nostrum420
Well-known member
Not at all.
Then how are you not also, on some level, a hypocrite? All violence is hypocritical.
Not at all.
Then how are you not also, on some level, a hypocrite? All violence is hypocritical.
When there's a vote that Bernie knows is going to pass with or without him he tries to do some good by working in decent amendments. In this case he supported the bill only once the violence against women act was included.
If I shoot three old ladies in the head and help one across the street, we're really only going to focus on the good deed? You're using different standards for Tulsi vs Bernie. I see them both as bad choices, but she checked more boxes for me.
I am a hypocrite. Everybody is. Violence is only hypocritical if you're against violence.
If it were up to him no old ladies would be shot but if his colleagues are going to shoot 3 anyway, he can vote against that and 3 get shot or he can try to work in getting the 4th one across the street.
To be clear though, I don't think Bernie is perfect but I have a hard time seeing how he doesn't check the most boxes for just about everyone.
I honestly have no idea what youre talking about anymore, lol. No idea if what youre saying is even true but when the country doesnt have a unifying leader and instead has a bozo nimwit it makes complete sense that the country would turn to someone else.
It looks like generally Bernie's ok with some interventionism as part of a NATO resolution. IDK, where that falls against anyone's personal feelings on interventionism but in the grand scheme of American politics, I think it's a pretty reasonable position.
You and I disagree on the morals regarding wealth. I don't think you're wrong, we just have different opinions on it. Since that is a huge part of Bernie's stance, we're just never going to agree on him. He seems like a good guy and I admire his dedication, but I don't agree with his stances on distribution of wealth.
You and I disagree on the morals regarding wealth. I don't think you're wrong, we just have different opinions on it. Since that is a huge part of Bernie's stance, we're just never going to agree on him. He seems like a good guy and I admire his dedication, but I don't agree with his stances on distribution of wealth.
You cant claim to support "some" interventionism with a group that should have massive war tribunals against them.
If we had the modern day Nuremberg trials today, NATO would be the primary defendents and its leaders would be sent to spend the rest of their days bunking beds in GITMO.
And I dont mean this immorality is Bernie's intent, just that I think he is so wrong on this.
Yeah, I still have to prove that rich people are actually, quite often, terrible for the economy. I haven't forgotten I was just shocked to find there wasn't much already written on the subject that I could quickly google so I'm actually going to have to write an article from scratch.
It's a prisoner's dilemma. Unfortunately, I don't think it's politically tenable to be as much of a Dove as you guys might like and still get anywhere. Trying to get NATO on board vs supporting unilateral US intervention at least sets some kind of standard that you can politically effectively hold your opposition's feet to the fire on.
In what way am I a dove?
Just that IIRC you praised Tulsi for being a dove (as opposed to a [war] "hawk" if you're not familiar with the political-ese)
I am clear on the definition of dove and hawk. I have never written the word dove in regard to Tulsi or anybody else on this forum. Her stance on war isn't one of my top reasons for picking her out of the steaming pile of contenders. Being in favor of basing targets on actual intelligence doesn't make somebody a dove. I prefer to base phenomena like war and the economy on data, not emotions.
In the grand scheme of things, in US politics, that still puts her on the dove-ish side but so does pushing for a coalition instead of unilateral action.
Can you clarify that last statement?
Dope!
***fixed***
Why would we want a dope for President?
Because any dope would make out to be a significant upgrade from the current delusional feeble minded imbecile born on planet Uranus stenching up the Oval Office with the smell of decaying turtles.
I’d vote for a lint brush over him.
I’d vote for a lint brush over 99% of US politicians to be fair. Doing literally nothing is preferable to what most politicians are doing.I’d vote for a lint brush over him.
I’d vote for a lint brush over 99% of US politicians to be fair. Doing literally nothing is preferable to what most politicians are doing.
damn, NY now has more cases than Washington. That might be due to NY actually testing their people though! Johns Hopkins has a pretty good tracker for cases Invalid Link Removed
damn, NY now has more cases than Washington. That might be due to NY actually testing their people though! Johns Hopkins has a pretty good tracker for cases Invalid Link Removed
possibly, but we still don't know enough about long-term effects and won't know until years down the road. Sometimes our immune systems make a bad situation worse. I'm shocked the media has been tossing the term "cytokine storm" around since it would make for good headlines.Id bet by now alot of people had it come and go and they will have never known.
possibly, but we still don't know enough about long-term effects and won't know until years down the road. Sometimes our immune systems make a bad situation worse. I'm shocked the media has been tossing the term "cytokine storm" around since it would make for good headlines.
possibly, but we still don't know enough about long-term effects and won't know until years down the road. Sometimes our immune systems make a bad situation worse. I'm shocked the media has been tossing the term "cytokine storm" around since it would make for good headlines.
I never knew these types of viruses can have effects down the road. I just assumed once you beat it out and have anti-bodies your set until you come across something else or have something such as age compromise your immune system. I have alot to learn.
For younger people in relatively good shape and with no underlying medical issues, that's usually the case. For them it's whatever doesn't kill you, makes you stronger. For the rest of us it's whatever doesn't kill us, makes it easier for the next thing!
I keep seeing patient cases published and extremely short clinical trials, but we're just not going to know until it's all over. To me it's all the more reason to have a global agreement on these diseases and what the response should be. If somebody pulls the crap China did again by covering it up, they need to be lined up and shot.
Using my broscience, vaccines therefore can theoretically make it easier for the next thing as well. Isnt it the same process here? What didnt kill you now that your body overcame makes it easier for the next thing? Although obviously broscience tells me your not getting shot as hard building anti-bodies for vaccines. Then again, we are all getting more and more vaccines so this is a big accumulation here.
So what I am saying here, if they make a vaccine for this we really dont know the long term effects years down the road with either that or getting the real thing. Although at least you get to live to find out!!!!!!!
Vaccines have to go through clinical trials like anything else. Invalid Link Removed
Trials for these are usually like a year to a year and a half. Any immune response damage is going to show up by then and the patients get fully tested. There's always going to be some people though that just have weird immune responses and are screwed either way.
Although I should say this is why Trump claiming to fast-track things and get rid of regulations could end up quite bad. We won't get thalidomide flipper babies, but we will get vaccines that don't work properly.
Oh when you said long term I thought like you meant decades down the road.
So Im now understanding those who had or going to get the virus now may have something haunt them within a few years after they thought all was well passed.
If thats the case they need to talk about this more, people need to know for a fact they got it and testing should be more extensive. This sounds like an important fact to know in your medical history in case weird things happen and then if the patient doesnt bring up or was aware they had that virus, diagnosis can get more complicated than needs to be.
That in all honesty has me paranoid as I was hearing him saying it. This sounds like the risk reward is losing its Yin and Yang. Also, I always follow the green, and although Im not saying this is the case here, people should be aware. And at the same time, it should be profitable, thats how some of the best talent gets attracted in various fields.
When are we gonna get our free stuff???
Being that I’m married it looks like They are gonna give me 2 bags....wwwwhhhiiippppiiieeeeeee!
Invalid Link Removed
The hypocrisy of Washington....keep selling them Princesses of Saudi's weapons and technology so they can obliterate Coronovirus in Yemen by wiping out their entire civilization with guns and bombs before Coronavirus does!!!!
Invalid Link Removed
I also haven't seen any follow-up on the mass arrests in Saudi Arabia, including members of the royal family.