Addiction has a medical definition, not a connotation.
As previously shown, SSRI’s do not cause addiction, even if they can cause withdrawal or physical dependence for some people.

I guess I’m wondering if support of this policy has to be riddled with asterisks and accompanied by statements that express hopes of how the programs will be run, then why express any support at all for them?

And finally: There are safe places available for people to go if they feel they are having mental health issues that require more intensive care. Mind you, these are really only available to people with health insurance - Regan largely killed off federal and community mental health care in the 80’s. Care that cannot be replaced with a labor camp.
The only proper replacement for that care is rebuilding that/those system(s), and that is not what RFK is proposing. He’s proposing a labor camp to take advantage of and imprison away vulnerable populations.

There is no such thing as addiction to antidepressants.

This viewpoint is supported by the Mayo Clinic, The Cleveland Clinic, as well as this 2019 study published by the national institutes of health, which draws from decades of research.

The above sources even clarify that withdrawal symptoms are not a sign of addiction.

Many psychiatric conditions are incurable. As a result, these lifelong conditions can only be treated by the lifelong administration of medicine.

Anyone who does not understand that should not have a say in public policy. Full stop.

Think it through to its logical conclusion.
ADHD does not go away. Depression (for many people) does not go away. Schizophrenia does not go away.
What happens to those people if they ‘voluntarily’ agree to go to a labor camp but never wind up ‘cured’?
Hint: They get worked to death.

Today I’ve been hearing they’re hanging around polling places all day, so if you missed out on going early, there’s still never a bad time to go.

The ruling happens after the act. Who knows what justices we’ll have by then.

Bear in mind that the drone strikes are less attributed to Trump because he revoked or ignored accountability rules and authorized the CIA and defense department to conduct drone strikes without seeking authorization from the White House.

It’s easy to assume that Trump was ‘better’, but nope. He was much, much worse. He just hid the evidence and delegated the crime to others.

Under Donald Trump, drone strikes far exceed Obama’s numbers – Chicago Sun-Times

He’s getting the Independence Day he deserves.

What would be a compelling answer?

But you’re not. You’re disagreeing with the person while asking leading questions, then arguing against the answers to the questions you asked.

It’s almost like you’re intentionally wasting their effort and mental energy to deal with your gish-galloping.

Oh, yeah. I just gave up on it. All my info got exposed in the recent AT&T hack, including my SS#, which is available as a data dump on the open web.

My credit is locked, I use a data removal service, and my fingers are crossed. As for the rest… Meh. I’m just gonna keep on swimming.

I got my oil changed a week and a half ago and they actually said - they couldn’t do certain things because of the cyberattack. As a result they couldn’t log it or print out paperwork or… something. For an oil change it wasn’t a big deal, but I didn’t even think about the rest of the dealership’s operations.

Fortunately, their payment system is isolated, but it gave me pause before I swiped my card.

If I’ve had a vasectomy, do I still get to participate?

I’m fine wearing a vest that says “Training Staff”.

^hehehehehe

He sexually assaulted an exotic dancer and chased her with the gun when she ran away. (Edit: Allegedly.)

This is from a subscription-only news source called Gongwer:

Posted at 12ish PM:

Rep. Neil Friske’s arrest this morning stems from allegations that he sexually assaulted an exotic dancer and then chased her with a firearm, a source familiar with the allegations says.

Lansing police have not released any information about what led to the arrest and jailing of Friske (R-Charlevoix). He remains in the city’s jail. Police have said he will not be arraigned until Friday or Saturday - if the Ingham County Prosecutor’s Office authorizes charges.

Posted at 1ish PM:

Jordan Gulkis, spokesperson for Lansing Police, said around 2:45 a.m. on Thursday, officers were dispatched to the 2100 block of Forest Road for a report of a male with a gun and possible shots fired.

Gulkis said the accused was arrested for a felony-level offense but did not specify what.

Other news stories indicate he owns a home in the vicinity of the arrest.

Edit 2: But don’t take my word for it!
GOP Michigan rep and gun-rights supporter Neil Friske accused of chasing a stripper while firing a gun – NY Post
(Sorry it’s a garbage publication.)

So you’re saying there’s going to be a big influx of cash into small battery research and improving efficiency for tiny screens/low power WiFi?

I admire and appreciate your optimism and sentiments.

My exact thought was “So they can know they have to enforce the ‘no water’ rule when republicans eliminate more polling stations in cities, eliminate mail in voting, and reduce poll hours?”

Good to know that got some holes poked in it, but… I’m a bit cynical.

Right now the one that comes to mind is the voucher systems for schools.

Channeling public money into private schools. It drains the education system.

As Reagan’s dismantling of the mental health system showed - once you destroy a public service, you can’t really rebuild it. The buildings are gone, the land repurposed. Now there’s a ‘homeless crisis’ as people do not get adequate care to participate in society.

And when our core populous is educated with a corporate agenda or a religious agenda, who will be capable of upholding the U.S. on the world stage? Will we innovate? Will we keep up military?

Rail transit in the 50’s and 60’s, followed by privatization of buses - leading to mass pollution, economic waste, segregated communities, and a divided society.

Bans on research, or underfunding public research, allowing corporations to tell us that cigarettes, PFAS, PCBS, BPA, Glyphosate, and all number of substances we consume(d) daily are safe. Leaning to massive public health issues.

Cuts to social safety nets, the attacks on the library system, Trump-era underfunding of the IRS, banning the post office from providing banking/passing laws and appointing people who specifically are trying to destroy the postal service, repeal of the FCC fairness doctrine - I could go on, but … sigh.

I think I need to hug my wife. I’m glad we aren’t having kids.

How do you envision change happening?

Every scenario I come up with is foiled by voter suppression measures, micro-targeted ads, influence campaigns, and systemic blocks.

At my most hopeful, I think that perhaps maximally, some of the national issues can be addressed at the state level via ballot initiatives - but that won’t change the federal government. And ballot initiatives move glacially slow compared to legislators who can change the rules and make ballot initiatives nigh impossible.

By voting in liberal democrats - like Obama? Who abandoned his promises once he had power, because resolving issues like abortion is less motivating to voters than using them as wedge issues? Of course, if they vote Democrat, that’s assuming their liberal candidates can rise through the ranks to gain power, vs like, a candidate that is a former Bush CIA torture operative, that is so hated by her constituents that when the district she was in got redrawn to include a better liked (and more liberal) candidate, she moved into the house of a lobbyist to run somewhere she wouldn’t get primaried. And then - when a senate seat opened, The Party emplaced her there by negotiating more liberal, better liked candidates out of the primary, so she can do to America what Manchin and Synema did the last time democrats had a majority.
By voting in third party candidates? Who lack conmity in their local dealings, who only gain that if they manage to elect enough people to gain local power? Which will split the power of the party closest to their political views under our two party system and ensure endless game theory discussions until that third party loses strength to go back into the shadows?

I just… don’t have hope today. Maybe tomorrow.

I mean.
Voters are pawns for political parties, but their understanding of the world is guided by their media. Political parties pretend to be autonomous, but their funding largely comes from corporations.
Media (social and otherwise) is controlled under a handful of large corporations. (The TikTok ban was not about China, it was about corporate governance and the ability of TikTok to sway public opinion.) The U.S. system of government ensures only two possible political parties can exist, and outside efforts cannot succeed.

The net result is that voters have no real ability to affect the outcome of our governance. Nor are the lawmakers inclined to change the system in ways that would harm their political party or their corporate patrons.

This has been the status quo for decades.

The only reason this is now a topic of conversation is because there’s a concerted effort to take the U.S. off the world stage by destabilizing it internally through both tearing apart the social fabric, but also destroying the very flawed but stable political system with fascism.

I’m not sure there is a war to win, for the citizenry, at least.

That’s the reason I killed IPv6 on my network.