rcummings

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

No truer words have ever been spoken.

Especially because it's based on a premise that isn't actually a fact. 

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Bias and more bias.  My post went over your head.

I offer hard evidence. You offer a characterization. This is your idea of a rebuttal?

3 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

Source? 

What amazing to me is that you don't know this. It's very old news. Clearly you inhabit an almost hermetically sealed news bubble. Does the phrase "pre-existing conditions" mean anything to you?

https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/chart-book-accomplishments-of-affordable-care-act#:~:text=Thanks to the Affordable Care,people have gained health coverage.&text=The ACA put in place,with pre-existing health conditions.

https://fortune.com/2018/11/15/obamacare-americans-with-health-insurance-uninsured/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-healthcare-obama/obama-20-million-americans-insured-thanks-to-obamacare-idUSKCN0W52KF

Next you'll be expressing doubt that voters in 5 red states authorized by referendums the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare.

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Don't recall you holding off "celebrating" whenever a shred of something potentially positive to Trump or negative to his opponents is reported on. Even when such things are mere rumors, or musings by Trump himself. This whole wait-and-see thing....you're doing it wrong.

And take the Clinesmith case. Just because he was found guilty by a jury, does that mean he's really guilty if he plans to appeal the verdict to a higher court? Guess not.

18 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I will admit that I am in disagreement over how he handles his criticisms.  I am in agreement that many of his responses to criticisms are justified and spot on.  The MSM, for instance, is fake news and a threat to the country as they create and promote false information to purposely mislead the people for their own ends.  I, though, would take a different tact in exposing them for what they are.

 

It's my opinion that the nastiness, from either side, is destructive.  It's a wedge that will keep Americans divided for as long as it's used.  It might come as a surprise to you but I believe there are people who desire and work towards keeping Americans divided against each other.  A shame that more people don't recognize that fact.

 

I'm a liberal and you're a conservative.  I'm a Republican and you're a Democrat.  We are at odds with each other and must eternally fight each other for we are sworn enemies.  You know, that kind of bullsh!t that people have fallen for.  Give it up and understand that both parties are two heads of the same snake.  Neither is truly fighting for the people.  No doubt some genuinely are but in the grander scheme we aren't in the club and never will be, as the insightful George Carlin famously quipped.

 

20 million people who previously had no health insurance got coverage thanks to Obamacare before the covid virus hit. Millions more who lost their jobs have gotten it since thanks to obamacare. Trump is trying to destroy obamacare and has offered nothing with which to replace it. Tell those people who are now protected that it makes no difference who's running the government.

30 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Because I'm not a Trump hater and don't share your bias towards him.  I look at things objectively.  That causes me to see things differently and without a pre-choosen slant.  So I have no ire towards Trump on this issue.

 

I'm glad that you admit to the utter nastiness that's displayed here towards Trump.  Those of us not in the Trump hating club have been pointing it out for a long time.

Now that I think about it, you may have a point. I was not the best-behaved child out there. But when people came to complain about my alleged misdeeds, and that happened frequently, my Mom would say, "Not my child. He would never do anything like that. He's a good boy." Anyway, thanks Mom for always being so unbiased.

11 hours ago, oompie69 said:

Public Liability Cover is normally part of any short-term insurance policy contract that businesses take out to protect them from negative financial effects should they be litigated against in the course of normal business activities.  As this company has its head office in England, I assume that they would have such a policy. So, in the event of claims they would be covered by their insurance policy.

Why should the shareholders be protected at the expense of the population at large who might have no choice but to get the vaccine?

And they are going to make a ton of money for their shareholders if they get out of the gate a lot earlier than their competitors.

I personally think setting a precedent with this type of waiver is not the right way to go.

Who is going to be compelling anyone to get vaccinated?

As pointed out above, Astra-Zeneca is charging very little for an innoculation: US$4 

It's governments that are pushing for the companies to act fast. So if anyone should be doing the indemnifying, it's them.

5 hours ago, Skallywag said:

Haven't read replies, yet I would think it very easy to get Trump returns from the IRS, instead of waiting for POTUS.  Seems simple to me, get a copy from the IRS where they are filed.

Against the law. Tax return privacy is very strictly protected. That said, there is a law that allows the chairperson of the House Ways and Means Committee to look at them. Trump has resisted.

5 minutes ago, Rancid said:

Cruel with no principles? Can see why he went into politics. The only difference I see is that Trump entered politics very rich, rather than just suspiciously getting that way while in office...

 

The one I really like is the $talking$ circuit where former presidents get paid a fortune from bankers and large companies for speeches no one is interested in. At least in Asia they are straight forward about their corruption.

And what 20th or 21st century President got suspiciously wealthy while in office? And what other President wealthy before he got into office refused to put his holdings in a blind trust? Who actually profited from being guarded by the Secret Service? Who pushed for his own resort to play host to the G7?

4 hours ago, Aspaltso said:

Nor Cal, and the entire state for that matter are in a downward trajectory for just about every metric available. Tragic for one of the most incredible places on earth to fall so much, and most of its due to self-inflicted political suicide.

Except maybe for this minor one?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CARGSP

California's GDP at about 40% over the last 10 years. The US GDP grew about 23%. If that's your idea of a downward trajectory, then most of the rest of the country's economy is in freefall.

4 hours ago, JCauto said:

Well, no, actually. I was just poking gentle fun at you.

But the main point, which somehow managed to avoid your attention, was to ask "do you have a link to that unsubstantiated and unlikely claim that"

 

"Postal voting leads to fraud, indeniable. 20% of New Jersey Primary votes were refused, and a large percentage went missing.""

Evidence please.

It was a municipal election. And despite a lesser degree of ballot security than would be the case in statewide elections, the perpetrators were caught.

1 hour ago, Smigel said:

During obamas second term, he had 12000 - 14000 mailboxes removed and not replaced. Can I assume you were suitably outraged on that occasion.? 

 

And was there a pandemic in progress at the time that threatened turnout for an upcoming election?

2 hours ago, Smigel said:

Of course in his eight years in the White House, the Great Obama never once appointed anyone for their political affiliation.

 

The post office corporation is by its charter supposed to be different. So much so that political appointees of Trump aren't even supposed to be in meetings with members of the board. Mnuchin got around this by meeting with each member separately. They had hired a headhunting firm to come up with candidates. Instead they appointed someone with obvious and huge financial conflicts  who is also heavily involved in Trump's re-election

4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Where in my post above did I say I knew Trump better than his sister knows him?

 

Go ahead and refute my own personal experience regarding these matters and believe, without any knowledge or evidence (unless you want to produce it) that Trump's sister does indeed know her brother.  100% certain.  LOL  On what basis?

If, in fact, she had shared a home with Trump for many years, your point would just just be silly. But since they grew up apart...oh wait a minute.

1 hour ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

She was already a federal district judge when Donald was elected president....it could be she's bitter he didn't elevate her to an appellate or supreme court judgeship. 

Or it could just possibly be that she was already semi-retired by the time he became President.

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

So many false statements in your post above that it's difficult to find a place to begin.  I could point them out but you would just deny or spin.

 

Just some of the quotes from recent threads:

 

"They’re currently at Power-Buy/Walmart buying up all the ‘Plasmas’ they can lay their hands on."

 

"Just where did this bloated, blowhard, idiot of a man get his medical degree from. I need a second opinion on my strange disease and would like to book an appointment."

 

"Probably still busy laughing about the ingestion of disinfectants and uv lights!"

 

"The nonsense this man comes out with. His narcissism was bad enough, but now paranoia is setting in as well."

 

"Well, i "heard" it's the blood of virgins that must be injected into the lungs, for a cleaning, or perhaps brought into the body, somehow.  and now you've "heard" it, too."

 

"What amazes me is that his redneck followers cannot see what a fool he is, come on rednecks, OPEN YOUR EYES AND EARS!..........Maybe there is no hope for them either!"

 

No, this isn't ridicule at all.  These are intelligent responses expressing concern as to the efficacy of convalescent plasma, that's all.  And no, the sky isn't blue.  LOL

These quotes are all so nasty, they could have been composed by Trump himself.

And if false statements about plasma are your concern, why is none of that righteous ire directed at Trump?

12 minutes ago, scammed said:

the phrase 'scientific consensus' has no useful meaning in science and are in fact detrimental to our understanding of reality, it discourages the seeking of the truth.

 

a good example of this is the scientific consensus that newton had nailed gravity, and einstein was discouraged to pond the problem of gravity.  but einstein being einstein kept at it, and came up with a theory that better described the mechanism of gravity then newton.

 

mind you 100 german scientists published the first 'scientific consensus' that einstein was wrong, to which einstein responded "why 100 when only 1 would do if they were right"

If what you were saying were true, then there would be no such things as scientific advancement at all since no hypothesis would have no greater value than any other.  

And, in fact, Newton's theory is good enough to guide space probes all the way to Pluto. 

And citing a million-to-one exception to buttress your case means you should consult a phenomenon labeled as "innumeracy".

And you still haven't shown how being guided by scientific consensus is somehow bullying.

Just now, scammed said:

yes, especially infants that scream non stop should in a perfect world

have a conscript at all times that see to it that the infant obey directives,

mobilize the army i say

If it were necessary for the world to be perfect to accomplish things, nothing would ever get done. A good enough world is sufficient.

3 minutes ago, scammed said:

no, my argument is that below 12 humans will spit out every bit as much virus

as your typical adult. and if you thought 'scientific consensus' has value,

youd be wrong, that wording only apply to politics or bullying and has no place in science

If most epidemiologists agree that masks work, how is that bullying? Most biologists believe that humans evolved from earlier great apes. Does that mean that creationists are being bullied?

3 minutes ago, scammed said:

i meant, that all children will be coughing, screaming and mess around with their masks

every bit as much as adults, children below age 12 will not be less contagious,

not even infants, if anything, their endless screams should blow out more virus then your average adult

So your argument is that masks don't work. The scientific consensus is against you.