The Board of Governors can remove the Postmaster General with a vote.

USC Title 39, Section 202: “© The Governors shall appoint and shall have the power to remove the Postmaster General, who shall be a voting member of the Board. His pay and term of service shall be fixed by the Governors.”

Picture-in-picture is one of those things that should only happen when I explicitly ask for it, in my opinion.

If you don’t laugh, you’ll cry :)

To be fair, it’s been ignored for so long it might as well be a secret weapon.

Agreed on the first part, but I’m not sure I agree on the second - the FOP is the best union in the country in terms of protecting its members.

Interesting. Well, I’m glad you don’t have anti-vaxxers, because they are alive and well here, even in a pretty progressive city like mine.

The elderly have almost certainly gotten every booster available to them, understandably, and I’m not so sure about the young. A confounding factor is that most of my friends work at least somewhat remotely, and so only the people who have to see other people in person are masked up.

I have heard the same about the new strains (i.e. more contagious but less serious), but the two people I know who have contracted it this year have both been on their ass for at least a day or two. Add on top of that that we still don’t fully understand Long Covid…

In terms of voting population? I imagine 50 is the split point.

From what I understand (person living in the US in their 30s), pretty much everyone I know has gotten the vaccine and 2 boosters. But (allegedly) because insurance companies are no longer footing the bill, pharmacies are stonewalling people asking for the next booster. I know three people who have separately been in contact or contracted the new Covid strain, all of whom couldn’t get the latest booster.

Republicans will guzzle from the spigot of federal highway funding no problem. It’s just when there’s funds available to actually have a positive effect on their communities that they decide they’re fiscally conservative.

You’re just proving my point… MBFC marks Reuters as very slightly left of center in terms of bias. If you think that Reuters is actually center-right, then you agree with me. You’re clearly either not reading what I’m saying, or trying to push a point, either way I’m done here.

What does it being world news have to do with it? My comment was that if MBFC marks the Associated Press, one of the most neutral news sources in the world alongside perhaps Reuters, as center-left, then naturally you should adjust all their judgments slightly to the right.

Judging by their faceroll username, they’re not.

Again, the only non-rambling concern I’ve seen about MBFC is that they are staunchly pro-Israel. What evidence do you have that they’re “far-right”? Calling AP center-left is a slight bias shift, but certainly not enough for me to call them far-right.

If that’s really your complaint, then if it’s not about Israel or Hamas, then I don’t see why we can’t use it.

You kinda have to shift everything they put slightly to the right - if AP is center-left, then I don’t know what to say anymore.

The usual complaint that I see people bring up is that the people behind it have a pro-Israel bias. But for a quick glance, it’s fine. The issue is that on Reddit, you’d have like 5 bot replies for 1000 human replies, and on Lemmy you’ll have 3 for 15 of the same, so they stand out more. In my opinion, anyway.

Be glad you’re not dead, then.

Damned if you suck, damned if you don’t.

They’ve destroyed that themselves, no need for us to help.

It’s the only way to get an actually unbiased take of an article. It’s not that long.