Cambridge, Massachusetts, will post very general reminders on fuel pumps that burning fossil fuels is dangerous.

Asking individuals to conserve is inadequate to address the problem; it takes the government to mobilize a country for changes such as are needed. It takes a lot more than the feeble efforts made under Obama, which have now been reversed by the wrecker.

However, these frequent reminders of the danger we live under may help bring about the necessary action.

Two years ago, there was an upsurge in use of less gentle-sounding terms such as "global heating", but media seem to have backed down. Not me!

Biden hesitates to believe he has the authority to cancel student debt without Congress.

I am not a lawyer; I am not the one to judge whether the president has the authority to do this. But lawyers argue for that, and if it is plausible, he should try it.

*The IHRA censors Palestinians by design, not by accident.*

Some pro-occupation activists push the legal adoption of the IHRA's definition of antisemitism with the specific intention of shutting down Palestinians BDS campaign. They claim that even using the expression "Israeli apartheid" is "antisemitism".

That definition, which was designed for data analysis, is not suitable as a criterion for judging a statement as antisemitic or not.

*Biden’s Drug Czar Must Be Someone Willing to Diverge From Our Country’s Failed Drug War.*

I think we should treat any addictive recreational drug as dangerous. For instance, taking enough alcohol to make you tipsy is risking that the habit will develop, gradually over years, into alcoholism. (This does not happen to everyone, but you don't know how it will affect you.) And don't touch an opioid at all unless it is for physical pain you can't bear.

Drugs cause real problems, but prohibition doesn't fix them; rather, it swaps them for worse problems. Prohibition of alcohol only built the Mafia, and prohibition of opioids makes them more dangerous.

We should to treat drug use problems as medical problems and give the people afflicted treatment, not imprisonment.

Videos show Boston thugs attacking BLM protesters and spewing hatred at them.

The hatred is important because it tends to preclude acting like a police office rather than a thug.

I wonder whether the people who started the "violent protests" were real protesters, or right-wing provocateurs. We know that right-wing provocateurs did this in Minneapolis.

The provocateurs succeeded in leading real protesters to go berserk, and that may have poisoned the public's perception of the protests.

I have no specific information, but we know that right-wing extremists communicate around the country and even internationally. If it was effective in Minneapolis, they would surely have tried it in other cities.