Supreme Court plays coward. Get raped in Texas and u can be forced to have the baby.

[Leftfield 2,660]

2 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The media are the ones that started this ridiculous death count and totally quit when Biden took office.  I’m just pointing out the difference in perception of that ridiculous metric in blaming the President for deaths due to a virus.

If a person is vaccinated and has increased his chance of survival of the virus, why would he blame someone that has chosen not to be vaccinated?  The unvaccinated have made their choice and the results are on them.

I have not once noticed the media failing to update the death total. I guess one of us is watching the wrong media.

You're entire argument here shows a basic lack of understanding as to how viruses work. I'm sure you have been told this over and over, without apparently listening (or again, ignoring):  the main point of vaccination is to prevent a person from becoming infected to begin with, because if the virus finds a safe harbor, it will continue to spread and mutate. The more mutation, the more likely it is that vaccines will become less effective. And no vaccine is 100% effective to begin with, which means there will already be breakthrough cases. The more safe harbors, the greater the chance for things to go wrong. Every person that chooses not to get vaccinated is prolonging the pandemic and endangering others. Why is this so difficult to grasp?

 

11 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

As for the unity of purpose; we have a common foe and it’s the virus, yet both sides are blaming others for not controlling and eliminating the virus.  Joe made some campaign promises that were unattainable just like every other President has made during their campaigns.  It also fair game to call him on those promises. 

Absolutely, it's fair to call someone out on a failed promise. Just don't complain when they do something you don't like to correct it.

 

18 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 Leaders are suppose to influence people to do the right thing.  If you have to force them to do it, you’re not leading.

Agreed. Now show me a President that has never had to use force.

[Leftfield 2,660]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Immigration policy, both at the Southern boarder and recently the un-vetted Afghan refugees.

Allowing Covid positive illegal immigrants into the nation during a pandemic he promised to eliminate.

The withdrawal from Afghanistan is too broad a subject get into detail, but it was a disaster.

His trying to spend his way out of the looming inflation is a policy yet to be seen by the general public.

and it’s only 8 months into his Presidency.

Try to focus. We're talking about the pandemic, not every single thing he's done as President.

And the fact that you're blaming illegal immigration as the primary fueler of the pandemic tells me all I need to know.

 

10 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I believe he just did insult and humiliate everyone that have not been vaccinated.  

How?

[AU9377 5,039]

36 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The man could not bring this country together just by his words so he is now mandating policy and blaming fellow Americans for his troubles.  He is even attaching Governors as part of the problem.  Can he take any responsibility for his failed policies?

It is difficult for someone that has been labeled a left wing socialist and a walking vegetable to convince someone that believes those things to do anything.  You accuse him of attacking governors.  He argues that his actions are to protect educators and children when they are faced with governors that won't allow them to protect themselves and their school systems by having simple mask requirements.

Look at the blatant political hypocrisy we have seen today.  AL Governor Ivey has been vocal in her disgust of the number of people not getting vaccinated and the harm they are causing the state.  However, after Biden announces these requirements, she joins the chorus screaming of an over reach.  That is not about what is good or not.  That is nothing but politics.  Biden says it, so they immediately oppose it.  It has nothing to do with the fight against the virus.  This type of political pandering is a sickness in the Republican party.  It may give short term boosts, but in the end it will destroy the country and certainly the party.

[I_M4_AU 8,000]

1 minute ago, Leftfield said:

And the fact that you're blaming illegal immigration as the primary fueler of the pandemic tells me all I need to know.

You need to focus, I didn’t mention it was the primary fueler of the pandemic or even it was a factor. Your response is all I need to know.

 

11 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

How?

Really.  Joe is losing patients with the unvaccinated and just ordered a vaccine mandate.

 

 

[Leftfield 2,660]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

You need to focus, I didn’t mention it was the primary fueler of the pandemic or even it was a factor. Your response is all I need to know.

Oooo...used my own words against me. How clever!

You didn't mention a single other failed policy of his regarding the pandemic. Please now tell me which of his failed pandemic policies are the primary drivers of the problem.

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Really.  Joe is losing patients with the unvaccinated and just ordered a vaccine mandate.

To you that is insulting and humiliating?

By chance are you someone that frequently calls others "snowflakes?"

[CoffeeTiger 5,179]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

 

Really.  Joe is losing patients with the unvaccinated and just ordered a vaccine mandate.

 

 

 

What did he say that was incorrect? If it's embarrassing and insulting for Biden to point out that our hospitals are being flooded with unvaccinated covid patients, and that the unvaccinated are helping keep the virus spreading and mutating, I don't see how that is wrong or bad on Bidens part. 

 

If the truth offends you then maybe you need to reassess your views. 

[I_M4_AU 8,000]

10 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

That is not about what is good or not.  That is nothing but politics.  Biden says it, so they immediately oppose it.  It has nothing to do with the fight against the virus.  This type of political pandering is a sickness in the Republican Party.  It may give short term boosts, but in the end it will destroy the country and certainly the party.

I have said all along it was political.  You have no argument here. To the bolded part; where were you during the last year of Trump’s Presidency?  There wasn’t many things Trump did that didn’t result in backlash from the Democrats.  They held up Cuomo as the savior of all things Covid and, as you know, his policies were killing older Americans.

Republicans have their issues, but you have to realize the Democrats have issues of their own.

[CoffeeTiger 5,179]

21 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I have said all along it was political.  You have no argument here. To the bolded part; where were you during the last year of Trump’s Presidency?  There wasn’t many things Trump did that didn’t result in backlash from the Democrats.

Ummmm....Because Trumps entire response to the pandemic was to dismiss it, pretend it wasn't anything to worry about, and was about to go away on it's own, and constantly "brag" about how good his administration was handling things even as cases and deaths started to sky rocket.  As things went south he just blamed individual (Democratic) Governors for not being completely prepared for Covid, and that it shouldn't be the Federal Governments responsibility to help them.

Fauci was the only person in the Trump Administration  that was taking Covid seriously and advocating for mitigation and warning about the future of the virus, and he was and still is universally reviled by Republicans because of it. 

 

The things that Trump Did do right at the tail end of his presidency, like the pandemic relief bills and development of the vaccine was supported by Democrats.

 

Quote

 

 They held up Cuomo as the savior of all things Covid and, as you know, his policies were killing older Americans.

Republicans have their issues, but you have to realize the Democrats have issues of their own.

And yet 

Trump is the presumed 2024 nominee for President and the undisputed leader of the Republican party.

Cuomo is a political pariah who has been forced out of office and no longer has any influence on anything. 

 

Yes, the Democrats do have issues, but they clearly are much better about trying to address their issues and solve problems than most Republicans are, who prefer to celebrate failure and pretend that everything is fine and no problems need solving. 

 

Edited September 10, 2021 by CoffeeTiger

[I_M4_AU 8,000]

9 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Oooo...used my own words against me. How clever!

I though so too.

10 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

You didn't mention a single other failed policy of his regarding the pandemic. Please now tell me which of his failed pandemic policies are the primary drivers of the problem

Joe has had no clear policy on Covid. He has let an unelected bureaucrat guide his every decision and that has resulted in policies that change every week or so.  If you’re vaccinated you are protected and you can live your life.  No wait, you must wear a mask indoors even if you are vaccinated, no wait. You must wear a mask when outdoors when you can’t practice social distancing even if you are vaccinated.

Why would anybody believe anything the CDC tells them?  Biden can’t take that information and make his own mind up as what to do.

The primary driver of the Pandemic is the virus.  There just is different views of how best to handle the pandemic.

[Leftfield 2,660]

35 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Joe has had no clear policy on Covid.

So you say his policies have failed, yet can't point to a policy. Got it.

35 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

He has let an unelected bureaucrat guide his every decision and that has resulted in policies that change every week or so.

Assuming you're talking about Fauci here? Are you saying that the head of NAIAD should be an elected official? Or that Biden shouldn't be taking his lead from the preeminent expert on infectious diseases in the middle of a pandemic?

35 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 If you’re vaccinated you are protected and you can live your life.  No wait, you must wear a mask indoors even if you are vaccinated, no wait. You must wear a mask when outdoors when you can’t practice social distancing even if you are vaccinated.

I won't defend the CDC and Fauci's messaging to be universally awesome, but to anyone willing to listen it's usually easy to follow. As to why it sometimes changes, well that would be because the situation changes. The example you give above was due to the emergence of the Delta variant. That emergence changed things dramatically (and oh-by-the-way has led to the current spike, leading to many of the deaths you attribute to Biden). It seems that so many who claim it's impossible to follow the recommendations just figure it's best to do nothing at all.

35 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The primary driver of the Pandemic is the virus. 

I don't recall that being one of Biden's policies.

Edited September 10, 2021 by Leftfield

[wdefromtx 3,159]

Well if people want the government to force vaccinations on people then they should be fine with the government telling people they cannot have an abortion......

 

[I_M4_AU 8,000]

5 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Assuming you're talking about Fauci here? Are you saying that the head of NAIAD should be an elected official? Or that Biden shouldn't be taking his lead from the preeminent expert on infectious diseases in the middle of a pandemic?

No, he shouldn’t be an elected official and Fauci should be consulted about how best to handle the pandemic, its just Biden should be able to take that information and form a policy that will fight the virus while doing what’s best for America in terms of jobs and the economy.  In my opinion, he is only listening to Fauci.

 

10 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

I won't defend the CDC and Fauci's messaging to be universally awesome, but to anyone willing to listen it's usually easy to follow. As to why it sometimes changes, well that would be because the situation changes. The example you give above was due to the emergence of the Delta variant. That emergence changed things dramatically (and oh-by-the-way has led to the current spike, leading to many of the deaths you attribute to Biden). It seems that so many who claim it's impossible to follow the recommendations just figure it's best to do nothing at all.

Things change all the time with this virus, but is it in the public’s interest to throw out policy changes every week or so or would it be best to have more information before changing what was said just a few days ago?  The messaging from the CDC was disjointed and lead to the claims you mentioned of just to do nothing because it will change next week.  

 

16 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

I don't recall that being one of Biden's policies.

It wasn’t, the virus is the driver of the pandemic.  Not Biden’s policy or any Governor’s policy is the driver.  

[Leftfield 2,660]

5 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

No, he shouldn’t be an elected official and Fauci should be consulted about how best to handle the pandemic, its just Biden should be able to take that information and form a policy that will fight the virus while doing what’s best for America in terms of jobs and the economy.  In my opinion, he is only listening to Fauci.

In my opinion he's been doing the former. If we absolutely wanted to shut down the pandemic as quickly as possible, everyone would be at home right now, but that's not the case. I'm sure the economy is a factor in his decision-making.

 

13 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Things change all the time with this virus, but is it in the public’s interest to throw out policy changes every week or so or would it be best to have more information before changing what was said just a few days ago?  The messaging from the CDC was disjointed and lead to the claims you mentioned of just to do nothing because it will change next week.  

This is a severe exaggeration. The recommendations have not been changing weekly. The only major shifts have been very early on, when it became more clear how transmissible Covid was, then when cases began to abate and the vaccine was widely available, and then when Delta came along. Could the messaging have been more organized? Sure, but it certainly wasn't helped by all the skeptics and right-wing media who belittled any change as being an indication that the scientists had no idea what they were talking about and couldn't be trusted. Do you hear people who support mitigations strategies complaining about how poor the CDC's messaging is or how often it changes?

 

[CoffeeTiger 5,179]

41 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

This is a severe exaggeration. The recommendations have not been changing weekly. The only major shifts have been very early on, when it became more clear how transmissible Covid was, then when cases began to abate and the vaccine was widely available, and then when Delta came along. Could the messaging have been more organized? Sure, but it certainly wasn't helped by all the skeptics and right-wing media who belittled any change as being an indication that the scientists had no idea what they were talking about and couldn't be trusted. Do you hear people who support mitigations strategies complaining about how poor the CDC's messaging is or how often it changes?

 

This is just a cop out excuse for the anti-vaxxers anyway. If you look back, the truth is that none of the current anti-vaxxers ever trusted or followed anything Fauci or the CDC said or believed from day 1. 

1. Early on Covid was a fake, made up hoax that didn't exist.

2. Then it was just a light flu that had hardly killed anyone and plus the seasonal flue sometimes kills up to a whole  60,000 a year, which is an insane number that covid isnt even close to touching. 

3. Then is was a virus that ONLY affected the very elderly and people that were immunocompromised, so shutdowns and masks weren't needed because most of the population wouldn't be affected by it anyway, and saving the lives of the elderly isn't worth it if it costs businesses or investors money.

4. Then it was "the vaccines are unapproved and untested. it would be stupid to take them.

4. Now its, the vaccine really isn't effective anyway and is all about government control and..."socialism?"...and personal freedom to endanger other people. 

 

It's always going the be 'something' with these people. 

 

 

 

 

 

[AU9377 5,039]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

I have said all along it was political.  You have no argument here. To the bolded part; where were you during the last year of Trump’s Presidency?  There wasn’t many things Trump did that didn’t result in backlash from the Democrats.  They held up Cuomo as the savior of all things Covid and, as you know, his policies were killing older Americans.

Republicans have their issues, but you have to realize the Democrats have issues of their own.

People like my conservative parents did like Cuomo at that time.  That was because he was actually discussing what was happening and the seriousness of Covid-19.  At that time, what they were hearing from the White House was that this would disappear come summer.  Every bit of information coming from Trump's White House was being filtered thru him and every briefing turned into a show reminding people how great he was.  Cuomo needed to resign and he did.  That said, nobody actually believes that the man wanted older people to die.  That is ridiculous.  It is ironic that the far right wants to carry that line, yet they have a problem requiring nursing home employees to be vaccinated. 

[homersapien 11,447]

2 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Well if people want the government to force vaccinations on people then they should be fine with the government telling people they cannot have an abortion......

 

Well, you see, abortion is a totally different issue from a viral pandemic.

Government has a duty to protect us all from a disease that threatens everyone.  And if simply advising people to get vaccinated in order to achieve "herd immunity" fails, then the obvious next step is to make vaccinations mandatory.  In fact, we have a legal precedent for doing exactly that. (Jacobson v. Massachusetts)

Abortion on the other hand, is a personal decision of the woman and government has no duty or business to mandate that an individual must undergo pregnancy and birth (in your example).   

Hope that helps.

 

[Gowebb11 9,374]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Abortion on the other hand, is a personal decision of the woman and government has no duty or business to mandate that an individual must undergo pregnancy and birth (in your example).   

If those same women and their partners made better personal decisions on the front end the majority of abortions would be unnecessary. And that’s the unfortunate fact of this debate. But for some reason we only speak of personal liberties in this country, never personal responsibilities. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Well, you see, abortion is a totally different issue from a viral pandemic.

Government has a duty to protect us all from a disease that threatens everyone. One could argue that the government has a duty to protect everyone, including the unborn. And if simply advising people to get vaccinated in order to achieve "herd immunity" fails, then the obvious next step is to make vaccinations mandatory.  What happens if a woman gets pregnant even after the advisement of birth control? The next obvious step is to have the child and place it up for adoption. In fact, we have a legal precedent for doing exactly that. (Jacobson v. Massachusetts) Ironically Roe vs Wade was used the 14th Amendment as part of it's reasoning.  "Finally, the Court summarily announced that the “Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action” includes “a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy”573 and that “[t]his right of privacy . . . is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” So same can be said about one's decision whether or not to get the vaccine. In the purest sense....it is saying it is nobody else's business to know.  

Abortion on the other hand, is a personal decision of the woman and government has no duty or business Same for the government to mandate an individual to get vaccinated if they don't want too to mandate that an individual must undergo pregnancy and birth (in your example).   

Hope that helps. It does, because all your points essentially apply to the vaccinations.

This is why I find it so amusing to see the extremes of both sides arguing about this............

 

[AU9377 5,039]

5 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

If those same women and their partners made better personal decisions on the front end the majority of abortions would be unnecessary. And that’s the unfortunate fact of this debate. But for some reason we only speak of personal liberties in this country, never personal responsibilities. 

Because the sex police are a sign of a non-intrusive government?

[Gowebb11 9,374]

1 hour ago, AU9377 said:

Because the sex police are a sign of a non-intrusive government?

I said nothing about the government or sex police. What I said is factually true. Most abortions would be unnecessary if people were more responsible. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

9 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

I said nothing about the government or sex police. What I said is factually true. Most abortions would be unnecessary if people were more responsible. 

They want their cake and eat it too, but they can’t have it both ways with this. The forced vaccinations and the forced no-abortions are very similar when you strip them down to the very basics. It boils down to personal freedoms and privacy….if the law is to hold for one it needs to hold for both. 

[AU9377 5,039]

10 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

I said nothing about the government or sex police. What I said is factually true. Most abortions would be unnecessary if people were more responsible. 

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement.  However, that point doesn't justify this law.  We could also agree that if more people were responsible, we wouldn't have as many people with Type II diabetes or liver damage or heart disease.  If more people were responsible, we would have more kids growing up in 2 parent homes.  I could go on and on.  The point is that these things will happen. 

In 1945, it was commonplace for a young woman to get married at 16 and start a family.  Today, it is just as common for a young woman to be 26 or older and not be married.  Are we supposed to believe that people will abstain from sex during the most sexually active time in their lives?  We certainly can't make a judgment call based on someone's level of responsibility as to the amount of control over their own bodies they can have.

I am confident in the fact that if abortion impacted the degree of control a man has over his body, this would not be an issue at all.  All hell would break loose if the government stopped allowing the sale of viagra, much less something as serious as first trimester abortion.

[Gowebb11 9,374]

23 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement.  However, that point doesn't justify this law

FWIW, I don’t support the Texas law either. I also don’t believe Roe v Wade should be overturned. I believe abortion is an unfortunate necessary evil that we should all do everything in our power to minimize. And people making better decisions can do that. At times have abstained from sex when I couldn’t properly protect myself or partner.  It’s called self control and I absolutely can make a judgement on that. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

2 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

They want their cake and eat it too, but they can’t have it both ways with this. The forced vaccinations and the forced no-abortions are very similar when you strip them down to the very basics. It boils down to personal freedoms and privacy….if the law is to hold for one it needs to hold for both. 

I agree ICHY, a thumbs down is in order for all the hypocrisy!! 

[homersapien 11,447]

On 9/10/2021 at 1:48 PM, I_M4_AU said:

I have said all along it was political.  You have no argument here. To the bolded part; where were you during the last year of Trump’s Presidency?  There wasn’t many things Trump did that didn’t result in backlash from the Democrats.  They held up Cuomo as the savior of all things Covid and, as you know, his policies were killing older Americans.

Republicans have their issues, but you have to realize the Democrats have issues of their own.

Ironically enough, YOU are the one who is blatantly politicizing our pandemic response by trying to make Biden accountable for it.  Yet you cannot illustrate a Biden policy that does so.  The fact you obviously hate Biden has nothing to do with the debate on his actual policies, which are appropriate.

It is the unvaccinated who are fueling the rise in infections and hospitalizations.  Yet you seem determined to somehow argue that Biden is responsible. It's absurd.