President Biden says that 3,500,000,000,000 equals 0.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"it’s not over"

My point is, if "over" means no one can get covid anymore, then it will probably never be over. Never. You know how many viruses have effectively been eliminated? Any idea? One. O-N-E. 1. Smallpox.



It's a very common tactic among stupid people with a weak argument, to ignore what the person winning the argument actually said, and respond instead to something that I never came close to saying. When I'm debating someone who acts like I said something I never came close to saying, that means I won.

We have largely eradicated Polio, tetanus, Flu, Hepatitis A+B, Rubella, Hib, Measles, Pertussis, Rotavirus, Mumps, Chickenpox, Diphtheria and Pneumococcal Disease and completely eradicated smallpox and rinderpest. Widespread vaccination is responsible for that.

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

My 15 year old is vaccinated, so are my wife and I, I'm totally on board with the vaccine. All the data I've seen, say vaccines are effective at reducing the risk of getting seriously sick from covid. I don't see evidence that the vaccines are a great shield against getting covid.

"it’s not over"

My point is, if "over" means no one can get covid anymore, then it will probably never be over. Never. You know how many viruses have effectively been eliminated? Any idea? One. O-N-E. 1. Smallpox.

So we need to ask ourselves how much of what constitutes a normal childhood, are we willing to deny our children, for what may be no real benefit? We're probably all going to get covid at some point, maybe more than once, like the flu.

"don’t vaccinate your kids Home school them, drive your hog in mass without a helmet, screw paying the evil government taxes to fund the new order, light up a cigarette in your office and have all the freedom you want."

Yup, that's exactly what I said.

It's a very common tactic among stupid people with a weak argument, to ignore what the person winning the argument actually said, and respond instead to something that I never came close to saying. When I'm debating someone who acts like I said something I never came close to saying, that means I won.

Show me any large population of healthy, vaccinated people, and I guarantee that if you test all of them, many will test positive and don't feel sick. That's how this disease works. Huge numbers of people get it, very few get seriously sick.

Amazing. The side you support has no problem locking down healthy vaccinated people, but show zero concern when thousands of unvaccinated, untested illegals cross our border daily, and end up in our cities and towns.

Here, according to all the right-wing nuts at NBC news, 18% of illegal migrants tested, tested positive for covid. Almost 1 out of 5. And Democrats adamantly deny that there's any reason to be concerned that more than 150,000 illegals a month cross the southern border.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...itive-n1276244

Keep believing you have the winning argument haha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Harvard touted her widely as their first Native American law professor.

I believe she was listed once in a diversity report but not by name.

She exploited the genuine suffering of your people, in order to land a $400,000-a-year-job.

The two people at Harvard who recommended her for the job said they had no idea she thought she was a Native American and she was hired solely on her professional qualifications.

She excoriated banks for foreclosing. Yet she and her husband bought and flipped foreclosures. So it's only OK when she does it.

She didn't flip a single foreclosure Jim.

Then there's her whopper about getting fired form a school job for being pregnant (poor little lamb, so victimized by the evil men), when there's paperwork that she quit and the school board asked her to stay.

I looked into this one, seems like it's based off some school meeting minutes that were months before she would have been visible pregnant. Certainly doesn't invalidate her story.

Me think-um she want to dwell in house of Great White Chief. Ugh.

Pathetic.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The American Right’s “21st-century Leninism”

The dismissal of Steve Bannon — leading intellectual of the US alt-right — before the first anniversary of Trump’s presidency comes as false relief. In fact, Bannon’s White House adventure was only one stage of a long journey — the migration of revolutionary-populist language, tactics, and strategies from the left to the right. Bannon has reportedly said: “I’m a Leninist. Lenin … wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” But what does this Leninism consist of? In a complex democracy, Leninism can only maintain itself as a populism of the long revolution. For decades, social science has insisted that due to entrenched institutions, no third party can succeed in the US. This very “scientific fact” has enabled a smug self-certainty among liberal leftists and autonomists/anarchists (who find therein further justification for, respectively, their subservience to neoliberalism and evasion of organized politics). The American far right has subverted this “fact.” It was as if they were following directions from a 21st-century, condensed version of Lenin’s (1902) What is to Be Done?, starting with the sentence: “If you can’t build a party, paralyze the party; circumvent it; and take it over.” They did all three simultaneously. Our imaginary, revised What is to Be Done? would then continue: “Before you become the de jure leaders of the party, make sure all of its institutions are crippled.” If the Tea Party (a populist grouping among Republicans) had not already paralyzed the Republican establishment, the latter would have been able to stop Trump’s rise.

American right-wing populism is Leninism under democratic conditions. Unlike the Russian Bolsheviks who had to avoid almost all above-ground society and politics, American rightists embrace society. The revised What is to Be Done? would therefore say: “Organize in every cell of society. Don’t underestimate any venue of organization and politics, even if (especially if) it seems to belong to the enemy camp.” The right learned not to leave education, science, and culture to the monopoly of the left. “Appropriate the organizational terrain and ideology of your enemy, to the extent possible. Dismantle whatever you fail to appropriate.” Starting with Andrew Breitbart himself, the founder of the “alt-right” media outlet, the right read the Frankfurt School; it made healthcare a big deal; and with the rise of Trump and Bannon, it promises jobs and infrastructure.

Today the Leninist Right cannot ignore the existence of other potentially populist forces on the social map, however meager they may be. The 21st-century What is to Be Done? would thus conclude with the sentence: “If certain trenches of the enemy appear to be beyond the reach of any of these tactics, provoke its occupants into immature and illegitimate action.” As the alt-right descended on the University of California, Berkeley and other pockets of residual left-wing influence in early 2017, liberals came to their defense (in the name of “free speech”) when a far left without a mass base attacked them. Liberal enthusiasm for “free speech” diminished slightly after an alt-rightist drove a truck into an anti-racist crowd in Charlottesville, but the Washington Post still emphasized far left violence and the alt-right’s freedoms when the latter returned to Berkeley in September 2017. Many birds are killed with one stone: the enemy is divided; its confusion, lack of will, and weakness are exposed; its reputation is tarnished; and the far right itself is further galvanized.

Since “the state” today is more complex than any 20th-century definition could capture, “smashing” it involves much less dramatic action than in 1917, at least for now. We still don’t know what the right holds in store for the time when the existing institutions are completely incapacitated, but we may soon find out. Right after his resignation, Steve Bannon declared “war” on his enemies, adding gleefully that he is returning to his “weapons” (meaning electronic media). A populist revolution in a land of entrenched (if decaying) liberalism is an uphill battle, and is bound to suffer setbacks. But the show is far from over.

This is the kind of BS you thrive on. There was a series of TV ads some time ago created for Pabst beer in which something was almost but not quite accomplished, such as a football player being tackled just short of the end zone. And the broadcasters voice which spoke in a stereotyped Japanese accent would always determine that it was "crose enough!"

For you, it is a fact when the verbiage, somehow, is "crose enough" to appear true. Your linked verbiage, to begin with, is structured around something Bannon supposedly said, but which (even by Snopes) is unproven. There is no proof that Bannon said he is a Leninist. But it is "crose enough" that somebody claims Bannon said it.

Then the author of the verbiage spins a trail of unproven labels (such as Bannon being a " leading intellectual of the US alt-right"--he is not alt-right but is accused of being so--which is "crose enough") opinions, interpretations, and presumptions or possibilities, and conjectured attributions that could describe a whole lot of folks including those on the American political left--i.e. Democrats--and quotes not by Bannon, but all part of an overall bag of BS which somehow implies that Bannon is the grand contradiction-- an alt-right Leninist. At least "crose enough" to the possibility that it must be a fact.

You do this "crose enough" kind of $hit a lot.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I believe she was listed once in a diversity report but not by name.


The two people at Harvard who recommended her for the job said they had no idea she thought she was a Native American and she was hired solely on her professional qualifications.


She didn't flip a single foreclosure Jim.


I looked into this one, seems like it's based off some school meeting minutes that were months before she would have been visible pregnant. Certainly doesn't invalidate her story.


Pathetic.

"I believe she was listed once in a diversity report but not by name."

Of course you believe that, because it paints her actions favorably. WHat I believe, because it's true, is that Harvard did mention her by name to show the diversity of lhe law school faculty. From the Crimson Tide article below...

"Although the conventional wisdom among students and faculty is that the Law School faculty includes no minority women, Chmura said Professor of Law Elizabeth Warren is Native American."


https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1...ing-at-hls-pa/

"The two people at Harvard who recommended her for the job said they had no idea she thought she was a Native American"

You say they said. You also said they didn't mention her by name, so...

"She didn't flip a single foreclosure Jim. "

Yahoo, among others, says otherwise. I dare say you might want to re-think where you get your "news".

https://news.yahoo.com/news/harsh-fo...ycsrp_catchall

"I looked into this one, seems like it's based off some school meeting minutes that were months before she would have been visible pregnant. Certainly doesn't invalidate her story. "

Which took place "months before she was visibly pregnant"? If she quit before she was visibly pregnant, how could they have fired her for being pregnant?

Again, your sources of "news" are a tad askew.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

This is the kind of BS you thrive on. There was a series of TV ads some time ago created for Pabst beer in which something was almost but not quite accomplished, such as a football player being tackled just short of the end zone. And the broadcasters voice which spoke in a stereotyped Japanese accent would always determine that it was "crose enough!"

For you, it is a fact when the verbiage, somehow, is "crose enough" to appear true. Your linked verbiage, to begin with, is structured around something Bannon supposedly said, but which (even by Snopes) is unproven. There is no proof that Bannon said he is a Leninist. But it is "crose enough" that somebody claims Bannon said it.

Then the author of the verbiage spins a trail of unproven labels (such as Bannon being a " leading intellectual of the US alt-right"--he is not alt-right but is accused of being so--which is "crose enough") opinions, interpretations, and presumptions or possibilities, and conjectured attributions that could describe a whole lot of folks including those on the American political left--i.e. Democrats--and quotes not by Bannon, but all part of an overall bag of BS which somehow implies that Bannon is the grand contradiction-- an alt-right Leninist. At least "crose enough" to the possibility that it must be a fact.

You do this "crose enough" kind of $hit a lot.

That’s been your justification for shutting your eyes, holding your hands over your ears and yelling since the last guy was elected.

You said last week you’d be glad if Congress defaulted on the debt.

Just what do you think that would do to Americans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

ETTD

In a profile in New York magazine published Tuesday, Stephanie Grisham expressed remorse over her stint in the White House: “I don’t think I can rebrand. I think this will follow me forever. I believe that I was part of something unusually evil, and I hope that it was a one-time lesson for our country and that I can be a part of making sure that at least that evil doesn’t come back now.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

That’s been your justification for shutting your eyes, holding your hands over your ears and yelling since the last guy was elected.

My eyes are wide open and my ears are not covered by my hands. That's why I know that you posted something based on an unproven premise, and that you spit out false labels and have been "yelling" and blatantly lying since the last guy was elected and before that.

You said last week you’d be glad if Congress defaulted on the debt.

Just what do you think that would do to Americans

Just what do you think will be done to Americans if Congress keeps raising the debt ceiling without actually having a budget? That has to stop. It would have been less painful if it had stopped long ago. I suppose the public pain will eventually become greater and greater the longer we put up with extravagant, irresponsible, and unsustainable government spending.

We Americans are in a precarious position if we have to continuously depend on more and more spending by a bankrupt government in order to sustain our personal welfare.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

ETTD

In a profile in New York magazine published Tuesday, Stephanie Grisham expressed remorse over her stint in the White House: “I don’t think I can rebrand. I think this will follow me forever. I believe that I was part of something unusually evil, and I hope that it was a one-time lesson for our country and that I can be a part of making sure that at least that evil doesn’t come back now.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is comical--"unusually evil"? As opposed to the usual commonplace evil that lurks in our politics? And she doesn't think she can "rebrand"? Isn't branding part of the usual evil? I guess she thinks she just won't be allowed to create a new and better facade. Did she not think that what she was doing at the time was unusually evil? Now that it's over she does a mea culpa and writes a book to make it all better? (But it's really about someone else's culpa.) And hope for a best seller? Many times on this forum Republicans or "Conservatives" have been called things like porn merchant or other forms of money grubbing if they wrote a book or had a successful radio show, etc. But when an Anti-Trumper writes a book . . . let's pay attention . . . it's really important . . . the nation is at stake!

Don't know everything that's in the book, but the articles about it and her interviews about it that I've seen don't point to any Russian collusions, or treasons, or impeachable offenses. If that is true, then maybe that's why she didn't seem to feel "unusually" evil during her tenure with Trump. Maybe just the usual, common evils of political lying and messy procedures and chaotic running of things and personal scandals and foibles that often, if not usually, accompany political campaigns.

And if she helps to scuttle a Trump attempt to get the Republican nomination, that's OK by me. I'm hoping he doesn't run. But if he gets the nod and runs, I'll vote for him over any Democrat because, as I've said over and over, for me it's not about him, but about defeating Progressivism--though that's looking more and more unlikely.

No doubt you'll be happy with the impending Brave New World of unimpeded government power. For sure, we won't have to be concerned about things like government spending our money that it doesn't have . . . money will be no object . . . government will always have our money . . . or may not even need money . . . just have the power to do, or make us do, whatever it deems necessary. We won't have to quibble about mandates or individual rights and freedoms. We will all dutifully do as government tells us to do, and be assured that it is all rightly so. And we won't have to be concerned about pandemics. Government will prevent them. Maybe just occasional outbursts of some disease or other which will be quickly quelled by good government control . . . of everything.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

We have largely eradicated Polio, tetanus, Flu, Hepatitis A+B, Rubella, Hib, Measles, Pertussis, Rotavirus, Mumps, Chickenpox, Diphtheria and Pneumococcal Disease and completely eradicated smallpox and rinderpest. Widespread vaccination is responsible for that.

CNBC
HEALTH AND SCIENCE
‘Zero Covid’ strategies are being abandoned as the highly infectious delta variant dominates
PUBLISHED TUE, OCT 5 2021

New Zealand has been notoriously strict in its tackling of Covid; Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern put the entire country under a strict lockdown in August after a single suspected case of Covid caused by the delta variant — at that time the country’s first coronavirus case in six months — was reported in Auckland.
It’s the first time that New Zealand has publicly signaled a shift away from a zero Covid strategy, coming after its neighbor Australia also abandoned its zero tolerance, or “Covid zero” approach in early September, saying it had shifted to a position of “learning to live with” the virus.

Similarly to in New Zealand, Australia’s decision to abandon the strategy came after a strict lockdown in Melbourne failed to quell an outbreak there.

At the time, Victoria state’s Premier Daniel Andrews noted that “we have thrown everything at this, but it is now clear to us that we are not going to drive these numbers down, they are instead going to increase.”

Experts are not surprised by the shift in strategy, noting that the spread of the delta variant makes such approaches futile.

“It’s no surprise that New Zealand has abandoned its ‘zero covid’ strategy – the highly transmissible delta variant has changed the game and means that an elimination strategy is no longer viable,” Lawrence Young, a virologist and professor of molecular oncology at the University of Warwick, told CNBC Monday.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

This is comical--"unusually evil"? As opposed to the usual commonplace evil that lurks in our politics? .

more of pete's bombshells.....

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

CNBC
HEALTH AND SCIENCE
‘Zero Covid’ strategies are being abandoned as the highly infectious delta variant dominates
PUBLISHED TUE, OCT 5 2021

New Zealand has been notoriously strict in its tackling of Covid; Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern put the entire country under a strict lockdown in August after a single suspected case of Covid caused by the delta variant — at that time the country’s first coronavirus case in six months — was reported in Auckland.
It’s the first time that New Zealand has publicly signaled a shift away from a zero Covid strategy, coming after its neighbor Australia also abandoned its zero tolerance, or “Covid zero” approach in early September, saying it had shifted to a position of “learning to live with” the virus.

Similarly to in New Zealand, Australia’s decision to abandon the strategy came after a strict lockdown in Melbourne failed to quell an outbreak there.

At the time, Victoria state’s Premier Daniel Andrews noted that “we have thrown everything at this, but it is now clear to us that we are not going to drive these numbers down, they are instead going to increase.”

Experts are not surprised by the shift in strategy, noting that the spread of the delta variant makes such approaches futile.

“It’s no surprise that New Zealand has abandoned its ‘zero covid’ strategy – the highly transmissible delta variant has changed the game and means that an elimination strategy is no longer viable,” Lawrence Young, a virologist and professor of molecular oncology at the University of Warwick, told CNBC Monday.

What does that have to do with vaccination?

In Vermont, 100% of the COVID patients in the ICU are unvaccinated.

Unlike some states, because of the high vaccination rate, Vermont’s medical system is not overloaded.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

What does that have to do with vaccination?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the subject wasn't vaccination....it was eradication


Pete F.
We have largely eradicated Polio, tetanus, blah, blah, blah, rindersomething

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Just what do you think will be done to Americans if Congress keeps raising the debt ceiling without actually having a budget? That has to stop. It would have been less painful if it had stopped long ago. I suppose the public pain will eventually become greater and greater the longer we put up with extravagant, irresponsible, and unsustainable government spending.

We Americans are in a precarious position if we have to continuously depend on more and more spending by a bankrupt government in order to sustain our personal welfare.

There are two things you need to learn about America:
1) We’ve got a lot of money. We’re the richest country on the face of the planet.
2) None of us think we’ve got a lot of money.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

There are two things you need to learn about America:

1) We’ve got a lot of money. We’re the richest country on the face of the planet.
2) None of us think we’ve got a lot of money.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

who is "we've"

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

the subject wasn't vaccination....it was eradication


Pete F.
We have largely eradicated Polio, tetanus, blah, blah, blah, rindersomething

And the reason all of those are largely eradicated is because of vaccination.
Not because we left them uncontrolled because of “Freedum”

New Zealand is not eliminating their vaccination program
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by scottw

who is "we've"

If the poorest 50% of Americans (net worth $3 trillion) suddenly vanished, it'd be chaos while everyone left scrambled in vain to restore basic features of modern civilization.

If the Forbes 400 (net worth $4.5 trillion) vanished, it'd just be some extra paperwork for lawyers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"I believe she was listed once in a diversity report but not by name."

Of course you believe that, because it paints her actions favorably. WHat I believe, because it's true, is that Harvard did mention her by name to show the diversity of lhe law school faculty. From the Crimson Tide article below...

"Although the conventional wisdom among students and faculty is that the Law School faculty includes no minority women, Chmura said Professor of Law Elizabeth Warren is Native American."


.

when was she at Harvard?...didn't she write POW WOW CHOW in 1984?

this is bidenesque...

Elizabeth Warren's Pow Wow Chow 'Cherokee' recipes were word for word COPIES of famous FRENCH chef's techniques
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
PUBLISHED: 20:31 EDT, 18 May 2012

[scottw]

^^^ so much cultural appropriation going on there....


stole the french chef's recipe to make the mexican soup claiming she's native american....good grief

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Keep believing you have the winning argument haha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When I express concern for kids, you acted like I'm defying science for no good reason.

First, all the data I have seen, says pretty clearly that covid isn't spreading like crazy in schools, especially in elementary schools. I don't know why that is, you'd think that would be one of the hottest places for it to spread, but it's not.

Second, young kids are not at high risk for getting really sick. This is one of the very items related to covid, on which there's sort of a consensus.

Third, there has to be a psychological price for kids to pay, when we remove them from school, isolate them from their friends, eliminate all of their activities, and have them pend even less time connecting with people, and even more time online, which is the last thing they need.

My wife plays tennis with a pediatric psychiatrist at Connecticut Childrens Medical Center. She told my wife they have never seen nearly this many cases of parents seeking behavioral healthcare for young children.

The Hartford Courant ran an article today...

https://www.courant.com/coronavirus/...6ya-story.html

GS, kids need to have normal experiences to be functional. This is why they call childhood "the formative years".

When I do a cost benefit analysis of taking normal experiences away from a generation of kids who are already not spending enough time connecting with people in a physical/intimate way thanks to the Internet, I see data that says there's not as much benefit to locking young kids down as there is to locking older people down. In addition, there may be a steep cost these kids have to pay.

You can respond by saying "oh, so you're saying we should let kids ride in pickup beds on the highway and smoke cigarettes, blah blah blah". But what I'm actually saying, is pretty logical, and based on the science and data that I see.

[Pete F.]

Now do “Ted” Cruz
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

^^^ so much cultural appropriation going on there....


stole the french chef's recipe to make the mexican soup claiming she's native american....good grief

Warren just reeks of sincerity.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

If the Forbes 400 (net worth $4.5 trillion) vanished, it'd just be some extra paperwork for lawyers.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

we should definitely get rid of them and take their money.....

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Jim is now selling the lie that the Covid spike is cause by illegals classic. "

Again, you're hearing voices. I never said "the" spike is caused by illegals. There's only one reason why people respond to something not even close to what one says, it's because you know you can't respond to what I'm actually saying.

Here's what I said:

Democrats claim to be concerned about minimizing covid, yet they say it's not a problem that 150,000 illegals cross each month, when almost 30,000 of those may have covid.

If democrats refuse to concede that 30,000 covid-positive people coming across monthly isn't any cause for concern, then I don't see how you can claim to take covid seriously.

That's what I said. See if you can avoid responding with "Jim said we should return to slavery...".

Try to respond to what I actually said. Not to what the voices in your head are telling you I said.

"all the hospitals are filled with nonvaccinated people not immigrants "

I didn't say they're filling the hospitals. I said thousands cross daily, and the data suggests that almost 1 in 5 have covid. That's not a potential problem?

"A total of 11,445 refugees were allowed into the United States during the budget year that ended on Thursday, 2021 "

I said illegal migrants, not legal refugees. No clue why the number of refugees matters at all.

Here, those right-wing nuts at the Washington Post say that in July, the Border Patrol had encounters with 200,000 illegals in the month. That's just the count of the ones Border Patrol came across - 200,000 in a month.

The data shows that 1 in 5 have covid.

No reason for ANY concern with those numbers?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...5f2_story.html

"Jim you like most other spoon fed conservatives think apprehension equals entry to the United States "

OK, How many do you suppose are entering the US per month?

"U.S. border arrests top 1 million in fiscal year 2021"

Are you saying we arrest those people, without them entering the United States? How do we do that?

In my ignorance, I though the arrest and processing took place within the United States.

I'm not saying every one of them gets to stay here forever. But all of them are here for some time, some are here for quite awhile, some are here for years.

Jim why even mention migrants and Covid at all in the same sentence.. unless it’s to blame and deflect from actual happening.. in the US with Covid like bring up Warren ..

Only conservatives are trying to tie migrants to Covid …no one saying they don’t have Covid . They just are not the reason for the spike .. so how did these migrants get to Idaho
With their Covid issues

Here are some headlines

No evidence migrants at border significantly spreading virus

This week, one Republican leader after another rushed to blame the spread of the virus, not on the unvaccinated but on immigrants.


Some Republicans Blame Migrants For COVID-19 Surges. Doctors Say They're Scapegoating

They're "allowing free pass into the United States of people with a high probability of COVID, and then spreading that COVID in our communities," Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in an interview last month on Fox News.

"I can tell you, whatever variants are around the world, they're coming across that southern border," Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said at a press conference last week.

You really need to pay more attention to what these so call Republicans leaders are actually saying

Just look at Covid funds

All Republicans in Congress voted against the $1.9 trillion relief bill signed by President Joe Biden last month – but that hasn’t stopped several of them from publicly celebrating funding to their districts made possible by its passage.

Alabama GOP governor signs bills to use Covid-19 relief funds to build prisons into law

Gov. Brian Kemp announced $1,000 bonuses for first responders paid for with the relief money. In Wyoming, a Republican legislative leader suggested the money could be used to pay the federal fines of businesses that defy Biden's vaccine mandate.

In Galveston County, Texas, Republican county commissioners approved a plan to spend $6.6 million of its total $27 million in coronavirus relief money for security roughly 350 miles (560 kilometers) away on the U.S.-Mexico border. They say the money will protect residents from COVID-19 and other dangers brought by people entering the United States

Arizona to use COVID money for anti-mask grants,


These actions just show how Republicans are unable and unwilling to do anything for Americans But would rather pull stunts for their base saying look we’re owing the libs . What a bunch of intellectually dishonest people these Trump Republicans have become
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Jim why even mention migrants and Covid at all in the same sentence.. unless it’s to blame and deflect from actual happening.. in the US with Covid like bring up Warren ..

Only conservatives are trying to tie migrants to Covid …no one saying they don’t have Covid . They just are not the reason for the spike .. so how did these migrants get to Idaho
With their Covid issues

No evidence migrants at border significantly spreading virus

This week, one Republican leader after another rushed to blame the spread of the virus, not on the unvaccinated but on immigrants.


Some Republicans Blame Migrants For COVID-19 Surges. Doctors Say They're Scapegoating

They're "allowing free pass into the United States of people with a high probability of COVID, and then spreading that COVID in our communities," Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in an interview last month on Fox News.

"I can tell you, whatever variants are around the world, they're coming across that southern border," Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said at a press conference last week.

You really need to pay more attention to what these so call Republicans leaders are actually saying

Just look at Covid funds

All Republicans in Congress voted against the $1.9 trillion relief bill signed by President Joe Biden last month – but that hasn’t stopped several of them from publicly celebrating funding to their districts made possible by its passage.

Alabama GOP governor signs bills to use Covid-19 relief funds to build prisons into law

Gov. Brian Kemp announced $1,000 bonuses for first responders paid for with the relief money. In Wyoming, a Republican legislative leader suggested the money could be used to pay the federal fines of businesses that defy Biden's vaccine mandate.

In Galveston County, Texas, Republican county commissioners approved a plan to spend $6.6 million of its total $27 million in coronavirus relief money for security roughly 350 miles (560 kilometers) away on the U.S.-Mexico border. They say the money will protect residents from COVID-19 and other dangers brought by people entering the United States

Arizona to use COVID money for anti-mask grants,


These actions just show how Republicans are unable and unwilling to do anything for Americans But would rather pull stunts for their base saying look we’re owing the libs . What a bunch of intellectually dishonest these Trump Republicans have become
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Jim why even mention migrants and Covid at all in the same sentence."

Because 200,000 of them were encountered on our side of the border, and one result showed that 1 in 5 had covid. That's 40,000 covid-positive migrants coming across in a month, and that's just the ones that BP encountered. Who knows how many more there are.

I answered your question. Can you answer mine? Why do you think it' snot even worth mentioning, that our open borders are essentially importing as many as 40,000 covid-positive people in a month? Why are you so intent on sweeping that under the rug?

"unless it’s to blame and deflect from actual happening.. in the US with Covid"

We can't talk about two things at once? Maybe you can't, most of us can. I'm not deflecting anything. There are multiple facets to this, I go where the truth (not where CNN) takes me.

"Only conservatives are trying to tie migrants to Covid"

SO you deny that tens of thousands of covid-positive migrants are likely coming across the southern border?

Wayne, when I brought this up, you immediately pivoted to the insignificantly low number of migrants who were granted asylum. You completely ignored the much, much larger number of illegal migrants. Then you claimed the illegals are never in the USA. So it appears to us that youre the one who is lying and deflecting.

You say you want to address covid, but you won't admit any issue with 40,000 covid-positive people crossing in a single month, in addition to god-knows-how-many others that were never encountered by BPS. We all know they don't catch all of them.

So one of two things is happening. Either you don't think that importing 40,000 sick people a month is worthy of discussing, or you refuse to discuss it because the underlying issue (open border) is a losing issue for your political agenda.

I have seen just about every conservatives here, criticize conservatives a few times. None of the liberals here except Rockhound, are capable of it. Never.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

If the poorest 50% of Americans (net worth $3 trillion) suddenly vanished, it'd be chaos while everyone left scrambled in vain to restore basic features of modern civilization.

If the Forbes 400 (net worth $4.5 trillion) vanished, it'd just be some extra paperwork for lawyers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's just about the most economically stupid thing I've ever read.

You are pathologically obsessed with the existence of a small number of wealthy people, whose existence has no impact on you at all. You're foaming at the mouth here.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Jim why even mention migrants and Covid at all in the same sentence.. unless it’s to blame and deflect from actual happening.. in the US with Covid like bring up Warren ..

Only conservatives are trying to tie migrants to Covid …no one saying they don’t have Covid . They just are not the reason for the spike .. so how did these migrants get to Idaho
With their Covid issues

Here are some headlines

No evidence migrants at border significantly spreading virus

This week, one Republican leader after another rushed to blame the spread of the virus, not on the unvaccinated but on immigrants.


Some Republicans Blame Migrants For COVID-19 Surges. Doctors Say They're Scapegoating

They're "allowing free pass into the United States of people with a high probability of COVID, and then spreading that COVID in our communities," Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in an interview last month on Fox News.

"I can tell you, whatever variants are around the world, they're coming across that southern border," Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said at a press conference last week.

You really need to pay more attention to what these so call Republicans leaders are actually saying

Just look at Covid funds

All Republicans in Congress voted against the $1.9 trillion relief bill signed by President Joe Biden last month – but that hasn’t stopped several of them from publicly celebrating funding to their districts made possible by its passage.

Alabama GOP governor signs bills to use Covid-19 relief funds to build prisons into law

Gov. Brian Kemp announced $1,000 bonuses for first responders paid for with the relief money. In Wyoming, a Republican legislative leader suggested the money could be used to pay the federal fines of businesses that defy Biden's vaccine mandate.

In Galveston County, Texas, Republican county commissioners approved a plan to spend $6.6 million of its total $27 million in coronavirus relief money for security roughly 350 miles (560 kilometers) away on the U.S.-Mexico border. They say the money will protect residents from COVID-19 and other dangers brought by people entering the United States

Arizona to use COVID money for anti-mask grants,


These actions just show how Republicans are unable and unwilling to do anything for Americans But would rather pull stunts for their base saying look we’re owing the libs . What a bunch of intellectually dishonest people these Trump Republicans have become
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"unless it’s to blame and deflect from actual happening.. in the US with Covid like bring up Warren ."

Spence brought up Warren, not me. It was OK with you when he brought her up, but a character flaw when I respond? How does that make sense?

Again, your entire existence on this forum is democrat=good, republican= bad. we get it, you don't need to keep saying it in different ways.

"These actions just show how Republicans are unable and unwilling to do anything for Americans"

Here's a study in the New York Times (not known to be Republican-friendly) showing clearly, that conservatives give more money and time to charity, than liberals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/o...21kristof.html

If Republicans don't do anything for Americans, explain the Gallup poll that showed a record-number of Americans claimed to be better off after 4 years of Trump, than after 4 years of any president in the history of that poll?

Yeah, John McCain, Dan Crenshaw, Tom Cotton, what have they ever done for anybody?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

If the poorest 50% of Americans (net worth $3 trillion) suddenly vanished, it'd be chaos while everyone left scrambled in vain to restore basic features of modern civilization.

If the Forbes 400 (net worth $4.5 trillion) vanished, it'd just be some extra paperwork for lawyers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

That's just about the most economically stupid thing I've ever read.

You are pathologically obsessed with the existence of a small number of wealthy people, whose existence has no impact on you at all. You're foaming at the mouth here.

The way the economics work is

The lowest 50% disappear, GDP goes to single digits, entire sectors disappear.

Lose 400 billionaires, all their investments continue and their labor is negligible.

You are obsessed with wealthy people and try to equate your rabid behavior with intelligence.

I'm concerned with the redistribution of wealth in this country thru politics and control of the government.

[Pete F.]

700,000 people have vanished in the US, & Americans are wondering where all the service staff went

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Here's a study in the New York Times (not known to be Republican-friendly) showing clearly, that conservatives give more money and time to charity, than liberals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/o...21kristof.html

An Op-Ed from anyone is not evidence.
Here's another one from the same time.

November 3, 2018; New York Times

The political differences between Republicans and Democrats don’t play out solely at the ballot box; they also predict how likely people are to donate to charity. This finding from a newly published research project reflects a key difference, one tied to political affiliation, about how our nation should take on critical social issues like homelessness, poverty, and health care. The data also suggest that in times of political strife, both parties’ supporters pull back, making problem-solving harder.

Using voting and IRS data for the residents of 3,000 counties across the nation, the four-professor research team found, according to the New York Times, that counties which are “overwhelmingly Republican” report higher charitable contributions than Democratic-dominated counties, although “giving in blue counties is often bolstered by a combination of charitable donations and higher taxes. But as red or blue counties become more politically competitive, charitable giving tends to fall.” The full study was recently published in the Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

One could conclude this shows the Republican party is, despite the conventional wisdom, the party that cares about those in need and puts its money where its mouth is. But the true picture is more complex, reflecting at best a real difference between the parties in the best way to approach the challenge of human need. Because the range of organizations and activities that are supported by tax deductible giving is very wide, it is not clear how these funds are actually used or what motives they reflect.

Republicans do give more, but where that money ends up is not yet clear. One of the study’s authors, Rebecca Nesbit, associate professor of public administration and policy at the University of Georgia, told the New York Times that Republicans prefer to “provide for the collective good through private institutions. But we don’t know what type of institutions they’re giving to.” It also wasn’t obvious “whether donors were being purely generous or whether they would also benefit from their donation. This relationship is called consumption philanthropy, in which people give to a religious organization or a school from which they will derive a benefit in the form of, say, a better religious education program or a new gymnasium.” Giving to a food bank or a homeless shelter has a very different outcome than does giving to a private school.

While red counties may be more philanthropic, tax rates are higher in blue counties, reflecting stronger support for collective action and for a social safety net of services and organizations. “The county you live in and the political ideology of that county affects the tax burden of the community,” Dr. Nesbit said. “That in turn has an effect on charitable contributions. If you leave tax burden out of the equation, you’re not getting the full story.”

Importantly, the study did not find that in Republican counties, private funds replaced public funds so that social services were equally supported.

Those in favor of lower taxes have argued that individuals are more capable than the government of allocating money to important causes, including people in need of assistance. But the study found that was not true. Donations do not match government assistance, and without tax money, social services are not funded as robustly.

“The evidence shows that private philanthropy can’t compensate for the loss of government provision,” Dr. Nesbit said. “It’s not equal. What government can put into these things is so much more than what we see through private philanthropy.”

Most concerning in this moment of high political strife is the finding that everyone pulls back in areas where political division is high: “When counties are split evenly between the political parties, both donations and the tax burden go down. Or in the study’s terms: Political competition decreases giving.” This does not bode well for organizations whose work is holding up a part of the social safety net, nor for the people they serve.

As we see very graphically on a national level, split electorates and the split governments they elect have difficulty enacting polices and laws to support democratic approaches to collective action. The publicly funded portion of the safety net weakens. If Republicans, who may be more individually ready than their Democratic neighbors, do not make growing charitable donations for these same purposes, philanthropy will not provide the solution, either.—Marty Levine