False equivalency. They. Are. Not. The. Same.
Do both parties have some issues in common? Sure. Does our system need reform? Absolutely. But just because there is some overlap in the Venn diagram that is our political system does not make them the same. At least the democrats are trying to govern.

Especially if it's a cock ring

Want to find the money? Increase the ability of the IRS to perform more audits. The richest folks are already not paying the taxes they should be. $688 billion per year!

Here is the correct quote from Winston Churchill: "If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty, you have no brain."
Also, conservatism in Churchill's era is absolutely NOT what conservatism is now.

History major here. Man, this one hurts.

Physician here. The best marker we have of covid prevalence is wastewater testing. With the availability of home kits (and no reporting) and people refusing to test when symptomatic, the old markers of positivity rates and number of positive tests aren't as valid. Even hospitalization numbers can fluctuate for multiple reasons. Municipal wastewater testing truly gives a sense of covid in a population.

Good! Providing a cheap service at the cost of the staff doing the work is not acceptable.

This is all just grandstanding anyway. They may leave, but likely they will just increase their rates.

Arris makes good stuff. But that is just the cable modem. It will NOT provide any router protection for your home network. Your network topology should look like this:

ISP -> your cable modem -> your router -> everything else

Honestly, if you don't have need for many ethernet connections, just get a wifi router with good reviews and the arris cable modem. Make sure the cable modem you pick up has the right DOCSIS version for the speed you are getting or plan to upgrade to. Your ISP will be able to tell you what version they are on.

Physician here. Masks absolutely reduce transmission and the chance of contracting COVID.

Here is the definitive study on the subject.

Here is a video of a presentation by one of the authors along with some demonstrations and explanations.

TLDR: Here is the Abstract:
There is ample evidence that masking and social distancing are effective in reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. However, due to the complexity of airborne disease transmission, it is difficult to quantify their effectiveness, especially in the case of one-to-one exposure. Here, we introduce the concept of an upper bound for one-to-one exposure to infectious human respiratory particles and apply it to SARS-CoV-2. To calculate exposure and infection risk, we use a comprehensive database on respiratory particle size distribution; exhalation flow physics; leakage from face masks of various types and fits measured on human subjects; consideration of ambient particle shrinkage due to evaporation; and rehydration, inhalability, and deposition in the susceptible airways. We find, for a typical SARS-CoV-2 viral load and infectious dose, that social distancing alone, even at 3.0 m between two speaking individuals, leads to an upper bound of 90% for risk of infection after a few minutes. If only the susceptible wears a face mask with infectious speaking at a distance of 1.5 m, the upper bound drops very significantly; that is, with a surgical mask, the upper bound reaches 90% after 30 min, and, with an FFP2 mask, it remains at about 20% even after 1 h. When both wear a surgical mask, while the infectious is speaking, the very conservative upper bound remains below 30% after 1 h, but, when both wear a well-fitting FFP2 mask, it is 0.4%. We conclude that wearing appropriate masks in the community provides excellent protection for others and oneself, and makes social distancing less important.

Physician and Chief Medical Officer here. I started my practice on the tail end of paper records and I have been through, and led, several different renditions of electronic medical records. Like any other software, the technology has evolved and matured over the last 20 years. Electronic Health Records are just about patient information anymore either. They incorporate patient info, clinician orders, billing, and also provide numerous cross checks and safety systems to improve patient care.

The article discusses the issue with digitizing handwritten notes. This is always problematic as they are not searchable, indexed, etc. and can be very difficult to work through. The system where I work has been on the same medical record system for over 10 years. This provides an efficiency that I didn't have when I was working in a paper system. The entire chart is searchable. Medical history sections are filled out and robust.

From a safety perspective, these systems give us so much more than we had. One prime example is bedside scanning. When a nurse administers a medication in a hospital environment the medical record plays a pivotal role. As a physician I enter and order for a medication. If there is an allergy, medication interaction, or a host of other things, the system will alert me to it before the order is signed. Once signed, the order then goes to a pharmacist to review and approve. The patient's nurse will then be notified of the order and be able to pull the medication from an integrated medication storage unit with multiple drawers and compartments to ensure the right medication is taken. Finally, the nurse must use the EHR to scan the patient's armband and the medication barcode. If there is any discrepancy, the medication is not given until the issue is resolved.

From a user perspective, I can now create notes and write orders faster than I could in a paper world, even with dictation. Most docs use a combined template/voice recognition approach which works well. There has been a great deal of work in the Epic world (one of the largest EHR systems) to increase efficiency and improve the user experience.

Are these systems perfect? Far from it. But things are better now, at least where I work, than this article makes it seem.

I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand, she didn't delay it until after the election which is wonderful. However, I am not confident that the trial will be over by the election. Trumps team will keep trying to delay the clock with jury selection, continuances, etc. which may push it bast the election.

Physician here. The psychological impacts of gender identity issues are very real and would occur even if society was 100% accepting of trans people. Sadly, society is not which makes it worse. These folks need and deserve healthcare. That care involves not only helping them work through their journey, but also supporting it with psychiatric care, hormonal options, and in some cases, surgical treatment. Transphobes make it sound like society is allowing minors to be injured by these practices. This couldn't be further from the truth.

Puberty blocking medications are a reversible option for adolescents. If they determine that they would like to proceed with their biological identity later, the meds are stopped and their puberty ensues. Very few minors receive any type of gender reassignment surgery. Most of the time, patients will start with hormonal treatment and pursue surgical options when they are done growing and usually when they are over 18. But there are exceptions.

Putting extra negative attention on people going through this and limiting their treatment options is draconian and must stop.