime, if you provide me stronger evidence for the alternative, than I have for my original idea. A few years back, I switched my idea on the 'big bang'. The idea I held was that the whole universe was once concentrated in a point, smaller than an atom and almost infinitely dense.
Then someone told me that there is good evidence that the universe is infinite. Something finite cannot grow into something infinite, unless it grows/grew at infinite speed. We observe the universe growing at a finite speed, so it has been infinite all along. Everything we can see still was concentrated in a much denser state, but just
not in one tiny point, but everywhere.

In no way do I think that I understand everything. It's not needed to have opinions.
I have opinions on what I understand and have justification for, and if I don't have justification, I don't have opinions on the matter.
Having an opinion on something, because of a lack of knowledge or understanding,
is called 'the god of the gaps argument'. Unless science finds some evidence for
non-material concepts, it means those concepts are an ever receding pocket
of scientific ignorance.
(Borrowed from Neil deGrasse Tyson, who borrowed it from someone else)

It's the damn union that should make sure their compensation is fair, without them needing a $10K bonus.
If their job IS providing safety, then when are they 'going beyond the call of duty'?

Here is an assessment of ChatGPT:

Overall Assessment

Yes, there is strong evidence that many TSA agents are serious about safety and do their job diligently. The high rate of firearm detection, combined with TSA’s public statements about security priorities, supports that view.

But no, the picture is not totally unblemished:
- There are genuine risks in how TSA handles internal misconduct (per the OIG report).
- There are serious policy and legal concerns around discrimination (e.g., transgender screening).
- There are tensions between security and operational efficiency.
- Labor unrest could erode performance or morale going forward.

That last sentence leads me to believe that they might deserve a raise, instead of a one time bonus. A bonus can be a good temporary motivation, but it doesn't attract new personnel. If they deserve $10K, better raise their wage by $5K-$8K and add a bonus program for achieving goals of $2K-$5K.

It seems like he didn't.

He should have known to not be friends with people who challenge you to do stupid things.
They just want to have a laugh at your expense.

This one was hard work from about 29 minutes in.
I had to listen to it several times, to get some idea what he was talking about.

Although these ideas about perception of time and progress are interesting to know
some basics about, I think it's mostly useful to understand perception of reality, but not
to understand reality itself. I don't agree with his 'Absolute Idealism', I'm very much a 'Materialist'. I think reality is doing perfectly fine, if there are no conscious creatures perceiving it. I agree that there are interactions between events that have non-linear effects, but that doesn't mean that time is non-linear. I'm sure that Hegel was smarter than me, but intelligence can also result in them perceiving patterns that only live in their minds. He also lived in a time, when science hadn't yet demolished many metaphysical delusions.

[For people who think this term 'Idealism' means the belief in and pursuit of high or noble principles, goals, and values, and 'Materialist' describes a preoccupation with or emphasis on material objects, wealth, and physical comfort, with a corresponding lack of interest in spiritual, intellectual, or ethical values; NO, the philosophical terms have completely different meanings, than how these terms are commonly known and used.]

only registered users can see external links

Colombia’s role is much larger, especially in production, while Venezuela
plays a more limited but still significant transit (and potentially processing) role.

The US just wants to end the Maduro government, because he nationalized, restricted and weaponized the oil exports to your country, because the US was extorting them. The US doesn't want their oil at a 'reasonable price', but very cheap. In response, of Maduro nationalizing THEIR oil, the US tried to force regime change for your buddy Juan Guaidу. To push Venezuela on their knees, the US sanctioned their oil. Because that doesn't work like you hoped, Trump has made up this lie,
that Venezuela is somehow the worst offender when it comes to drugs cartels
in South America.

It's a repeat of the US attacking Iraq, in relation to 9/11.
Why waste a reason to attack who you want to attack, even if it's false.
It's easy to sell a lie to Americans, because they don't inform themselves.
Then there are people like you, who want to believe Trump's lies and ignore him
when he runs his mouth, and tells you his real intentions.

That's you understanding the exact reason for why Trump is making up these lies.
How about your principle of not taking what doesn't belong to you?

Why are Americans stupid enough to take poison?
I can get that poison easily, but I don't.
What about people's personal responsibility?

By the way, it's nonsense, because those boats don't even have the range to reach you.
They are are being targeted thousands of miles away from the U.S. mainland.

"Categorizing unprotected harmful speech as part of “free speech” opens the door to the censorship of opinions.."
Read again what you wrote, because your either intending to say:
"Categorizing unprotected harmful speech as part of “free speech” opens the door to people's rights being violated."
or "Categorizing “free speech” as part of “harmful speech” opens the door to the censorship of opinions.."

I know what you mean, and I agree. That is not the limits of freedom of speech
that I'm talking about.

"There is no need to limit protected speech, no matter how offensive or how much it bothers you, as long as it does not threaten harm or violate the rights of others."

"There is no need to limit protected speech" Exactly!
Why are you arguing against something that I'm NOT saying?

"as long as it does not threaten harm or violate the rights of others." Exactly!
You are agreeing with my exact position on the matter.

I am definitely NOT denying that cancellation exists.
And indeed (attempted) homicide is the most extreme version of cancellation.

According to your first amendment, the law is responsible for protecting free speech,
but ALSO to protect people when their rights WERE violated by the speech of someone else, primarily through civil lawsuits for specific types of "unprotected" speech, such as defamation, harassment, or true threats.

The law in my country is very much similar, and I fully support it.

When Trump is using his FCC Chairman, Brendan Carr, to put pressure on ABC and
its parent company, Disney, to take action against Jimmy Kimmel, which led to the temporary suspension of Kimmel's show in September 2025, for speech that DIDN'T threaten, harm or violate the rights of anyone, that was clear censorship and a clear violation of the First Amendment.

If Jimmy Kimmel was doing defamation, then the victim has a right to start a civil lawsuit against him. However, the president is not just a private citizen. Government officials are protected against defamation, but they face a much higher standard of proof, compared to private individuals when they sue someone for speech related to their official conduct.
Trump would have clearly lost a civil lawsuit against Jimmy Kimmel, so he decided to cancel him, using his FCC Chairman. Trump has admitted this and shows clear intent
of doing more like it to lots of others.

There is someone holding an "Abolish ICE" sign.
They are probably also anti-fascism, but is that a reason to call them 'Antifa'?

There is no organization called 'Antifa'. There are many people protesting against fascism.
At some point in history, millions of people died fighting against fascism.
Your whole country was against anti-fascism once. What happened to you?

True, but I said "If murder is illegal", not "If homicide is illegal".
That was exactly in line with my meaning.

It's a slippery slope argument. Here is an example:
"If trespassing is illegal, then why are Jehovah's Witnesses not arrested?"
Reverse logic: "If listening to music is legal, then why can’t people
blast it at airplane-engine volume in the middle of the night?"

Why don't you want your tax dollars to fund elective medical procedures?
The only difference between emergency care and elective medical procedures
is that an emergency is needed to prevent the patient from dying right-now,
while elective medical procedures can be scheduled in advance, because
the life of the patient is not in immediate danger.

The next examples are all elective medical procedures:
- Hip replacements
- Knee replacement or reconstruction surgery
- Most hernia repairs
- Cataract surgery
- Gallbladder removal (when not emergent)
- Heart bypass surgery (when not done during an active crisis)

What makes it better for you, to fund these medical procedures through
for-profit insurance, instead of tax-dollars? Do you think that you will never
need an elective medical procedure?

You don't have to be a socialist, to not believe Trump's lies.

You can be to the right of fucking Dzjengis Khan,
and still know that Trump is a filthy pe.do.
You wouldn't care, but you would still know.

Oh damn, I just described you.

Just ask ChatGPT: "Why can a domesticated cow not survive in the wild,
but a domesticated pig can?"

Cows are bred to give huge amounts of milk. No calf can ever drink that much.
A high-producing dairy cow would die within a few days to a week, if not milked.
Pigs are bred for meat, not milk. We only bred them to have large litters and grow fast. They can eat almost anything, so they are pretty successful in nature. Feral populations will actually establish fast, and can develop into an invasive species.
It's actually nature/evolution that is limiting the reproduction rate of e.g. wild boars, because an invasive species would kill nature, which would then kill itself.

You could say that we created cows to be losers and pigs to be winners.
However, too many winners will collapse the ecosystem.
(which is very much what humanity is doing too)

What we don't see is the contrast in color between the clothes of the woman
and the street, because the video blurs her. Either the cop is blind as a bat,
or she was hard to see.

It looks to me like a failure from everyone involved.
Reportedly people urged her to not keep laying there.
If she didn't want to or couldn't get up, at least
stand in front of her, so she doesn't get run over.
Or put your own car in the way, to keep her safe.

The presenter is at least correct to say that this should be investigated.
Police has the tendency to never take responsibility. That should be changed.

They might have given it a sedative.

They were accountable long before your side started attacking them.
Even if the claim itself is true, and lots of them were not,
it's still only a tiny fraction of the money.

The investigation reportedly lasted 11 months and involved the United States Secret Service, the Ohio Investigative Unit (which enforces SNAP fraud laws in Ohio),
and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food & Nutrition Service.
That's looking with a microscope, and they only found $100k that they can point to
as fraud. Congratulations on wasting this huge effort on peanuts, while every single billionaire is scamming the taxpayer consistently for billions.

A judge found Trump and his companies liable in a years-long scheme of inflating
asset values (for banks/insurance) and ordered a penalty of $355 million.
A review by House Judiciary Committee Democrats found that Trump’s pardons,
by canceling restitution payments owed to victims, could cost victims and ultimately taxpayers about $1.3 billion.

You couldn't care less. You only care if some poor people might have received
a couple of dollars too much.

Or it shows that they are running so low on supplies,
that they are using soup cans for munition.
You can take whatever you want from it.
That's why anecdotes like this are useless to understand the complete picture.

Russia Might Soon Run Out of Money for the Ukraine War
only registered users can see external links

Russia to Sell Debut Yuan Bonds as War-Driven Deficit Widens
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links

It's a dirty job, but I love them for caring.

The effect of AI in the US is now measurable.
This video shows a gap between rising profits and declining employment:
only registered users can see external links

True, if you are able to learn how to use AI, it CAN be an opportunity.
Are the people who are losing their jobs able to learn how to use AI?
An economy needs working people, to pay for products, that the economy produces.
If the least intelligent half of the people don't have jobs anymore,
how are the more intelligent half of the people going to care for them?

Even though this might be educational, it's too political for me to comment on here.

There are many projects like that, being organized all over the world.
There are several regreening organizations at work.
They make their money from donations and views on YouTube.
Here are some that I know and watch:

Planet Wild: only registered users can see external links
Mossy Earth: only registered users can see external links
Leaf of Life: only registered users can see external links
Justdiggit: only registered users can see external links

Their videos are great. They give me some hope, with every video.
I'm thinking about donating to one of them, I just haven't decided which one,
how much, and if I want to get a paid subscription.

Woman Asks Churches If They Will Feed Starving Baby — The Response is Shocking
Short: only registered users can see external links
Long: only registered users can see external links

only registered users can see external links

She was denied by 26 churches, but the one mosque she called immediately agreed.
It's already picked up by Islamic channels to show how they are better than Christians.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Pretty damn smart, from a public relations standpoint, isn't it?

However, are many Christians not donating to their church, so they can do CHARITY?
Why are they not helping a mother in need to feed her baby then?

Russians have always been creative and efficient.
Is that a reason to celebrate them in this conflict?
What's the intent of this video?

"oh this baby may have a iq lower than 125" abort abort abort!"
Really? Do you think that people are thinking that, about their pregnancy?
You have strange ideas about people.
If there are people like that, I very much think they shouldn't have children.

But, let me answer your slippery slope fallacy, with a whataboutism.
If murder is illegal, how can people still defend themselves?

The answer: Because we "draw the line" with LAWS.

You may rest easy by killing people in boats, who are drugs smugglers at worst, without a day in court. Those are living and thinking people, the unborn are not.

Your ideas are forcing women to carry and give birth to a child like that,
and then have parents or society care for a vegetable 24/7 for it's life.

The Pentagon cannot account for a 61% of its $3.5 trillion in assets.
Is that an argument for not funding it anymore?