The post title asks you to look at the "biggest bar," which seems to imply that the biggest bars - children - must be targeted. OccamsTeapot population graph is important context because, as war-crimey as indiscriminantly bombing civilian populations is, intentionally targeting children feels so much like comic-book villany that people dismiss it as propaganda.
They do look pretty similar to me, but can't say without numbers. Keeping in mind the population graph is a couple years old - half of a bar height - they both show a minor peak/inflection around age 30 that's maybe 2/3 of the major peak around 5. Babies seem to be spared from the bombing, but that could be fewer births or increased non-violent infant mortality.
IMO, it's not a great data set to claim Israelis are intentionally targeting children, but it is pretty good for saying they are not intentionally targeting military-age men.
There's a lot more than Fox out there echoing the narrative that times are hard, inflation is killing you, and there aren't enough homes to go around. Wapo and NYT would happily recount Trump's claims that it's because immigrants are taking all the houses and jobs while Biden policies are making everything expensive. Doesn't matter if they follow up with long-winded explanations that his claims aren't true, because most people stop listening when they hear there's someone to blame.
Fun fact: in the boiling frog experiment, the frogs were 'pithed.' Jam a stick in their skull and scramble their brain.
Frog spinal cords have a lot of reflexes. They'll use one leg to wipe a painful stimulus off the other. They'll jump. But they accommodate pretty quickly and won't get excited enough to jump out of slowly warming water. Gotta have a brain for that.
Recounted here: https://archive.org/details/studiesfrombiol00martgoog/page/398/mode/2up
Original ref: Goltz, F. 1869. Beiträge zur Lehre von den Functionen der Nervencentren des Frosches. Berlin, 1869, p. 127, etc Which is actually online: https://ia801200.us.archive.org/15/items/b22344937/b22344937.pdf
The filibuster is just a Senate rule, though, which they can rewrite any time they like (though usually only after an election).
The 2017 repeal effort used a budget reconciliation mechanism that is not subject to filibuster. In fact, a lot of the 2017 legislative awfulness used the budget reconciliation hack, where the Senate can change laws in order to 'balance the budget,' so long as (by convention) they don't change policy. 2017 repeal, of course, famously failed because John McCain thought they shouldn't use that process and voted against it.
Yeah, my niece, who is generally a worldly, progressive person, was talking about this guy whom she's not ready to call 'boyfriend' yet, and part of that description was, "he's, like, super into Hitler."
Doesn't that seem like kind of a red flag? ??
Autonomy is not "given."
Dems definitely lack a coherent, interesting economic message. Any new proposal - medicare for all, UBI - immediately gets sucked into a quagmire of details. Turning to Republicans for the votes they need to win in general elections has been such a consistently losing strategy that I have no idea why they keep doing it.
Meanwhile Republicans keep running on "You feel poor and it's Their fault," continues to resonate, for varying definitions of "Them," as long as GOP is out-of-power. It's simple. It feels good. It completely absolves them of needing any policy more complicated than "Get rid of Them." It's a winning strategy as much as the Dems have a losing strategy.
Look how tight the labor market got when COVID took a million people out of the workforce. Trump's talking about deporting 10 million workers and customers. You will absolutely see it, although it may be hard to connect the dots.
They released doorbell video of the incident. Dude's running through the neighborhood, half naked, yelling incoherently. Runs up to the home, pounds on the door, rolls around on the porch, still yelling, something about his girlfriend. Bath salts type of crazy.
One national election every four years is enough for me. I can't even imagine what the campaigns for judges with the power to rewrite the Constitution through creative interpretation would look like, but if they can put Trump in the White House, they could put him on the Supreme Court.
Term limits. Active oversight. Maybe go back to requiring 60+ votes to confirm so the GOP can't shove the Federalist Society hack-of-the-day through with a simple majority.
Yeah, rereading your text, I may have confused all the negatives and inferred that you support the post's implication that they're targeting children, but I meant to comment on the data in the context of 'biggest bar,' not to criticize opinions. Seeing OP's chart, the first thing I wanted was a population chart, and I'm glad you'd already provided one.