Trump's delay/inaction/misinformation in the beginning was a contributing factor to the record number of US deaths from COVID-19. I wonder how many - other than the one confirmed.

Amazing how Trump seems to channel Mussolini with his poses so like the WW2 dictator.

The dufus may well have inspired the actions that couple in Arizona tragically undertook, and we can argue his culpibility level, but what's evident 2 months later is his incompetence and the false hope he feeds us in what is a logistical nightmare. I mean where's the honesty to convey real optimism and not feed us the false hope his exaggerations conveys.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/thats-just-not-true-gop-gov-hogan-contradicts-trump-claim-that-testing-problems-are-fixed/ar-BB11XUMZ?ocid=spartanntp

We still haven't tested nearly enough, nor have a uniform national policy since he cedes that to those governors he quacks to all the time according to him. The big cities are a disaster at this point, and those rural areas will be worse. The numbers just don't lie, and they are going up everywhere. So the dufus cannot be held accountable for what we are experiencing, but we can comment on what he has done about it.

This dude, in repeating what the scientist say, would be the most optimistic death toll projections, actually thinks 1/2 hundred thousand is a good outcome! Maybe it is compared to millions, but damn, that's some scary stuff to already take credit for, if he can achieve it which is debatable given he doesn't/hasn't/ and probably never will fact check very well.

Get that fool off the TV in the evenings and let the experts answer the questions as he show isn't ready for prime time. LOL, he laments the mess he was left and how he fixed it, and it's karma I suppose that he will have to fix a broken health system and the economy on his own this time.

On what happens NOW will he be judged!

lol This was all happening when the Dems were 24-7 impeachment Y'all are 20-20 hindsight . The blame lies SOLEY with the Red Chinese scumbags covering up what was happening in Wuhan with the WHO complicity . When Trump was proactively ordering travel bans from China ,the Dems were debating resolutions that called his actions racist . Your partisanship at this time is going to expose your side for what they are . .

lol This was all happening when the Dems were 24-7 impeachment Y'all are 20-20 hindsight .

ZAP! WRONG! You sound just like Moscow Mitch McConnell. The impeachment ended six weeks before Trump took any action to plan how to handle the virus. Then he began with really dumb comments - "a hoax", "a miracle will remove it", "it will go to zero in a week", and more like that. Note how drastically he has changed his tune after he realized his re-election was in jeopardy. The 20-20 hindsight - the FALSE 20-20 hindsight - is all yours.


Your partisanship at this time is going to expose your side for what they are . .

Let's hope so. My "side" is for the truth, always has been.

"Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus" on January 31, 2020.

Feb 5 Trump acquited . www.cnn.com/2020/02/05/politics/senate-impeachment-trial-vote-acquittal/index.html

Nice spin Tom, but facts is facts

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/

Won't comment on his impeachment acquittal, he did what he did and got away with it thanks to Moscow Mitch and his sham court of sycophants. That's a whole different conversation and we must remember Clinton set the tone for working through trials and tribulations.

impeachment, not that old chessnut again, Trump was distracted, now he is just confused by reality

Nice spin Tom, but facts is facts

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/



Tom is rarely concerned about facts.

Nice link!

Maybe all of you complainers can show us back in January when you were posting that we had better do something about this new Chinese virus. For that matter, maybe you can show us where Pelosi or Biden were telling us what to do at that point. Or where all the liberal dems on this board stood up and cheered when Trump stopped flights from China. The truth is, this virus came basically out of nowhere and has, all in all, been handled pretty well. Not perfectly, but well. I'm not sure how anyone could be prepared for something like this. I do know that cheap criticism is not helpful.


My "side" is for the truth, always has been.Was your blatant misrepresentation of the views of Aquinas part of that great concern your "side" has for the truth? You need to be careful with what you post. Some of us remember your past posts quite well. How about your claim that Matthew contained 660 of Mark's 661 verses? Was that the truth?

The lack of testing for everybody is not a cheap criticism, nor is states having a bidding war for resources especially ventilators a cheap criticism, or having an aircraft carrier full of sick military personnel a cheap criticism (https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak-united-states-aircraft-carrier-guam-20200401.html), and saying the dufus has a bigmouth as he gives false information a cheap criticism. No JL, it's a mark of his total incompetence and still he dithers not telling governors to shut their states down NOW and save lives.

Your first three comments are just foolish. It would be like criticizing the Japanese in 2011 for not having already evacuated the areas devastated by the tsunami. If we had had a six months warning of the coming virus then sure, those criticisms would be valid, but to think that our country should be able to come up with 300 million test kits in three months from a standing start is ridiculous. No other country has tested everybody. That's why it all is, in reality, cheap criticism.

He has not, to my knowledge, given out false information, and it's not his place to tell governors to shut their states down. It's easy for you to sit in Texas and theorize, but when you talk about shutting down entire states, then you are talking about shutting down entire economies, and since, to the great surprise of lifelong liberals, money actually does not grow on trees, and since all of these treatments for the sick do have to be paid for, then destroying the economy is really not a very good idea. Destroying the economy will cost lives as well. Destroying the economy will cost people their jobs, homes, and property. There is a lot to consider here.

It's just a symptom of irrational, unthinking TDS.

Your first three comments are just foolish. It would be like criticizing the Japanese in 2011 for not having already evacuated the areas devastated by the tsunami. If we had had a six months warning of the coming virus then sure, those criticisms would be valid, but to think that our country should be able to come up with 300 million test kits in three months from a standing start is ridiculous. No other country has tested everybody. That's why it all is, in reality, cheap criticism.

It figures you set such a low standard for performance that you compare the greatest nation in the world to other nations that don't come close to us. Wander what all that talking to governors is accomplishing, if not to coordinate the needs of the states to benefit us effectively without a trade war between the states? A commander in chief that doesn't protect his troops is a foolish cheap criticism? Who is the one accepting mediocracy now?


The lack of testing for everybody is not a cheap criticism, nor is states having a bidding war for resources especially ventilators a cheap criticism, or having an aircraft carrier full of sick military personnel a cheap criticism (https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak-united-states-aircraft-carrier-guam-20200401.html)
,

So I'm the one that's foolish to expect more from our great nation?


He has not, to my knowledge, given out false information, and it's not his place to tell governors to shut their states down. It's easy for you to sit in Texas and theorize, but when you talk about shutting down entire states, then you are talking about shutting down entire economies, and since, to the great surprise of lifelong liberals, money actually does not grow on trees, and since all of these treatments for the sick do have to be paid for, then destroying the economy is really not a very good idea. Destroying the economy will cost lives as well. Destroying the economy will cost people their jobs, homes, and property. There is a lot to consider here.

YUP, that's what I'm talking about and Texas is not shutdown while your state just did, so while you holler about the economy, think of the millions of the dead people who will need to be mourned if you don't shut it down NOW, prolonging the agony for months to come.


It's just a symptom of irrational, unthinking TDS.

Unrealistic give the situation with this pandemic. I could say a very foolish comment, but I doubt you would understand the criticism, since you never have before. You're great at making excuses why you under perform though.

So I'm the one that's foolish to expect more from our great nation?

No, you're being foolish to expect the impossible. You might as well criticize Trump for not putting a manned spaceship on Neptune.


YUP, that's what I'm talking about and Texas is not shutdown while your state just did, so while you holler about the economy, think of the millions of the dead people who will need to be mourned if you don't shut it down NOW, prolonging the agony for months to come.

Our state is not shutdown. The county I live in is shutdown. And again, it's easy for you to sit in Texas and plead for the dying while never considering the dying that will occur if we end up with a devastated economy. Your mentioning of millions of dead people is hyperbole on steroids.


Unrealistic give the situation with this pandemic. I could say a very foolish comment, but I doubt you would understand the criticism, since you never have before. You're great at making excuses why you under perform though.Kind of like you did with the Obama economy? You were just fine with the weakest recovery from a recession in a hundred years, and that despite a doubling of the national debt, but you want to rant and rave about Trump. Yep. A sure symptom of TDS.

No, you're being foolish to expect the impossible. You might as well criticize Trump for not putting a manned spaceship on Neptune.

The CDC dropped the ball starting with dismantling of the WH team assembled years ago for such emergencies after having been through such an emergencies. Such an early warning team would have been invaluable for a quicker response. Gutting the layers of government such as Homeland Security also played a huge role the slow and inadequate, so yeah let's criticize the dufus for his actions that left us wholly unprepared when we should have been.


Our state is not shutdown. The county I live in is shutdown. And again, it's easy for you to sit in Texas and plead for the dying while never considering the dying that will occur if we end up with a devastated economy. Your mentioning of millions of dead people is hyperbole on steroids.

Oh that's right, your governor like mine is dithering around the edges of taking precautions, making them 2 of 20 states that like Florida, will see a sharp rise in infected rates and bring the health care facilities to a brimming capacity that extends the recovery rate far beyond it's ability to cope effectively. Yeah money doesn't grow on trees and neither do humans, and if you think about it what are the effects of the economy with sick workers infecting not just the workplace, but customers and consumers too. Of course conservatives don't think that far ahead, so they don't see it coming until it smacks them up side their heads.

Ignoring what is happening already, and think it won't happen to you is as foolish as it gets.


Kind of like you did with the Obama economy? You were just fine with the weakest recovery from a recession in a hundred years, and that despite a doubling of the national debt, but you want to rant and rave about Trump. Yep. A sure symptom of TDS.

Weakest, but steady and growing for sure when the dufus came along, and hopefully strong enough to weather this corona storm if the dufus doesn't keep screwing it up. Libs saw him coming, and have tried to get rid of this sucker which despite the obvious they hold onto like a dog with a bone. LOL, maybe Obama's economics were the weakest recovery from a recession, but the dufus will have more dead bodies on his hand than Obama did it appears.

He didn't start this thing but his response to it is HIS to own whether he and conservatives like it or not.

The CDC dropped the ball starting with dismantling of the WH team assembled years ago for such emergencies after having been through such an emergencies.Not true. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/20/was-white-house-office-global-pandemics-eliminated/


Ignoring what is happening already, and think it won't happen to you is as foolish as it gets.If you find someone doing that, let us know.


but the dufus will have more dead bodies on his hand than Obama did it appears.
You think maybe that's because he's having to contend with something far more serious that anything Obama encountered? Are you counting the dead bodies from the H1N1 epidemic which Obama largely ignored for weeks and weeks?

Not true. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/20/was-white-house-office-global-pandemics-eliminated/

I have no prescrption to the post sorry, but read it through other sources and of course I view it differently.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213201124


Asked at a congressional hearing on March 11 whether it was a mistake to eliminate the office, Anthony S. Fauci, who runs the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, diplomatically said: “I wouldn’t necessarily characterize it as a mistake. I would say we worked very well with that office. It would be nice if the office was still there.”

AND

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/387191-trump-official-overseeing-pandemic-response-suddenly-leaves-admin


The Post reported that Ziemer will not be replaced, and that his departure means that there is no single official at the highest levels of the administration who focuses only on global health security.
st reported that Ziemer will not be replaced, and that his departure means that there is no single official at the highest levels of the administration who focuses only on global health security.



If you find someone doing that, let us know.

I did in previous post #14, those 19 states governors that have not acted. Forida just went shelter in place statewide.


You think maybe that's because he's having to contend with something far more serious that anything Obama encountered? Are you counting the dead bodies from the H1N1 epidemic which Obama largely ignored for weeks and weeks?

I can easily concede this is a lot more daunting a challenge, but I stop short of the rest of your comparisons.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/trumps-h1n1-swine-flu-pandemic-spin/

I did in previous post #14, those 19 states governors that have not acted.So in other words, if they are not doing what you want, then they are irresponsible? Got it. BTW, our governor has enacted, but he has not put a "shelter in place" advisory for the entire state. I'm sure that same thing is true of many of those other states.

" agreed that Trump’s travel restrictions bought the U.S. time to react," Oh my goodness, your article was complimentary of Trump's initial decision! It is, by the way, absolutely true that Obama did nothing for the first several weeks of the swine flu epidemic. This is contained in the following article. "The declaration, signed Friday night and announced Saturday, comes with the disease more prevalent than ever in the country and production delays undercutting the government's initial, optimistic estimates that as many as 120 million doses of the vaccine could be available by mid-October.Health authorities say more than 1,000 people in the United States, including almost 100 children, have died from the strain of flu known as H1N1, and 46 states have widespread flu activity. So far only 11 million doses of the vaccine have gone out to health departments, doctor's offices and other providers, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials." So rather than the estimate that 120 million doses of the vaccine would be available, there was only 10% of that. Hmm. I'm going to go way out on a limb and guess that you were not jumping up and down in criticism of Obama back then.

So even the wonderful (in your view) Mr. Obama waited months before declaring a national emergency and had problems with vaccine production. Now that's all fine by me, but it's frustrating to see people like you give Obama a free pass and then practically wet your pants in being critical of Trump for having what is basically the same problems except that he moved MUCH more quickly and is facing a greater threat.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33459423/ns/health-cold_and_flu/t/obama-declares-swine-flu-national-emergency/#.XoTbRIhKjIU

Don't know why you would be so frustrated at my opinion of the dufus, since for one seldom do I compare the two, and have been consistent with my objections to the dufus, he lies, cheats and steals, and is a big bully, all characteristics I think are deplorable. Frustrates me that you ACCEPT such behavior.

I have been consistently critical of Trump's lying and big mouth, just as I was consistently critical of Obama's lies about Benghazi. That's where you and I differ. I try to apply a standard consistently.

https://babylonbee.com/news/cnn-publishes-real-news-story-for-april-fools-day?fbclid=IwAR0cis9-3JSAyDyWO16w2ShQj2wgYZaRx9JdAY00h0fzNhnsi2DCCRby4x c

>CHUCKLE<

Never heard you ever comment on a LIE the dufs has told, maybe I missed that.

His claim that Mexico would pay for the wall was outrageous from the outset. Now you claim he has lied about the CV, but I haven't seen evidence of that. Can you provide it?

>CHUCKLE<

facts :
January 11: Chinese media report the first known death from an illness originating in the Wuhan market. So now the news was out there But 4 days later ....

January 15: Madam Mim holds a vote to send articles of impeachment to the Senate. She had to stare down her caucus that was about to erupt in joyous ceremony on this "solemn day" She and House Dems celebrate the occasion in an elaborately staged spectacle ;signing the articles with 30 gold pens on a silver platter .She hands the pens out as souvenirs

January 21: The first person with coronavirus arrives in the United States from China, where he had been in Wuhan.

January 23: The House impeachment managers make their opening arguments for removing Trump.

January 23: China closes off the city of Wuhan completely to slow the spread of coronavirus to the rest of China.

January 30: Senators begin asking two days of questions of both sides in the president’s impeachment trial

January 30: The WHO declares a global health emergency as coronavirus continues to spread.

January 31: The Senate holds a vote on whether to allow further witnesses and documents in the impeachment trial.

January 31: Trump declares a national health emergency and imposes a ban on travel to and from China. Quid pro Joe calls Trump’s decision “hysterical xenophobia , and fear-mongering.”

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/01/31/801686524/trump-declares-coronavirus-a-public-health-emergency-and-restricts-travel-from-c
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/31/business/china-travel-coronavirus.html

February 2: The first death from coronavirus outside China is reported in the Philippines.

February 3: House impeachment managers begin closing arguments, calling Trump a threat to national security ;Not the Chinese ;not the coming virus ..

February 4: Trump talks about coronavirus in his SOTU Address Madam Mim has a hissy fit and rips up every page of his address .

February 5: The Senate votes to acquit Trump on both articles of impeachment,
.
February 5: House Democrats FINALLY address coronavirus in the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia.



Schmucky Schumer tweeted on Feb. 5, “The premature travel ban to and from China by the current administration is just an excuse to further his ongoing war against immigrants. There must be a check and Balance on these restrictions.”

Let's fast forward to March 7 , while the virus spreads ,the Dems in the House were debating the 'No Ban Act ' ,a bill that would've reversed Trump's ban. They pulled it off the floor on March 12 . ONE DAY AFTER THE NBA suspends it's season

March 11 Homeland Security Hearing when the world was well aware of the spread of the virus .
During the hearing, acting Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Ken Cuccinelli explained he had advised the president to ban travel from China even though “the academic model suggested not to do that.” Cuccinelli further stressed that “the president was well aware” that the existing models recommended against a China travel ban but that Trump nonetheless instituted the ban. So how did the Dems on the committee react ? Well here is comments from
Rep. Dina Titus of Nevada......

I think you said earlier that you rejected the academic models that advised against travel boundaries or travel restrictions and gave the advice to the president to the contrary. What would make you think you could reject an academic model based on scientific study and evidence to advise the president? Was that like bad politics as opposed to good science? I think it probably [is that] this administration have very little respect for anything intellectual. And this is yet another example.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4861733/user-clip-dina-titus

Sorry guys .If anyone was late to the game it was the Democrats in government who were obsessed with removing Trump from office .




No doubt Tal will take 5 minutes of his time to post a liberal rag's "fact checker "

Fantastic post, Tom. The quote from JB was priceless. "Quid pro Joe calls Trump’s decision “hysterical xenophobia , and fear-mongering.” If we elect that guy, then we will richly deserve what we get out of it.

@Tom, already posted my fact check of the dufus travel ban guess you missed it. That's okay though as even your links point out that he was a bit late and for the record nobody buys his distracted by impeachment claim. Luckily he had Moscow and the Sycophants to save his bacon.

@JL, I have said many times we deserve the president we have, and didn't mean that as a compliment to the USA.

His claim that Mexico would pay for the wall was outrageous from the outset. Now you claim he has lied about the CV, but I haven't seen evidence of that. Can you provide it?

>CHUCKLE<

Any briefing he has appeared in will do.

Any briefing he has appeared in will do.It would be better if you would just say, "I have no idea."

It would be better if you would just say, "I have no idea."
Apparently, you don't watch the briefings. I thought for sure Pence was going to deck him, or more likely kick him in a knee, today.

your fact check org has no credibilty . Are you aware of the history of the Anneberg Center ? I'm sure you do since you worship one of it's past directors ,the emperor himself. Yes he became director through his patron Billl Ayers .The emperor as Senator made sure they were properly funded with government $$ through earmarks

Anyway liberal Journalist Ben Smith wrote of such groups like Fact Check that distort the truth that "they’re doing opinion journalism under pseudo-scientific banners, something that’s really corrosive to actual journalism, which if it’s any good is about reported fact in the first place” .
Anneberg funded Fact Check to the tune of almost $90 million before Fact Check began taking public donations . They are hopelessly left wing biased .

When asked about Trump's travel ban ,
Dr. Anthony Fauci said that the purpose of the travel restrictions was to blunt the infection curve. When a reporter asked Fauci if Trump’s travel ban had helped, he responded, “It was the right public health call....If you look back early on, Chinese travelers who were infected seeded not only the United States but countries in Europe, including Italy.” And of course Trumps European travel ban March 12 blunted the spread of the disease from Europe also .


I don't know ;maybe you think we should still have open travel between the US and Italy .

Apparently, you don't watch the briefings. I thought for sure Pence was going to deck him, or more likely kick him in a knee, today.Can anyone come up with a single specific instance of Trump lying at these press conferences? Something perhaps a tad more specific that someone wanting to kick him in the knee? And if you can't, and it certainly appears that you can't, then shouldn't you just admit that you don't have anything?

Things like this greatly diminish your liberal cause. You say Trump has been lying but have no idea how. The outrageous suggestion is made that Trump was directly responsible for the death of the elderly man. I would hope there would be some level of shame for these accusations. It is exactly why I conclude, correctly I think, that a hatred of Trump is what is really behind these charges. But perhaps you can come up with some specifics that will make me rethink my position. And no, trying to suggest that he lied about hydroxychloroquine won't get the job done.

Can anyone come up with a single specific instance of Trump lying at these press conferences? Something perhaps a tad more specific that someone wanting to kick him in the knee? And if you can't, and it certainly appears that you can't, then shouldn't you just admit that you don't have anything?
Aha! You didn't watch, did you!

Aha! You didn't watch, did you!This really gets old. You've got nothing so you try to act cute.

This really gets old. You've got nothing so you try to act cute.
Yup, this gets REAL old. You didn't watch (or notice) so you throw rocks (or Oxford commas?) at me.

I have no problem with the dufus travel ban, but it was more a closing the barn door after the horse got out move and he didn't lock the door, there were enough exemptions and exclusions to have enough free flow to further complicate things but in fairness much of that couldn't really be helped, as it was inevitable that Biz would get the shipments already planned and loaded and enroute. I suspect that would be true of all the world markets. To keep touting that as a glory point though without the details is but a blatant blow his own horn as usual, but if that's all he's got then that's all he got. Those perfect phone calls and perfect understanding of rocket science only works on conservatives who have little or no clue or just choose to ignore his misrepresentations.

Just the dufus being the dufus as he dismantles the functions of government to the useless and uncoordinated buearacracy the right has always said it was. He has said he wanted the states and not DC to set the pace, even during an emergency where everybody being on the same page is ever more crucial for the common good. Fortunately the dufus's surgeon general said the other day the fed guidelines was a call to the whole country to shut this thing down.

LOL Tom, sooner or later you will accept that liberals are as American as conservatives. I get you want a small weak central government with states doing their own thing, but during this pandemic shouldn't we be all on the same page fighting our common foe? Florida and Georgia joined the fight yesterday. The Georgia governor just found out the virus can be spread by people who are a symptomatic after all this time. Where has this dude been?

11 to go! Maybe the dufus will get off his arse now and get the feds involved in coordinating this thing for all our good and end the national chaos by taking charge with actions and not words in a briefing.

If you claim that Trump lied about the CV but you cannot provide any examples of him lying, then does that mean you were lying? If so, then wouldn't the two of you be just alike?

"He has said he wanted the states and not DC to set the pace." When did Trump say that about the CV?

" he dismantles the functions of government to the useless and uncoordinated buearacracy." He has not done that. You've already been shown that so why do you continue to advance that disproven idea?

Not even close JL, but what's more to the point if YOU cannot tell when he's lying then wouldn't that make you a dufus too? Ever try giving evidence to a dufus? To be fair maybe you have dufus derangement syndrome and will believe any lie he tells whether it can be proved or not. I don't envy you since after 8 years of Obama derangement syndrome, and decades of HC derangement syndrome, you have to be pretty screwed up.

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/4e94b06347254f726536400b8f6c32d728aa5298/0_0_3500_1866/master/3500.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&

Do I have to go back to the first days he became president

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/29/donald-trump-false-claims-lies-germany-father-abortion-popular-vote-

Or more recent ones

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/11/politics/fact-check-trump-administration-coronavirus-28-dishonest/index.html

Geez guy he has told tens of thousand in 3 years and you want a list? That's messed up on so many levels.

Why is it that when you get called out for saying things which you cannot prove, you always resort to name calling? I simply have asked you to verify a statement you made about Trump lying about the CV. If you can't do it, and it certainly seems you can't, then wouldn't an honorable person simply admit to his mistake rather than calling others names?

"Obama derangement syndrome". As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

See second link which obviously was added while you were posting. Forget being flattered dude, derangement syndrome applies to many cases in regard to right wing conservatives.

The topic was Trump lying about the CV. The first link is irrelevant to the topic. The second one is more on target, though many of those are more Trump just having a big mouth as opposed to intentionally lying. Still, it was on target, and it is mystifying why you simply cannot back up your statement from the beginning without all the name calling. That's a huge part of our cultural problem right now, the inability of so many people to hold a rational conversation without engaging in temper tantrums and vitriol. In that respect, I think you are much more like Trump than you would care to admit.


derangement syndrome applies to many cases in regard to right wing conservatives.It is in widespread use nowhere but in your mind.

If you claim that Trump lied about the CV but you cannot provide any examples of him lying, then does that mean you were lying? If so, then wouldn't the two of you be just alike?

"He has said he wanted the states and not DC to set the pace." When did Trump say that about the CV?

" he dismantles the functions of government to the useless and uncoordinated buearacracy." He has not done that. You've already been shown that so why do you continue to advance that disproven idea?

Nuff said, I'll leave you to figure it out rather than explain the obvious that you MISSED, or dismissed, or didn't want to understand.


The topic was Trump lying about the CV. The first link is irrelevant to the topic. The second one is more on target, though many of those are more Trump just having a big mouth as opposed to intentionally lying. Still, it was on target, and it is mystifying why you simply cannot back up your statement from the beginning without all the name calling. That's a huge part of our cultural problem right now, the inability of so many people to hold a rational conversation without engaging in temper tantrums and vitriol. In that respect, I think you are much more like Trump than you would care to admit.

It is in widespread use nowhere but in your mind.

It's not name calling if it's true and you and the dufus have much more in common that I do for sure. Maybe we all share a stubbornness in what we believe, but that's okay.

I'll leave you to figure it out rather than explain the obvious that you MISSED, or dismissed, or didn't want to understand.Your usual answer when you don't have a clue.


It's not name calling if it's trueSo it's name calling when everyone else does it, but not when you do it. Got it.

I have no problem with the dufus travel ban, but it was more a closing the barn door after the horse got out move and he didn't lock the door, there were enough exemptions and exclusions to have enough free flow to further complicate things but in fairness much of that couldn't really be helped, as it was inevitable that Biz would get the shipments already planned and loaded and enroute. I suspect that would be true of all the world markets.
All 20-20 hindsight horse poo .
Bloomberg is late to the game but this is the reality the shaped decisions then .....


“The reality is that we could have been better off if China had been more forthcoming,” Vice President Mike Pence said Wednesday on CNN. “What appears evident now is that long before the world learned in December that China was dealing with this, and maybe as much as a month earlier than that, that the outbreak was real in China.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-01/china-concealed-extent-of-virus-outbreak-u-s-intelligence-says?fbclid=IwAR2bd3oXD8c50XmCNbUZqIocS7YZRlqQw6OR ubbNcck7I18cZMiNLh7eI4Y



LOL Tom, sooner or later you will accept that liberals are as American as conservatives. I get you want a small weak central government with states doing their own thing, but during this pandemic shouldn't we be all on the same page fighting our common foe? Florida and Georgia joined the fight yesterday. The Georgia governor just found out the virus can be spread by people who are a symptomatic after all this time. Where has this dude been?

No you are absolutely wrong . We don't need central control .Federalism works . What is happening in NY is not the same as what is happening in other localities . WE do NOT need top down management of crisis . States cooperate with each other . When Florida or New Orleans gets hit with hurricanes then hundreds of people from this area who can help get in their cars and trucks to gladly assist . They don't need Washington to command them to do so . The problem with liberalism is that you get so used to government direction that people are helpless when something happens .They stand around doing nothing on their own ;blaming Washington for not reacting fast enough from a thousand miles away

There is a lot of difference between a government that ensures the right of individuals to pursue happiness versus a government that thinks it is there to guarantee happiness. The former is conservative thought. The latter is liberal thought.


All 20-20 hindsight horse poo .Exactly.

No you are absolutely wrong . We don't need central control .Federalism works . What is happening in NY is not the same as what is happening in other localities . WE do NOT need top down management of crisis . States cooperate with each other . When Florida or New Orleans gets hit with hurricanes then hundreds of people from this area who can help get in their cars and trucks to gladly assist . They don't need Washington to command them to do so . The problem with liberalism is that you get so used to government direction that people are helpless when something happens .They stand around doing nothing on their own ;blaming Washington for not reacting fast enough from a thousand miles away


The USA has been hit with a crisis and is it against your federalist leanings for states and feds to cooperate for the common good, as this virus rolls through the country? I just don't think setting states against each other competing for resources is such a great idea and a lousy management style and fiscally irresponsible.

The whole idea of federalism is a cooperation between all the governing facets.

There is a lot of difference between a government that ensures the right of individuals to pursue happiness versus a government that thinks it is there to guarantee happiness. The former is conservative thought. The latter is liberal thought.

Exactly.

Conservative gobble D goop, not even close and while your at it show me where I objected to the travel ban, since my only complaint was it wasn't swift enough or strict enough. Now I get our dependence on Chinese goods, especially medical and electronic essentials may have played a role in that and may well fueled the virus here to some extent in those areas, but that travel ban doesn't stop the resumption on those goods again just because they say it's under control does it? Maybe it is but I would rather have that verified before those shipment dock if no body minds that. I mean they weren't honest before so why trust now?

And what's wrong with an efficient government that ensures the rights of everybody, and where does this guarantee language even come from. Like I say conservative semantic gobble D goop. Meaningless dribble.

And what's wrong with an efficient government that ensures the rights of everybody, and where does this guarantee language even come from. Like I say conservative semantic gobble D goop. Meaningless dribble.

I'm all for an efficient government, but a gov that is 25 tril in debt is a million miles away from being efficient. A gov that sends out checks for thousands of dollars it doesn't have to people who are still working and in good financial shape is not efficient and is largely interested in buying votes and making the folks happy.


show me where I objected to the travel ban, since my only complaint was it wasn't swift enough or strict enough.I never said you objected to the travel ban. As to it not being swift or strict enough, you show us where you said that in January or February. As Tom said, that's just 20/20 hindsight poo.

adding to my timeline

January 14 . WHO sends out a message that corona -virus is NOT human to human transmission . That was a message they received from the Commie Chinese Party


"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in Wuhan, China,"

https://twitter.com/who/status/1217043229427761152?lang=en


The USA has been hit with a crisis and is it against your federalist leanings for states and feds to cooperate for the common good, as this virus rolls through the country? I just don't think setting states against each other competing for resources is such a great idea and a lousy management style and fiscally irresponsible.

The whole idea of federalism is a cooperation between all the governing facets.

It begs for Federalism which I might say is exactly what is going right . State governors ;mayors and local officials taking the lead with the Federal government assisting where it can . Your top down micromanagement style is what causes massive deaths in Soviet Union in Ukraine ;and in China's Great Leap forward . That system is a failed system . I can't believe anyone still clings to that failed model . Federalism does NOT set states against states . Problem is we have too many blue state governors like Cuomo who beggared NY preparedness for almost a decade and then whines that the Federal government is not doing enough

and here is another useful timeline of the deception that the Commie Chinese played in this ... Xi and the whole party needs to be brought to the Hague to answer to the holocaust they have inflicted on the world . https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devastating-lies/?fbclid=IwAR2tXvimLChFR0IVFFzhFmeij7sq2-CAj49RoD_U7724aTL8rB4yw5uiFQo

Problem is we have too many blue state governors like Cuomo who beggared NY preparedness for almost a decade and then whines that the Federal government is not doing enoughVery true and similar to the utter lack of preparedness in New Orleans after Katrina that somehow ended up being blamed on Bush. It was an inefficient governor and mayor that was the problem. Contrast that with Giuliani's performance after 9/11.

I wonder whatever happened to hydroxychloroquine? It was thought at one time that it was going to be the answer, but the next thing you know we are facing over a hundred thousand deaths

Well here you go. "Michigan, (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/michigans-whitmer-says-states-are-in-bidding-war-for-medical-supplies-amid-coronavirus-pandemic) this week, requested hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine from the Strategic National Stockpile for physicians to use to help treat patients with COVID-19, after the Food and Drug Administration over the weekend granted an emergency use authorization for the anti-malarial drugs.
But last week, Whitmer’s administration threatened physicians prescribing the drugs, saying they were subject to “administrative action” (https://www.michigan.gov/documents/lara/Reminder_of_Appropriate_Prescribing_and_Dispensing _3-24-2020_684869_7.pdf) should they continue to use the medication."


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/michigan-reverses-course-on-trump-touted-coronavirus-drugs

Chinese study came out yesterday which showed hydroxychloroquine to be effective, so it turns out, at least so far, that Trump knew what he was talking about. Hmm.

Approval for emergency use is not a tribute to effectiveness against this strain of virus and as your article points out there is no scientific proof of effectiveness. Its just two of a list of things being tested in a laboratory. Even the Chinese study shows that and that hasn't been verified either.

Hell of a leap of faith to believe the dufus, or China without PROOF!

Approval for emergency use is not a tribute to effectiveness against this strain of virus and as your article points out there is no scientific proof of effectiveness. Its just two of a list of things being tested in a laboratory. Even the Chinese study shows that and that hasn't been verified either."BREAKING: New controlled clinical study conducted by doctors ​in France shows that a combo of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin (Z-Pak) cures 100% of coronavirus patients within 6 days of treatment."

https://techstartups.com/2020/03/18/breaking-controlled-clinical-study-conducted-doctors-%e2%80%8bin-france-shows-hydroxychloroquine-cures-100-coronavirus-patients-within-6-days-treatment-covidtrial-io/

I guess that makes two formal studies and several informal studies. You can be so funny. If Obama had said the drug worked, you'd be writing songs to sing the praises of hydroxychloroquine, but since Trump endorsed it, we get, "Hell of a leap of faith to believe the dufus, or China without PROOF!" Wouldn't it also be a leap of faith to disbelieve Trump with the considerable evidence that does exist?

I won't lie I don't believe anything the dufus says, or repeats from someone else, without solid verifications, so when we get it definitively I'll let you know. Till then I keep my fingers crossed for those that are sick and suffering and hopeful the claims match the high hopes. That goes double for the Chinese my friend.

Honesty is refreshing!

"BREAKING: New controlled clinical study conducted by doctors in France shows that a combo of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin (Z-Pak) cures 100% of coronavirus patients within 6 days of treatment."

https://techstartups.com/2020/03/18/breaking-controlled-clinical-study-conducted-doctors-%e2%80%8bin-france-shows-hydroxychloroquine-cures-100-coronavirus-patients-within-6-days-treatment-covidtrial-io/

we discovered that in Australia weeks ago, the problem is the nanny state won't let doctors treat the disease with out endless clinical trials, to prove the safety of the drug


I guess that makes two formal studies and several informal studies. You can be so funny. If Obama had said the drug worked, you'd be writing songs to sing the praises of hydroxychloroquine, but since Trump endorsed it, we get, "Hell of a leap of faith to believe the dufus, or China without PROOF!" Wouldn't it also be a leap of faith to disbelieve Trump with the considerable evidence that does exist?

It is common sense to try all possible treatments and when one is shown to be effective in one place it should be adopted in others

It is common sense to try all possible treatments and when one is shown to be effective in one place it should be adopted in othersEspecially in these times.

So out of fear and desperation we should forget the clinical trials and go straight to humans in the general population? I kind of think China has, or will, and we should follow THAT example and make Americans (Or anybody for that matter) the guinea pigs for the world? Is that common sense? I can see stocks in those producers rising with the price of each dose, and bragging rights that may not be justified.

I know for FACT the dufus has no degree in any science and can only repeat a chemical name he was told and we have not even reached a reliable thresh hold of testing for the virus itself, which makes the entire response, let alone treatments and cures, way behind the actual events.

Yes, the events run ahead of reason, but good news, the rate of infection is slowing here, since we stopped the pleasure boats, a very useful border control, stopping the boats and that other usefull border control, turning hotels into concentration camps noone gets in without a visit, and anyone who has no purpose here has been asked to leave, I think they are expected to swim, but wait there some empty pleasure boats (plague ships) leaving................

I know for FACT the dufus has no degree in any science and can only repeat a chemical name he was told and we have not even reached a reliable thresh hold of testing for the virus itself, which makes the entire response, let alone treatments and cures, way behind the actual events.You know less than he does but that doesn't stop you from incessantly commenting on the subject. He has the advantage of meeting repeatedly with med experts, and he's a seriously smart guy who just happens to be the pres. I would think it strange if he didn't express his opinion.


So out of fear and desperation we should forget the clinical trials and go straight to humans in the general population?Clinical trials have been going on for weeks, so I'm not sure what your point is there. The two drugs have been in use for decades. The only question is not safety, but whether or not the drugs will work against CV.

You know less than he does but that doesn't stop you from incessantly commenting on the subject.

Clinical trials have going on for weeks. Have you been living on Mars?

For every expert the dufus has multiple idiots around him, diluting common sense, and decisive actions, which allows him to rift his despicable character he knows some will buy...! Clinical trials even fast tracked are early in the process, but of course you can't wait to taut their success. Even a Martian would know that. Or a Chinaman, who has lied before, and a dufus who has lied before.

For every expert the dufus has multiple idiots around him, diluting common sense, and decisive actions, Who?


Clinical trials even fast tracked are early in the process, but of course you can't wait to taut their success. Even a Martian would know that. Or a Chinaman, who has lied before, and a dufus who has lied befYou must begin to keep up. The latest completed trial I posted was from France. Can't wait to taut their success? Wow. Would you feel better if hundreds of thousands died just so you could use that to advance your hatred of all things Trump?

Good for France, after a sufficient verification process we're good to go, but don't tell me to celebrate the end of this dilemma until then. Can't I cross my fingers, but remain neutral till then?

don't tell me to celebrate the end of this dilemma until then.I haven't told you to.


Can't I cross my fingers, but remain neutral till then?I would hope you would be more than neutral, but I get your point. It's still a wait and see game. The hard part is going to be when the time comes to pay for all of this. Every level of government is going to be short of funds and long on expenses so figuring out how to pay for this is going to be tough.

Yeah we will see what happens when the bills come due.

Yeah we will see what happens when the bills come due.I think that will prove to be the worst part of this whole deal.

Just for a laugh.
https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/91557968_535474960679684_2810996996482007040_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=txSwkFsojf4AX8oFroY&_nc_ht=scontent.fmem1-1.fna&oh=0fd33c0cef9cac3d6ee62205b9f5156b&oe=5EAEAE1E

Had to laugh. Good one.

Yes it happened here over night

Silly signs or rain?

That sign is probably one of ours but both

Was your blatant misrepresentation of the views of Aquinas part of that great concern your "side" has for the truth? You need to be careful with what you post. Some of us remember your past posts quite well. How about your claim that Matthew contained 660 of Mark's 661 verses? Was that the truth?

JL, you're a bigger moron than I thought. Maybe it's just laziness – probably a little of each.


From your bizarre belief in eternal punishment for anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus, and your insistence in refusing to believe the US Navy spoke out against Trump re his visit to the USS John McCain, and to your inability to understand Thomas Aquinas, you never disappoint with your stupidity.


I won't touch on your uninformed belief on taxes other than to refer to your own Bible for guidance on this matter.


The eternal punishment business which you defended for months with numerous Bible verses was thoroughly rebutted in every case, until you yourself fell into confusion as you tried to fit your new understanding into a modified position considering, for example, that newborn babies were not subject to your monstrous penalty.

After the changes you made, you finished with eternal punishment for “SINNERS” with Christ being unnecessary. You even included a Buddhist "sinner" which was a far cry from your original position. However, your newfound belief is so vague as to be meaningless. You've shown constant difficulties with your reading of the Bible, going so far as to characterize those who disagree with you as “amateurs”. Having been taught since childhood your bizarre Biblicisms, you present as quite a bit less than “amateur”. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.


When you insisted the US Navy made no response to Trump's comments on the USS McCain in Yokohama, I pointed out that you were 100% wrong. You demanded I prove what I was claiming, calling me a liar. (A habit of yours – calling those who disagree with you, liars.) If memory serves, I said I would prove it if you met certain conditions. You failed to do so, and continued with your insults. Therefore, I kept that knowledge to myself. Now, I'll give it to you – Vice Admiral Phillip Sawyer, when asked by the White House to obscure the USS John McCain during Trump's visit, said “NO WAY”. Here's the link --https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/06/03/admiral-squashes-white-house-request-to-hide-uss-john-mccain/ You lacked the skill to find it for yourself.


Finally, Thomas Aquinas. You couldn't find this either, probably because it's not contained in your three minute study of the saint at Wikipedia. He added the clause in question because of pressure from the Church hierarchy. In the 13th century, the Catholic Church had much more power (secular and religious) than it does today. It was common to exert pressure on scholars when they came up with something the Church found heretical. Heresy then was a SECULAR crime against the state. (Galileo is a more famous example when he was silenced by the Church for teaching the earth was not the center of the universe.) Ultimately, Aquinas found exceptions in those who lived before Christ and those after him who were “made fit for heaven without it.”


That silliness about Matthew and Mark doesn't deserve a response. Yes, the number of verses should have been 601, not 660. A typo hardly enough to get you so excited like it was the second coming.


(If you don't like insults and name-calling, then don't start it).

Many words but no quotes, so no, I don't trust your recollection of any of our discussions.

As to Aquinas, you posted only a portion (deceitfully??) of what Aquinas wrote. When I supplied the remainder, it completely changed his meaning. It was such a pathetic attempt at deceit that I have it in a Word doc to use with youth groups. I can use it to show them how to deal with people who consider themselves to be intellectuals by simply double checking their claims. That's why I was so easily able to reproduce your post. I'll be happy to send the doc to you if you'd like it. It's instructive.

The Matthew/Mark problem was that you never simply came back and said, "My bad." I even posted that I suspected you were mistaken, but you never owned it.

I never changed my position of sinners. You just can't read.

And then there is, of course, the four unanswered questions. Months and months later, you cannot answer them. That's why I really have come to find this board so boring. At least two people who love to argue and yet cannot summon the simple courage to answer questions. It's too frustrating for my tastes. You can't really call it a discussion when only one person (me) is willing to answer questions.

Many words but no quotes

So what?



As to Aquinas, you posted only a portion (deceitfully??) of what Aquinas wrote

I said, "...he added the clause in question". Trouble reading?



......people who consider themselves to be intellectuals ....

Never wade in water over your head.



The Matthew/Mark problem was that you never simply came back and said, "My bad." I even posted that I suspected you were mistaken, but you never owned it.

Wow! That must be the sin against the Holy Ghost!




I never changed my position of sinners. You just can't read.

That was NOT what I said. Who can't read now? Your change of position referred to belief in Jesus.




And then there is, of course, the four unanswered questions.

The questions were answered and some were answered more than once due to your habit of claiming answers you don't like are not answers. Good luck with that!

The questions were answered and some were answered more than once due to your habit of claiming answers you don't like are not answers. Good luck with that!

Nope. Asked many, many times, but never answered.

The rest of your post is meaningless.

The rest of your post is meaningless.

Proves my point. Whatever you disagree with is "meaningless". You're imitating Trump who uses different words for the identical idea. Whatever he disagrees with is "fake news".

Aren't you the one who said imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?

You could always give us the real answers JL. Then we would all know. 8D

No he can't do that Tal, he isn't interested in answers, just in arguing

Just to prove the point, here are the four unanswered questions. At this point I don't care if you answer them or not as it's an old topic. I do care when you state you already have when, in fact, I posted them close to a dozen times in an effort to get at least one answered and you never would.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

There is a very acceptable place for this discussion that doesn't hijack this thread topic.

Just to prove the point, here are the four unanswered questions. At this point I don't care if you answer them or not as it's an old topic. I do care when you state you already have when, in fact, I posted them close to a dozen times in an effort to get at least one answered and you never would.

1. How is it that nearly every translation does not accept your definition of aionios?
2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
3. What was your view of these scriptures? Matt. 13:50; 10:28; 18:8,9; Luke 3:17; 12:5; 13:27,28; 17:19ff. You can also refer to Rev. 20:11ff; 21:8, 2 Thes. 1:9, Mark 9:43, Jude 1:7, and 2 Peter 3ff.
4. Based upon what Strong's concordance had to say about "kolasis", do you think you missed it with your interpretation of the word?

Jl, you are really pathetic. For the last time.

1. Your "every translation" is sourced in a copy that made the initial error long ago.

2. That's called Purgatory.

3. Those scriptures have been responded to in the many months when you were defending your non-belief-in-Jesus-eternal-punishment-in-hell business. If you need to see them again, check the archives.

4. No, I prefer my interpretation which is far more consistent with the Bible overall (and earlier than many of yours) than your sick interpretation which demonizes Jesus and comes from somewhere inside you.


Have you checked out your Bible yet and what it says about taxation as I told you?

(sorry, Tal, maybe this will end it).

1. Your "every translation" is sourced in a copy that made the initial error long ago.
That does not strike me as an adequate explanation. Besides, whatever it means for hell, it must mean the same thing for the life of the believer referenced in Matthew 19. I would hardly characterize that as a majority view.


2. That's called Purgatory. There is no way to fit that into Matthew 25. Doesn't work. You have to "shoehorn" your existing belief into the text. The concept is nowhere to be found in that passage.


3. Those scriptures have been responded to in the many months when you were defending your non-belief-in-Jesus-eternal-punishment-in-hell business. If you need to see them again, check the archives.I think we can take that as you having no reply. The cumulative weight of those scriptures is contrary to your concept.


4. No, I prefer my interpretation which is far more consistent with the Bible overall (and earlier than many of yours) than your sick interpretation which demonizes Jesus and comes from somewhere inside you. That's fine. You differ with thousands of scholars over centuries who do not agree with you. That's OK with me, but I wouldn't expect many people to side with your view.

Let's get honest about something here. if you want to discuss this, you might as well be civil. I don't bow to you in any way in this discussion. You seem to think that I should just accept your remarks as gospel truth, but you can forget that. I generally don't find your remarks to be compelling, and there is certainly nothing about you that is intimidating. If you can't accept that, then that's OK with me and we can just drop it, but your cutting remarks have gotten old. But at least you did answer 2.5 of the questions, so I give you that much.

JL said:

2. Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage, that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?
Um, yes, that's the description of Purgatory.

if you want to discuss this, you might as well be civil.

You mean like you?


I don't bow to you in any way in this discussion. You seem to think that I should just accept your remarks as gospel truth, but you can forget that. I generally don't find your remarks to be compelling, and there is certainly nothing about you that is intimidating.

Wow! Imagine what a psychologist could do with that! Very revealing.


If you can't accept that,

Your reply was totally predictable. But I trust it will stop your carping once and for all. Your answer was simply your usual answer of your own statements without supporting facts.

A thousand scholars! Indeed! Please provide their names. No, never mind.

Now will you go away? Finally?

Now will you go away? Finally?


Not much chance of that, about as much chance as getting out of his purgatory

Um, yes, that's the description of Purgatory. Can you point me to the scripture which describes a person getting out of hell and going to heaven such as would happen in Purgatory?


Your reply was totally predictable. But I trust it will stop your carping once and for all. Your answer was simply your usual answer of your own statements without supporting facts.

A thousand scholars! Indeed! Please provide their names. No, never mind.

Now will you go away? Finally?Sadly consistent with the past.

A thousand scholars? I feel very safe in saying that in the dozens of translations that do not accept your drastically minority view of the meaning of "aionios", it would be safe to say that a thousand scholars were involved. I guess it would be safe to assume that you were not one of them. And I'm certain we can say the same thing about your translation of "kolasis". It's all fine with me. Believe it if you want to, but it does nothing to diminish the Biblical teaching of an eternal hell.

Can you point me to the scripture which describes a person getting out of hell and going to heaven such as would happen in Purgatory?
I was agreeing with Athos. What you described ("Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage,that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?") is the definition of Purgatory.

...your translation of "kolasis". It's all fine with me. Believe it if you want to, but it does nothing to diminish the Biblical teaching of an eternal hell.

Of course it does. It is translated as "corrective punishment", not "eternal punishment". Corrective punishment means the penalty is temporary, not forever.

Are we really discussing what the difference is between hell and purgatory? I fail to see the difference and though not a scholar, appreciated the zeal that the members take on the subject. As we enter into the spring and the days important to many, lets not forget those that are sick and suffering, the elders, and the least, dealing with the hell on earth scourge of this virus. Very grateful for those that take actions despite the obvious danger to themselves on behalf of other, from the medicine people to the grocery people. Their importance is obvious.

Be wise and safe and just give some thoughts to those that are a blessing for all of us.

I was agreeing with Athos. What you described ("Would you agree that, even based upon your rendering of the Mt. 25 passage,that there is a hell and people will be sent there at least for some period of time?") is the definition of Purgatory.I understood your intent. My question to Athos was not to affirm any temporary nature of hell but rather to see if we could at least agree that people will be sent to hell. But since there is not so much as a whisper in the Bible of people going from hell to heaven, or at least that I'm aware of, then I don't accept the idea of Purgatory. That's why I asked you what I did. I don't know if you buy into the idea of Purgatory or not.

As for Athos, you hold a position supported by a very much minority translation of two Greek words. I went through about ten mainstream, well-known NT translations and none of them agreed with your take on the two words in Mt. 25. So it's like your idea is water coming from a kitchen faucet with the Niagara Falls flowing in the background. I don't mean for that to sound offensive, but I'm going with the Niagara Falls which has Jesus describing hell as both eternal and fiery. I realize that rubs you the wrong way which I think is unfortunate. I suppose we'll just have to leave it at that.

@WG from JL



I understood your intent. My question to Athos was not to affirm any temporary nature of hell but rather to see if we could at least agree that people will be sent to hell. But since there is not so much as a whisper in the Bible of people going from hell to heaven, then I don't accept the idea of Purgatory. That's why I asked you what I did.

Not to speak for anyone, but is it my understanding here that as you reject the concept of purgatory so should we all? Isn't that like me rejecting the bible, because of an ancient man or men saying what Jesus said to them eons ago? Or even broader accepting that any religious book should be taken as God inspired given the foibles of man (disciple or not; preacher or NOT.) in the first place?

It really scares me that ones faith is so dependent on a translation of a foreign language. An ancient foreign language at that.

Not to speak for anyone, but is it my understanding here that as you reject the concept of purgatory so should we all?Everyone is free to believe what they will. I'm just advocating for a position. I don't know of any Biblical support of purgatory. Maybe it's there and I'm not aware of it, but as in all things, people can take it or leave it.


It really scares me that ones faith is so dependent on a translation of a foreign language.Practically all of ancient history is dependent on the translation of ancient languages. The Bible, and in particular the NT, is actually extraordinarily well supported.

JL posted:

...So it's like your idea is water coming from a kitchen faucet with the Niagara Falls flowing in the background. I don't mean for that to sound offensive, but I'm going with the Niagara Falls...
I'm guessing you've never been to and seen Niagara Falls. It's not "the" Niagara Falls; no article is used because it's actually TWO large falls, one on the American side ("American Falls") and one on the Canadian side ("Horseshoe Falls"), the two separated by Goat Island.

You're welcome :) .

I have been there. Your correction is well taken.

Thank you :)

Note: You did leave out Bridal Veil Falls, the third of the group.

As for Athos, you hold a position supported by a very much minority translation of two Greek words. I went through about ten mainstream, well-known NT translations and none of them agreed with your take on the two words in Mt. 25.

That's because they simply repeat the error of what others have already said. Here's a hint: look for those words in Plato and Aristotle where they obviously don't mean what Matthew's Greek is translated as.


So it's like your idea is water coming from a kitchen faucet with the Niagara Falls flowing in the background. I don't mean for that to sound offensive

That was never my idea. You're confusing yourself again.


, Jesus describing hell as both eternal and fiery. I realize that rubs you the wrong way which I think is unfortunate.

Once again, you are confusing the issue. My initial objection, which you opposed, was that your belief of unbelievers going to eternal punishment was wrong. You defended that position for several months until modifying it along the way, finally arriving at something like unbelievers/sinners go to hell leaving Jesus out of the equation.

Frankly, you don't seem to be able to put your belief in a simple sentence that all can understand. To now say that I don't believe in an eternal hell as punishment is nothing more than a deflection from your original position. In any case, my belief, which I have already stated, is irrelevant to the discussion which is about YOUR belief.

By the way, you are correct in one thing. The description of Jesus describing hell as both eternal and fiery absolutely "rubs me the wrong way". It is a horrible way to think of the "good and gentle Jesus" in that way.

Everyone is free to believe what they will. I'm just advocating for a position. I don't know of any Biblical support of purgatory. Maybe it's there and I'm not aware of it, but as in all things, people can take it or leave it.

Of course, it's there. Google "Bible and Purgatory". Or just go to a Catholic website and examine their support for a Biblical purgatory. Can you do that? Will you? No one is forcing you to believe it, but you will see why it is believed.


Practically all of ancient history is dependent on the translation of ancient languages. The Bible, and in particular the NT, is actually extraordinarily well supported.

I frequently hear this claim.

1. It's simply not true. There is little extra-Biblical reference supporting Biblical claims.
2. It's frequently asked why do people believe there was a Caesar or Alexander or other historical figures and not believe in Jesus? It's because belief in Caesar has not come down to the present day as a god.

I have been there. Your correction is well taken.

Thank you :)

Note: You did leave out Bridal Veil Falls, the third of the group.
I didn't want to overload you with names. I grew up in a tiny community about an hour away and got to see the American side when it was "turned off" by the Army Corps of Engineers in 1969.
https://niagaracruises.com/blog/is-it-possible-to-turn-off-niagara-falls/

Or maybe you just forgot? Anyway, I have seen pictures of that. I don't recall why it was done, but it was an amazing sight. I would love to have seen it in person. Isn't there some sort of large power station upstream from the Falls?

Or maybe you just forgot? Anyway, I have seen pictures of that. I don't recall why it was done, but it was an amazing sight. I would love to have seen it in person. Isn't there some sort of large power station upstream from the Falls?
No, I didn't forget!!! Sheesh!

Read the article to answer your questions. (There's a power station at the foot of the American Falls.)

Question for you: What's the striking difference between the two main falls?

No, I didn't forget!!! Sheesh!Well, your first explanation was phony, sooooooo??



Question for you: What's the striking difference between the two main falls?Horseshoe Falls is much larger???

That's because they simply repeat the error of what others have already said.Sure they do. By the hundreds and hundreds, highly educated, thoroughly professional people just repeat an error that, it just so happens, disturbs you. It is a thousand times more likely that the mistake lies with you and not with them. Sorry, but I'm just not going to buy that idea. Very few reasonable people would. Besides, as I've said repeatedly, if hell is temporary, then so is heaven, for the same word is used to describe both of them.


Once again, you are confusing the issue. My initial objection, which you opposed, was that your belief of unbelievers going to eternal punishment was wrong. You defended that position for several months until modifying it along the way, finally arriving at something like unbelievers/sinners go to hell leaving Jesus out of the equation.

Frankly, you don't seem to be able to put your belief in a simple sentence that all can understand. To now say that I don't believe in an eternal hell as punishment is nothing more than a deflection from your original position. In any case, my belief, which I have already stated, is irrelevant to the discussion which is about YOUR belief.I have never left Jesus out of the equation. You can't read Rev. 20 and get that idea. Sinners go to hell because of their sins. It is judgement for sin. Jesus is our deliverance from that fate. Jesus himself said, “I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.” That is the part that has you confused.


Of course, it's there. Google "Bible and Purgatory". Or just go to a Catholic website and examine their support for a Biblical purgatory. Can you do that? Will you? No one is forcing you to believe it, but you will see why it is believed.If it's there, then post it. I'm not going to play the "google it" game. To be clear, I am looking for that "smoking gun" scripture that tells us about someone getting out of hell and going to heaven since he had suffered enough for his sins.


Practically all of ancient history is dependent on the translation of ancient languages. The Bible, and in particular the NT, is actually extraordinarily well supported.



I frequently hear this claim.

1. It's simply not true. There is little extra-Biblical reference supporting Biblical claims.
2. It's frequently asked why do people believe there was a Caesar or Alexander or other historical figures and not believe in Jesus? It's because belief in Caesar has not come down to the present day as a god.Trying to find a historian who does not believe in the existence of Jesus is not easy. Josephus, Pliny the younger, Trajan himself, and several others testify to that. The controversy concerns the resurrection, not His existence.

The strange thing to me is this. Why do you bother with any of this if you don't believe in the authority of the Bible? Why would you care?

Well, your first explanation was phony, sooooooo??
It was not.


Horseshoe Falls is much larger???
Nope. I doubt very much you've been there. The striking difference between the two falls is very obvious.

It was not.I assure you it was.


Nope. I doubt very much you've been there.Believe what you will.

I assure you it was.

Believe what you will.
I've been there tons of times. I figured mentioning Bridal Veil Falls would only confuse you. Now, Mr. Avoider, please tell me the very obvious difference between the American Falls and the Horseshoe Falls. Or were you there on a family vacation when you were a child? Ah, that must be it!

I was there one time in the summer of 82. I was in Bible College and playing bass for our praise group. We were up there for a Full Gospel Business Men's Convention to do the music singing for Jesus. We also got to play at a fairly small amusement park. I drove the bus (used Trailways bus) and the thing I remember the most was some narrow streets. We did the boat ride (Maid of the Mist?) and could see the Falls though our hotel lobby window. We were there one day and had to move on to our next church. I don't recall any glaring issues with the Falls.

You just forgot. Go ahead and be honest enough to admit it. "Pride goes before a fall." (<;

I was there one time in the summer of 82. I was in Bible College and playing bass for our praise group. We were up there for a Full Gospel Business Men's Convention to do the music. We also got to play at a fairly small amusement park. I drove the bus (used Trailways bus) and the thing I remember the most was the narrow streets. We did the boat ride (Maid of the Mist?) and could see the Falls though our hotel lobby window. We were there one day and had to move on to our next church. I don't recall any glaring issues with the Falls.

You just forgot. Go ahead and be honest enough to admit it. "Pride goes before a fall." (<;
YOU DROVE a Trailways bus at that age?

Look at the water falling over both precipices and where the water lands. Notice anything?

YOU DROVE a Trailways bus at that age?I was 28.


Look at the water falling over both precipices and where the water lands. Notice anything?If your objective is to drive me bonkers, you are getting perilously close to it. PERILOUSLY CLOSE!

don't stop now

Clete, two civil people are having a conversation here. You would be out of place.

I was 28.
Whew!


If your objective is to drive me bonkers, you are getting perilously close to it. PERILOUSLY CLOSE!
I was just pretending I'm you.

Here are photos of the American Falls:
https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/niagara-falls-without-water-1969/

Here are photos of the Horseshoe Falls:
https://www.tripadvisor.com/AttractionProductReview-g154998-d11448214-Niagara_Falls_Canadian_Side_Tour_and_Maid_of_the_M ist_Boat_Ride-Niagara_Falls_Onta.html

Because of all the mist, it's difficult to see the difference at the base. But try. Ignore what Yoda said. Or do your own googling.

One of them is dry and has no color???

OK. Seriously now, my best guess is the amount of rubble at the base of each fall? There is much more at the American Fall?

One of them is dry and has no color???

OK. Seriously now, my best guess is the amount of rubble at the base of each fall? There is much more at the American Fall?
As I said, in 1969, the army corps of engineers diverted the Niagara River to check the American side for erosion (far too many rocks had piled up at the base -- "rubble"). The Canadian side is limestone and has little erosion.

Read the "rare historical photos" link!!!! Here it is again:
https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/niagara-falls-without-water-1969/

Got it.

Got it.
There will be a test on Tuesday.

On Matthew 25?

On Matthew 25?
On the Niagara Falls....

Rats. Oh well, I will be prepared.

Rats. Oh well, I will be prepared.
Remember: no notes smuggled in and no cellphones.

Remember: no notes smuggled in and no cellphones.Since I'll be taking it on the computer by internet, then notes and cell phones kind of become irrelevant, so I accept your terms!

Since I'll be taking it on the computer by internet, then notes and cell phones kind of become irrelevant, so I accept your terms!
But you might google for an answer! Is there anyone around to oversee you?

Is there anyone around to oversee you?Let me put it this way. I anticipate making a good score.

Let me put it this way. I anticipate making a good score.
My worst fears have come to pass.

My worst fears have come to pass.Life can sure be tough.

and apparently in the opinion of some, made tougher

My worst fears have come to pass.Now what can you really have on the test? The names of the three falls, the fact that one of them was dry at one time, and what makes the Canadian Falls different from the American Falls. What else could you have?

Now what can you really have on the test? The names of the three falls, the fact that one of them was dry at one time, and what makes the Canadian Falls different from the American Falls. What else could you have?
Have you read all the material I passed out to the class? If so, you'll be okay. Or maybe not. There may be a few surprise questions.

There may be a few surprise questions.Now I'm worried.

Have a wonderful Easter. Celebrate and honor the risen Lord.

Sure they do. By the hundreds and hundreds, highly educated, thoroughly professional people just repeat an error that, it just so happens, disturbs you. It is a thousand times more likely that the mistake lies with you and not with them. Sorry, but I'm just not going to buy that idea. Very few reasonable people would.

Here's a brief lesson on textual criticism. It's the study of various versions of the Gospels (Scripture). There are many translations and revised versions of the Bible. For example the KJV was written a few centuries before the earliest Greek scriptures were discovered. The earliest complete Gospels date from the 3rd-4th century. That is time enough for slight omissions or errors to be made. Copies were generally made by scribes - not scholars. Many of the scholars (Protestant and Catholic) had biases and pressure to conform to certain doctrines.

Even the autograph gospels had differences in Jesus' words and actions, but none to threaten his essential core message. Extend the copying over 2,000 years and it's easy to accept some differences. That can easily explain the heaven/hell wording.


I have never left Jesus out of the equation. You can't read Rev. 20 and get that idea. Sinners go to hell because of their sins. It is judgement for sin. Jesus is our deliverance from that fate. Jesus himself said, “I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.” That is the part that has you confused.

Yes, it has me very confused. When I brought up people who never heard of Jesus - babies and Buddhists - you seemed to backtrack and left out the belief in Jesus part because, of course, they would be unable to believe if they had never heard of him. Can you now make a clear statement about who goes to hell for eternal punishment? Not just Sinners - that's far too vague.


If it's there, then post it. I'm not going to play the "google it" game. To be clear, I am looking for that "smoking gun" scripture that tells us about someone getting out of hell and going to heaven since he had suffered enough for his sins.

You asked the question about purgatory and I gave you the best way to get your question answered. Now you refuse to do what I recommended because you don't play google games. Google is an excellent way to find out, and in this instance, by far the best way. Yet, you refuse.


The controversy concerns the resurrection, not His existence.

No argument there.


The strange thing to me is this. Why do you bother with any of this if you don't believe in the authority of the Bible? Why would you care?

I don't remember ever saying I didn't believe in the Bible. What I don't believe in is your erroneous and literal understanding of the Bible.

What is strange to me about this discussion is that you generally don't respond to the things I present other than hurling insults and nastiness - to which I am happy to return in kind.

Here's a brief lesson on textual criticism. It's the study of various versions of the Gospels (Scripture). There are many translations and revised versions of the Bible. For example the KJV was written a few centuries before the earliest Greek scriptures were discovered. The earliest complete Gospels date from the 3rd-4th century. That is time enough for slight omissions or errors to be made. Copies were generally made by scribes - not scholars. Many of the scholars (Protestant and Catholic) had biases and pressure to conform to certain doctrines.

Even the autograph gospels had differences in Jesus' words and actions, but none to threaten his essential core message. Extend the copying over 2,000 years and it's easy to accept some differences. That can easily explain the heaven/hell wording.You left out some things such as the fact that scribes were generally highly dedicated, professional individuals who employed safeguards to keep their work accurate. You also failed to mention that the manuscript evidence for the NT is abundant, especially in relationship to other ancient texts. It is nonsense to contend that scribes made wholesale changes to the manuscripts in such a way that could not have been detected. Still, you were generally accurate, but you said nothing to defend your position that you are right and hundreds of scholars have been essentially duped. It is just a ridiculous position, so much so that I'm surprised you insist on continuing with it.


You asked the question about purgatory and I gave you the best way to get your question answered. Now you refuse to do what I recommended because you don't play google games. Google is an excellent way to find out, and in this instance, by far the best way. Yet, you refuse.Already very adequately answered. No, I don't play the "google it" game. If you know, then respond. If you don't know, then simply say you don't know. The "google it" response is usually a cheap way of trying to hide a lack of knowledge. That's why I don't play that game.

I have not said sinners go to hell. I have said, and it is in complete agreement with the words of Christ, that people go to hell for their sins. It is only in Christ that sins are forgiven. Do you agree with the words of Christ from John 8? "I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”


What is strange to me about this discussion is that you generally don't respond to the things I present other than hurling insults and nastiness - to which I am happy to return in kind.If you find a comment of mine to be "nasty", then point it out and we can discuss it. As to your questions, they are being, and have been, answered. I have already made a clear statement about who goes to hell, but I'll make an agreement with you. I will again state my belief if you will guarantee us all that you will follow it with a clear statement of your belief.

You left out some things such as the fact that scribes were generally highly dedicated, professional individuals who employed safeguards to keep their work accurate. You also failed to mention that the manuscript evidence for the NT is abundant, especially in relationship to other ancient texts. It is nonsense to contend that scribes made wholesale changes to the manuscripts in such a way that could not have been detected. Still, you were generally accurate, but you said nothing to defend your position that you are right and hundreds of scholars have been essentially duped. It is just a ridiculous position, so much so that I'm surprised you insist on continuing with it.

None of the things you stated are facts I'd be interested in knowing those safeguards for accuracy were as opposed to consensus to appeal to an agreeable position as did other writers of the day on the same subject.

The bible and any other works of man ever recorded is subject to the authority of the day and whatever they deemed important or relevant. The ancient Christian movement had many sects and off shoots that produced many bibles, and writings until almost by consensus and popularity, mostly regional/local one version was adapted and promoted, and that's the product we have now and worth noting is the various version that exist. It's actually fascinating to observe and study the evolution of culture and society as it grows and consolidates and hones its dogma, traditions and customs into one dominant clear message for it's followers, and unless you are an "independent" religions outside the affiliations of the mainstream, then you are at least a local part of a national and international body of some religious agreement.

So those ancient men didn't just tune into God to come up with a finished product, they reached a consensus, to make that finished product we call the bible (Or any other final product man makes for public consumption), as the goal was to out compete the competition for public attention and support. Now if any one thinks that a lot of liberal license was not taken to that end, in language use and meanings, then think again, because that's what people to rise above the other voices. To even think there was no competition between the original disciples of Christ after the crucifixion, would be ignoring the basic human nature of just surviving, while spreading the word of Jesus in a break from the Jewish traditions of the day which they and Jesus were a part of. Yes Jesus was a Jew, NOT a Christian, and if there is a historical record of him leaving the Jewish faith please share that with me.

No religion can survive without followers, or at least curry interest enough to make people stop and listen, and then as now you still have to have enough sponsorship to keep it going. So in todays world least we forget the simple message of the one who's tribulations sparked this huge holiday shared by many, share love not hate.

Leave it to other humans to making a simple thing into a big mess.

So those ancient men didn't just tune into God to come up with a finished product, they reached a consensus, to make that finished product we call the bible (Or any other final product man makes for public consumption), as the goal was to out compete the competition for public attention and support.That is far removed from the Christian faith. God sent His Son to reveal the truth to us, not to ask us for our opinions. He has no interest at all in any human consensus from the perspective of establishing truth. Our job is to agree with His word and will. Jesus leaves no room whatsoever for any appeal to consensus. He never adjusted His message in order to gain the approval of man.

As the author of Hebrews puts it, "Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world." The greatness of Christ demands our worship and obedience.

I have not said sinners go to hell. I have said, and it is in complete agreement with the words of Christ, that people go to hell for their sins. It is only in Christ that sins are forgiven. Do you agree with the words of Christ from Joahn 8? "I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”
What about the mentally ill, the developmentally disabled, those with Down's syndrome (and other genetic disorders), the tribes living in remote places, the unborn (miscarriages and abortions), the babies before the age of reason? What about anyone who doesn't -- or can't -- believe because of extenuating circumstances over which they have no control?

You don't answer my questions. Why should I answer yours?

You don't answer my questions. Why should I answer yours?
I wasn't asking you.

According to your statement, they're going to hell.

I guess the question mark at the end made it seem like a question. But since you're not asking me, then there is no need for an answer.


According to your statement, they're going to hell.Your conclusion.

I guess the question mark at the end made it seem like a question. But since you're not asking me, then there is no need for an answer.

Your conclusion.
Well, then, feel free to explain!

I feel very free.

I feel very free.
Please put your clothes back on!

Watch yourself!

You left out some things such as the fact that scribes were generally highly dedicated, professional individuals who employed safeguards to keep their work accurate.

Scribes, vis-a-vis the New Testament (Gospels), were generally monastics skilled in the art of writing/printing but not scholars. In fact, they usually did not know the language they were copying from unless the source was their own language. They were allowed one mistake per page and completed 3-4 pages during daylight. The Scriptorium Master checked their work and corrected any mistakes they may have made. However, not all mistakes were caught by the Masters. This is easily seen when comparing copied manuscripts.


You also failed to mention that the manuscript evidence for the NT is abundant, especially in relationship to other ancient texts.

The abundance of manuscripts, I would have thought, is obvious, not worth mentioning. The relation of Bible manuscripts to other ancient writings is completely irrelevant to the present discussion.



It is nonsense to contend that scribes made wholesale changes to the manuscripts in such a way that could not have been detected.

I made NO such contention! In fact, I said the errors were infrequent and minor not changing the core essence of the Gospels. Please don't attribute words to me that I didn't make.


but you said nothing to defend your position that you are right and hundreds of scholars have been essentially duped. It is just a ridiculous position,

Again, your words, not mine. I never said they were "duped". Over 2,000 years and several thousand manuscripts, it is simply common sense that the latest copies are not exact copies of the autographs. Add to this that the English translations aren't even in the same original language, and in English itself, words change their meanings over time. The word "gay" does not have the same meaning today as it had as recently as 50 years ago.

In fact, no autographs have ever been found to exist. Other than fragments of a verse or two, the sources date from the 3rd century and later. More than enough time for the earliest manuscripts to reflect the thinking and development of the religion as it evolved since the time of Jesus. Hence, the many disputes and arguments of the nature of Christ and of theology in general until the Church canonized the books of the Bible in the 4th century.


No, I don't play the "google it" game.

That's too bad. You could have gotten the information you asked about had you "played the game" by checking the internet. I note here that, of the many times I asked you to explain something, you usually referred me to the internet to verses from a book (the Bible) and rarely put your point in your own words.


If you know, then respond. If you don't know, then simply say you don't know. The "google it" response is usually a cheap way of trying to hide a lack of knowledge. That's why I don't play that game.

That is complete nonsense. You are letting your prejudices run your knowledge seeking. The question of Purgatory is not something like "Jesus said - I declare Purgatory is after heaven' Period. Full stop". You need to read the references in the Old and New Testaments to understand how the Catholic Church understands it. Now you'll say you don't care. Well, you cared enough to ask in the first place.


I have not said sinners go to hell. I have said, and it is in complete agreement with the words of Christ, that people go to hell for their sins. It is only in Christ that sins are forgiven.

Ok, good. Then my question remains what about those who never heard of Jesus? Since the beginning of time to the present day. And are they punished for all eternity?


Do you agree with the words of Christ from John 8? "I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

I have never had a problem with believing that people die in their sins. The discussion is being hijacked again by you, going off on a tangent.


I'll make an agreement with you. I will again state my belief if you will guarantee us all that you will follow it with a clear statement of your belief.

Fine. But haven't you already stated your belief right above quoting John 8? However, I will state my belief on the issue right after you state yours.

Again, your words, not mine. I never said they were "duped". Over 2,000 years and several thousand manuscripts, it is simply common sense that the latest copies are not exact copies of the autographs. Add to this that the English translations aren't even in the same original language, and in English itself, words change their meanings over time. The word "gay" does not have the same meaning today as it had as recently as 50 years ago.

In fact, no autographs have ever been found to exist. Other than fragments of a verse or two, the sources date from the 3rd century and later. More than enough time for the earliest manuscripts to reflect the thinking and development of the religion as it evolved since the time of Jesus. Hence, the many disputes and arguments of the nature of Christ and of theology in general until the Church canonized the books of the Bible in the 4th century.You never used the word "duped", but you have contended that they have, unwittingly I suppose, just continued the translation of a Greek word that you claim is blatantly and wildly incorrect. So you place yourself against the hundreds of scholars in claiming that "eternal" actually means something else. In essence you are claiming they have been duped into simply accepting something false, and a "something" that is of critical importance. It just strikes me that they would have to be incredibly unprofessional to have done such a thing.

You still have not answered why hell is temporary, but heaven is eternal. The same word is used to describe both. You also have not found a scripture that describes a person going from hell to heaven after having paid the penalty of his sins.

According to Daniel Wallace, 43% of the NT is contained in manuscripts from the second century. That hardly amounts to "a verse or two". Surely you were exaggerating. https://voice.dts.edu/article/wallace-new-testament-manscript-first-century/

I don't agree with your statement about the canon. The canon was likely largely settled by informal agreement some time during the second century. By the time the church formalized it, there was very little disagreement over what to accept.

The autographs do not exist? Name the work of antiquity for which the autographs are still in existence. It is the most common thing in the world for that to be the case. There is also no evidence that the text of the NT has been changed in any substantial way since the autographs, and certainly in no way that suggests it has "evolved" in meaning or content.



I'll make an agreement with you. I will again state my belief if you will guarantee us all that you will follow it with a clear statement of your belief.


Fine. But haven't you already stated your belief right above quoting John 8? However, I will state my belief on the issue right after you state yours.We'll see how this goes. Yes, unsurprisingly I would agree with the words of Jesus in John 8, or in many other passages including the Matt. 25 passage, Rev. 20, and John 3. "The wages of sin is death." When Jesus came at first, He came to bring the message of salvation and to pay the penalty for our sins. He will come again for the purpose of judgment. It is going to be such a terrible event that the "heavens and earth" will flee away. Those who die in their sins will be sent to hell. Those whose sins have been forgiven through faith in Christ will spend eternity in the presence of God. It is the consistent message of the New Testament. Now the punishment will be proportional in a way I don't understand, and yet recognize as being stated in several places.

For further reference you can look at Psalm 21:8-9, Matthew 3:12; 13:49,50; 10:28; 18:8, Hebrews 10:31, Mt. 5:22, 1 Thessalonians 1:10 and 5:9, and 2 Thessalonians 1:8-10.

Your turn.

Wonder who was on that canon "committee"? Can't see anyone putting a bible together including bad stuff, or anything that called the message they wanted to convey into dispute, or contradicted the orthodoxy of the time. Don't you think the ancient kings, popes, politicians, and conquerors corrupted the bible for their own use just as they do today?

You never used the word "duped", but you have contended that they have, unwittingly I suppose, just continued the translation of a Greek word that you claim is blatantly and wildly incorrect.

I claimed ?? - "Blatantly and wildly incorrect" ???? You're doing it again - even after I asked you to stop. Putting words into my posts that were never there.


So you place yourself against the hundreds of scholars in claiming that "eternal" actually means something else. In essence you are claiming they have been duped into simply accepting something false, and a "something" that is of critical importance. It just strikes me that they would have to be incredibly unprofessional to have done such a thing.

You're still missing the point. Maybe this will help.

The method used by scholars is flawed. As we know, if one tells something to someone who then tells someone, and so forth, by the time the telling gets very far down the line, it has been changed, either accidentally or to meet the agenda of the teller. Scholars should not take any such ‘preponderance’ of information over an earlier writing. The closer to the source, the more accurate the writing should be considered. In the oldest manuscript of Mark, the disciples do not find out that Jesus is risen. We have no written evidence that the disciples ever find out since all references to such are found in much later documents. In fact, since Mary is told and the disciples are not, some feel the later manuscripts were changed in order to give the disciples power to control the early church, a political agenda. Given the history of politics in Church history throughout its existence, such a theory is not far fetched. Especially if you agree with many who have read the earliest Mark that the disciples are portrayed as unbelieving, demanding of truth, and the true believers were Mary and Martha. Also, when asked the way to the kingdom of God in the earliest Mark, Jesus replied that one had to give up all of their worldly goods, forsake their families, and follow him. It is no wonder this was later changed to introduce faith as a means to salvation. Only a very, very few could even come close to this criteria. Certainly, the fragile early Church could not have survived with the criteria Jesus laid out.


You still have not answered why hell is temporary, but heaven is eternal. The same word is used to describe both. You also have not found a scripture that describes a person going from hell to heaven after having paid the penalty of his sins.

I explained why. As to the purgatory reference, I gave you all you needed to know and you refused to look at it. You can lead a horse to water, but ..................................


According to Daniel Wallace, 43% of the NT is contained in manuscripts from the second century.

The is hardly accepted by the majority of scholars. The first complete Gospel is from the 4th century. Prior to that are fragments only.


I don't agree with your statement about the canon. The canon was likely largely settled by informal agreement some time during the second century.

Likely? Largely settled? Are you making this up? The Bible was canonized in the late 4th century (Council of Laodicea).


By the time the church formalized it, there was very little disagreement over what to accept.

At the time, there were over 50 gospels and over 100 epistles being used in churches. The Book of Revelation was initially omitted. It is unclear to this day how it finally did get included. Even Luther thought it so wild, he relegated it to an appendix. To this day, the Orthodox Church does not accept it.


The autographs do not exist? Name the work of antiquity for which the autographs are still in existence.

This argument is irrelevant.


There is also no evidence that the text of the NT has been changed in any substantial way since the autographs, and certainly in no way that suggests it has "evolved" in meaning or content.

70 books, almost one million words, 40-50 different authors, composed over millenia, passed down by hand-written copies until the printing press, etc. Do you seriously maintain no changes have occurred?


We'll see how this goes. Yes, unsurprisingly I would agree with the words of Jesus in John 8, or in many other passages including the Matt. 25 passage, Rev. 20, and John 3. "The wages of sin is death." When Jesus came at first, He came to bring the message of salvation and to pay the penalty for our sins. He will come again for the purpose of judgment. It is going to be such a terrible event that the "heavens and earth" will flee away. Those who die in their sins will be sent to hell. Those whose sins have been forgiven through faith in Christ will spend eternity in the presence of God. It is the consistent message of the New Testament. Now the punishment will be proportional in a way I don't understand, and yet recognize as being stated in several places.

My position is - I do not believe people go to hell for eternal punishment because they do not believe in Jesus. You claim that you don't understand about the punishment. I claim that I do understand, and it is not eternal. I believe that faith in Christ has nothing to do with it since babies and the mentally impaired and those who never heard of Christ cannot be liable for something they have no knowledge of. I do not believe that those who "die in their sins" go to hell since the statement is far too vague. What exactly do you mean by sin? Murder? A white lie? I do not believe sins need to be forgiven through faith in Christ. For example, a Hindu may atone for his sins by apology, recompense, or good works.


For further reference you can look at Psalm 21:8-9, Matthew 3:12; 13:49,50; 10:28; 18:8, Hebrews 10:31, Mt. 5:22, 1 Thessalonians 1:10 and 5:9, and 2 Thessalonians 1:8-10.

Let me get this straight. You refuse to look at what I provide for further reference, yet you expect me to look at what YOU provide for further reference!

My position is - I do not believe people go to hell for eternal punishment because they do not believe in Jesus. You claim that you don't understand about the punishment. I claim that I do understand, and it is not eternal. I believe that faith in Christ has nothing to do with it since babies and the mentally impaired and those who never heard of Christ cannot be liable for something they have no knowledge of. I do not believe that those who "die in their sins" go to hell since the statement is far too vague. What exactly do you mean by sin? Murder? A white lie? I do not believe sins need to be forgiven through faith in Christ. For example, a Hindu may atone for his sins by apology, recompense, or good works.You are doing nothing more than telling us what you believe. That's fine, but it's only your opinion with no appeal to any authority. You give no scriptures. Not only that, but you then seem upset that I have refused "to look at what I (you) provide for further reference." Well, what would I look at? There is no scripture, so I am left to believe Jesus or you. I'm going with Jesus.


The method used by scholars is flawed. As we know, if one tells something to someone who then tells someone, and so forth, by the time the telling gets very far down the line, it has been changed, either accidentally or to meet the agenda of the teller.You are mixing two thing together. The method used to copy manuscripts hardly amounts to, "...one tells something to someone who then tells someone and so forth." There is no "telling" going on, and it is scarcely the casual, careless method described. It was a careful, well-scrutinized system, and the result is clear.


Likely? Largely settled? Are you making this up? The Bible was canonized in the late 4th century (Council of Laodicea).Irenaeus in the second century mentions 21 books as being accepted in the churches, all 21 of which ended up in the 4th century canon. At about the same time the Muratorian fragment mentions a very similar set of accepted books. To suggest that it was not settled until the 4th century is inaccurate.

Where is your evidence that 50 gospels and 100 epistles were being used in the early churches?


We have no written evidence that the disciples ever find out since all references to such are found in much later documents.Matthew and Luke are "much later" than Mark? What?

I think I see why you don't refer to scripture. In your mind, the Bible is such a jumbled, unreliable fairy tale that there is no point in putting any confidence in it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but if I believed what you believe about the Bible, I would never read it again. You stated a few days ago that you resented my supposed distorting of the image of a gentle and loving Jesus. How can you have any confidence in that? How would you know it's true that Jesus was "gentle and loving"? I honestly believe that is the greatest difference between the two of us. I regard the Bible as authoritative. You seem to regard it as a collection of nice stories but of no real historical significance, and certainly not a book one would base his life on. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that is sure how it seems.

Jesus didn't write the bible and all his words and accounts are from hearsay sources, many unknown, and unverifiable. Its up to you what you believe, and that's fine with me. If what others believe is not fine with you...so what? Wars have bee fought over ones beliefs before, and we can have a war of words all you want, but who here voted for the sinner who has not repented? I guess he knows he is going to hell, and taking the country and all his fake evangelical family values true believers with him.

What a fine example you have set on how to get to heaven. Good luck with that. Your hatred of HC has served you well. Yeah lets get back to the politics of NOW, because the evidence of your own faith betrays you and you are not very repentant yourself. You have lied about wanting an HONEST discussion.

Repent sinner or burn in the eternal flames of hell! Please God open this sinners mind that he may see the path of salvation ain't through the dufus!

If what others believe is not fine with you...so what?I agree completely with that. Never indicated otherwise.

As to your opening statement, Matthew and John gave first-hand accounts. Both were with Jesus and could scarcely be called "unknown" or "unverifiable". Luke stated this at the very beginning of his gospel. "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%201&version=NIV#fen-NIV-24895a)] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." Mark wrote his gospel from the account given to him by Peter. So your assumption that, "his words and accounts are from hearsay sources, many unknown, and unverifiable," is not accurate. In fact it is a mile away from being accurate. It is simply untrue.

I don't hate HC.

How have I lied? In what way have I conducted a discussion that was less than honest?

What about this angers you so easily? This discussion, fairly civil, was with Athos. What got you so fired up?

Not mad at all JL except when a thread is hijacked yet again by true believers justifying their faith and proselytizing for it. I get it, but at least tell the whole story of the blood, corruption, conquering and domination that spread the word as much as the preaching. I suppose they all (religions) have gone through the same thing from their ancient beginnings until now, but who believes that pure as the driven snow and innocent as lambs stuff when history says otherwise?

Can you keep it in its own thread though?

Can you keep it in its own thread though?I will work on it!

Trump's news briefing today was so far the most bizarre. It turned into a pseudo-ish campaign rally (unethical and illegal), trumpeting (ha ha) about his achievements (but reporters refused to take the bait, which infuriated him). Pence jumped over to the mic to praise Trump with high praise for how well he has handled the pandemic. Trump assured everyone that we'll be open and back to normal very soon.

Trump's news briefing today was so far the most bizarre. It turned into a pseudo-ish campaign rally (unethical and illegal), trumpeting (ha ha) about his achievements (but reporters refused to take the bait, which infuriated him). Pence jumped over to the mic to praise Trump with high praise for how well he has handled the pandemic. Trump assured everyone that we'll be open and back to normal very soon.

Yes but define normal, the world will take a long time to recover and there will be a much more nationalistic attitude, buy local will become normal as people support local industries, the cheap knockoffs from China won't have the same appeal

Recovery is a long way off here I think, and we probably should skip the dufus bluster pressers for a while, just to avoid false hope and false information he tries to feed the public, as we get to tornado season and all those folks with nowhere to run and hide. I think the challenge is the food supply not Chinese knock offs with so many idled workers and more to follow.

Yes food supply will be challenging all over, after years of drought harvests here are way down, particularly rice with only a 10% crop and the sheep and cattle herds are low. Finding workers will be a problem too, not many will take to the road in the great tradition of the swaggie

The virus is going to end up being great big problem #2. Great big problem #1 is going to be figuring out how to pay for all of this. As we say in Mississippi, the chickens are going to come home to roost sooner or later.

You are doing nothing more than telling us what you believe.

That's exactly what you asked me for - a statement of my belief. That's precisely what I gave you! Now you criticize me for "telling what I believe". That's why you have so little credibility. You have a habit of confusing yourself, like you did here.


You give no scriptures. What would I look at? There is no scripture

Good grief! I DID refer to Scripture. You refused to read it. The internet reference had TONS of Scripture material for you in answer to your question. BUT YOU REFUSED TO READ IT.


In your mind, the Bible is such a jumbled, unreliable fairy tale that there is no point in putting any confidence in it.

Now you can read my mind?


Perhaps I'm wrong, but if I believed what you believe about the Bible, I would never read it again.

There's no perhaps about it! You read it on a surface level, taking the words literally and missing the essence.


You stated a few days ago that my supposed distorting of the image of a gentle and loving Jesus. How can you have any confidence in that? How would you know it's true that Jesus was "gentle and loving"?

Calling Jesus gentle and loving is a common expression. Now we can see by your words you don't believe that about Jesus. That's a shocker. But it does help to explain how your Jesus can condemn those who die in their sins to everlasting punishment in hell.


I honestly believe that is the greatest difference between the two of us. I regard the Bible as authoritative.

I believe that you believe that. Closer to the truth is your regard for the Bible being authoritative as the result of an unthinking literal understanding.


You seem to regard it as a collection of nice stories but of no real historical significance.

I am confident I have more knowledge of the historical significance of the Bible than you will ever have.


Perhaps I'm wrong

No perhaps about it. You ARE wrong.

In your world, the Jesus who said Love Your Enemy is the same Jesus who condemns that enemy to hell for eternal punishment. The contradiction escapes you.

In order to honor what I told Tal, I have done away with my post here and moved it here. It can be read at that place. https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=847246&page=5&p=3851676#post3851676

Our generally more civil exchange has been nice.

Thank you JL, have fun. Much appreciate the consideration their is of course new developments into the dufus handling of the covid19 crisis.

It's been reported that through the FBI fema has been tracking states health supply orders and jacking them and rerouting those supplies to it's own stockpile inventories. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/coronavirus-fema-medical-supplies.html?login=email&auth=login-email)

I can understand rationing of scarce supplies, but why are the feds acting like pirates after the states are doing the ordering? Why doesn't the feds do the orders and logistics, if they are going to control the process?

The virus is going to end up being great big problem #2. Great big problem #1 is going to be figuring out how to pay for all of this. As we say in Mississippi, the chickens are going to come home to roost sooner or later.

How we are going to pay for this is not a mystery, how long will it take is the mystery. We just got over paying for the last lot, here at least, but as you have no intention of paying for the last lot, why should you be concerned about paying for this lot, just add it to the slate and continuing living in utopia, where health care ensures you will have an early death and not have to worry about it

Quiet day.

Busy day.

every day is a quiet day, whatever is happening isn't happening here

Rest assured it is happening elsewhere. Hope you're knocking on wood. Our elderly are particularly hard hit.

Yes It is so here too, but the real blight has been cruise ships

We can keep people at home and likely contain the virus, but we can't stay at home forever, so the big question is going to be this. What happens when people go back to work? That has to happen, and likely very soon, so what happens when that happens?

Here are the official Coronavirus guidelines.

1. Basically, you cannot leave the house for any reason unless of course you have a really good reason.

2. Masks are useless, but maybe you have to wear one since it could possibly save you. It's useless, but maybe it is mandatory as well.

3. Stores are closed except the ones that are still open.

4. You should not go to hospitals unless you have to go there. Same thing applies to doctor visits. You should only go there in case of emergency, provided that you are not too sick.

5. This virus is deadly but still not too scary, except that sometimes it actually leads to a global disaster.

6. Gloves won't help, but they can still be very helpful in some cases.

7. Everyone needs to stay HOME, but it's important to GO OUT.

8. There is no shortage of groceries in the supermarket except that there are many things missing when you go there in the evening, but not in the morning, or at least sometimes.

9. The virus has no effect on children except for those it does affect.

10. You will have many symptoms when you are sick, but you can also get sick without symptoms, have symptoms without being sick, or be contagious without having symptoms. It's all very simple.

11. In order not to get sick, you have to eat well and exercise, but eat whatever you have on hand and it's better not to go out, well, but no…

12. It's better to get some fresh air, but you get looked at very strangely when you get some fresh air, and most importantly, don't go to parks or walk. But also don’t sit down, except that you can do that now if you are old, but not for too long or if you are pregnant (but not too old).

13. You can't go to retirement homes, but you have to take care of the elderly and bring food and medication.

14. You can get restaurant food delivered to the house, which may have been prepared by people who didn't wear masks or gloves which, of course, are not effective anyway other than when they are effective. But you have to have your groceries decontaminated outside for 3 hours. Pizza too?

15. Every disturbing article or disturbing interview starts with "I don't want to trigger panic, but…"

16. You can't see your older mother or grandmother, but you can take a taxi and meet an older taxi driver.

17. You can walk around with a friend, but you can't walk around with your family unless, of course, that they don't live under the same roof in which case it is allowable.

18. You are safe if you maintain the appropriate social distance, but you can’t go out with friends or strangers at the safe social distance.

19. The virus remains active on different surfaces for two hours, no, four, no, six, no, we didn't say hours, maybe days? But it takes a damp environment other than in cases where that is not the case.

20. We count the number of deaths but we don't know how many people are infected as we have only tested so far those who were "almost dead" to find out if that's what they will die of.

21. We have no treatment, except that there may be one that apparently is not dangerous unless you take too much (which is, of course, the case with all medications).

22. We should stay locked up until the virus disappears, but it will only disappear if we achieve collective immunity, so when it circulates… but we must no longer be locked up for that?

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/prevention.html

I didn't see your version.


We can keep people at home and likely contain the virus, but we can't stay at home forever, so the big question is going to be this. What happens when people go back to work? That has to happen, and likely very soon, so what happens when that happens?

Seems that testing, and workplace safety equipment will dictate the new normal. TBA.

seems like a great deal of indecision, which is not the case here. The message is stay home, avoid contact with others, and it seems to be working

Of couse there is more confusion and indecision when a growing crisis is sweeping through large populations like we have, but we also have the areas in less populated states that are not as hard hit, but they are starting to show signs that should be heeded and dealt with.

It would seem after your wildfire experience you would be very cautious for we know it doesn't take much to get this thing started, and ramped up quickly in those less populated places.

Of couse there is more confusion and indecision when a growing crisis is sweeping through large populations like we have, but we also have the areas in less populated states that are not as hard hit, but they are starting to show signs that should be heeded and dealt with.

It would seem after your wildfire experience you would be very cautious for we know it doesn't take much to get this thing started, and ramped up quickly in those less populated places.

There have been no reported cases in my region for two weeks and much of the state seems to be free of it, however, there are pockets in Sydney but infections are lessening. Still, we still have the accompanying pandemic of stupidity to deal with. indications the lockdown will remain for another month

Why stop what's working because people are bored, and broke?

There are other reasons to stop, like the low level of infections and the long unemployment queues.

That's the same thing the dufus said today. I would think about doing anything he is pushing. Guess we wait and see how this works. There is the inherent possibility this virus can comeback like most viruses do. Everybody wants this over with, especially those growing number of unemployed losing everything they worked for, or those with elders in places we can't visit but at least alive for the moment. Think about the huge populations yet to have this virus hit, like Africa and Asia with less than stellar health resources.

Or in Australia's case, the next asymptomatic returning cruise ship or vacationer, or just a visitor from some innocuous place on business. You don't know what the catalyst is, or will be. I think we all need to stay on this one, for the foreseeable future any way.

That's the same thing the dufus said today. I would think about doing anything he is pushing. Guess we wait and see how this works. There is the inherent possibility this virus can comeback like most viruses do. Everybody wants this over with, especially those growing number of unemployed losing everything they worked for, or those with elders in places we can't visit but at least alive for the moment. Think about the huge populations yet to have this virus hit, like Africa and Asia with less than stellar health resources.

Or in Australia's case, the next asymptomatic returning cruise ship or vacationer, or just a visitor from some innocuous place on business. You don't know what the catalyst is, or will be. I think we all need to stay on this one, for the foreseeable future any way.
there won't be any more returning cruise ships, the last plague ship is scheduled to leave Sunday all others have been ordered out of our waters'. Anyone returning is placed in mandatory quarantine

I have no concern for other places at the moment, just the reality that I can do nothing for them, and there are governments with that responsibility and even the irresponsible WHO for that purpose. Our response has been nothing short of panic when the number of cases have been fewer than elsewhere and the death rate low, but the doom and gloom merchants have had a field day

there won't be any more returning cruise ships, the last plague ship is scheduled to leave Sunday all others have been ordered out of our waters'. Anyone returning is placed in mandatory quarantine

I cannot say that the only danger of infection is the cruise ships passengers, or whether there are other people infected who are a symptomatic, have a stronger immune system so unknowingly infected, and without testing NO ONE can know either. While reported cases can be counted, it's no telling what is the count for those that have not reported for whatever reason. It's those unknown variables that can bite you.


I have no concern for other places at the moment, just the reality that I can do nothing for them, and there are governments with that responsibility and even the irresponsible WHO for that purpose. Our response has been nothing short of panic when the number of cases have been fewer than elsewhere and the death rate low, but the doom and gloom merchants have had a field day

The Who declared this virus a pandemic in early March but in January they had issued a statement of concern.

https://time.com/5791661/who-coronavirus-pandemic-declaration/



During multiple prior press briefings, WHO officials maintained that COVID-19 had “pandemic potential,” but stopped short of declaring it one. The agency did, in January, call it a
public health emergency of international concern (https://time.com/5774747/coronavirus-who-public-health-emergency/)
, a slightly different label that refers to an “extraordinary event” that “constitute[s] a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease.”


Many world governments were on notice to the events in China, so let's not scapegoat them, though like everywhere, we can see the slow response by all the normal human reactions to a virus that outspread everything we have ever seen.

For all the superiority bluster it's safe to say we were all caught with our pants down and scramble to catch up. Even the most sophisticated and advanced medical minds in the world are searching for answers. Many places like yours don't see the point, since you have not been so effected as other places, but to dismiss it would not be wise. As I have said erring on the side of safety and caution should be everybody's goal as more is learned.

Trust me Clete, enough time later to beetch, blame, and retaliate after it's a lot more certain that the crisis is indeed over and not just in remission.

I cannot say that the only danger of infection is the cruise ships passengers, or whether there are other people infected who are a symptomatic, have a stronger immune system so unknowingly infected, and without testing NO ONE can know either. While reported cases can be counted, it's no telling what is the count for those that have not reported for whatever reason. It's those unknown variables that can bite you.

Cruise ships have for a long time represented a source of infection of various viruses but this time a large number of CV infections and indeed deaths here have originated in cruise ships. Some of these lines will not survive the actions that will be brought against them
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-18/how-coronavirus-turned-the-ruby-princess-into-a-bastard-cruise/12158924



The Who declared this virus a pandemic in early March but in January they had issued a statement of concern.

https://time.com/5791661/who-coronavirus-pandemic-declaration/

the WHO are culpable




Many world governments were on notice to the events in China, so let's not scapegoat them, though like everywhere, we can see the slow response by all the normal human reactions to a virus that outspread everything we have ever seen.

For all the superiority bluster it's safe to say we were all caught with our pants down and scramble to catch up. Even the most sophisticated and advanced medical minds in the world are searching for answers. Many places like yours don't see the point, since you have not been so effected as other places, but to dismiss it would not be wise. As I have said erring on the side of safety and caution should be everybody's goal as more is learned.

Trust me Clete, enough time later to beetch, blame, and retaliate after it's a lot more certain that the crisis is indeed over and not just in remission.

Our politicians erred on the side of caution and we have fewer infections and even fewer deaths, certain others did not and the results are catastrophic, but China bears blame and responsibility. What is happening in the US where lockdowns are being protested is shear lunacy

1. Yes cruise ships are a veritable corona19 bredding ground, as are nursing homes, and prisons but that's the point. Any large gathering of humans in defined spaces is the same risk, and we don't know who is an infector and who is more susceptible. It could be a while before you find out. For sure letting your guard down is not a wise course at this time.

2. Should the focus be on WHO, or dealing with what you got? Seems what you got will keep you busy enough.

3. Agreed! I understand the fear though of those unemployed losing all they have worked for and unable to maintain it. Being powerless will make you crazy!

What you are seeing is lack of trust in government, you are learning the hard lesson that absolute freedom can mean absolute destruction, people left to their own devices are dangerous, people left without direction become mobs. Trump masquerades as a strong leader but he is actually weak and indecisive there should have been a cohesive national plan to deal with CV but the pilate approach leaving it to individual governors was a recipe for disaster, you are either a nation or a collection of individual states

What you are seeing is lack of trust in government,

There has always been a huge lack of trust in government here Clete, but we get to blow off some steam every two years, and plenty of rallies, protests, and marching in between.


you are learning the hard lesson that absolute freedom can mean absolute destruction, people left to their own devices are dangerous, people left without direction become mobs. Trump masquerades as a strong leader but he is actually weak and indecisive there should have been a cohesive national plan to deal with CV but the pilate approach leaving it to individual governors was a recipe for disaster,


When things don't work he can blame the governors, but the reality is he doesn't know what to do. Never did!


you are either a nation or a collection of individual states

Our problem is too much trust in government. "In Government we trust."

Trust but verify!

Our problem is too much trust in government. "In Government we trust."

No, it is actually misplaced trust, in Trump you trust

Not really. Our over reliance on government was going on long before Trump came along. That's why we have a 25 trillion dollar national debt.

I think there is a different reason you have a 25 trillion debt, you cut down all the money trees

Not really. Our over reliance on government was going on long before Trump came along. That's why we have a 25 trillion dollar national debt.

5 trillion dollars a year in a 26 trillion dollar a year economy? We do have options.

https://www.thebalance.com/will-the-u-s-debt-ever-be-paid-off-3970473

And for background

https://www.thebalance.com/deficit-vs-debt-how-they-affect-each-other-and-economy-3305779

We need overall fiscal responsibility on a national level because states on their own can barely provide what they need for themselves on a yearly basis. Some just have more resources and thus more options than others.

5 trillion dollars a year in a 26 trillion dollar a year economy? We do have options.We're not bringing in 5 tril a year in revenue. That's the whole problem. We also don't have a 26 trillion dollar economy. Fairly close, but not that large.

Here's a solution. Pass a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to assess a flat income tax on all Americans equal to whatever they want to spend. There would be no deductions. If you live in America, then you get to support America. If Congress wants to spend 4 trillion, then they must, by law, raise 4 trillion. Now if they did that, you would see spending go down and borrowing stop. Problem solved.

We're not bringing in 5 tril a year in revenue. That's the whole problem. We also don't have a 26 trillion dollar economy. Fairly close, but not that large.

Best economy iin the world dude bar none, and bringing in an extra 5 trill is extremely possible if repubs would stop juicing that economy by suppressing the engine to match those 3rd world nations so big biz can have an edge on cheap labor.


Here's a solution. Pass a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to assess a flat income tax on all Americans equal to whatever they want to spend. There would be no deductions. If you live in America, then you get to support America. If Congress wants to spend 4 trillion, then they must, by law, raise 4 trillion. Now if they did that, you would see spending go down and borrowing stop. Problem solved.

Any plan takes leadership and competence to execute and we just don't have that, but we get a chance to change that in a few months.

5 trillion dollars a year in a 26 trillion dollar a year economy? We do have options.


You do have options it is called fiscal responsibility, something your governments are incapable of, because the government is run by politicians who cannot see beyond the end of their term



We need overall fiscal responsibility on a national level because states on their own can barely provide what they need for themselves on a yearly basis. Some just have more resources and thus more options than others.

Yes you do and it starts with lower spending and more taxation, but it cannot be done because the rich hollar like stuck pigs. All these wonderful programs are programs you cannot afford because there isn't enough to pay for them. Other nations can do it, but you cannot

Big Biz has found a way around our Constitution. We the people elect our government, and big biz pays them. Capitalist run this country and you can see our real issues of infrastructure, poverty, education, healthcare, and inequality go unaddressed. You cannot have moral fiscal responsibility with trickle down economics. I mean what kind of society do we have when a teacher is worth far less than a lawyer?

It's hard to adjust for GREED!

our real issues of infrastructure, poverty, education, healthcare, and inequality go unaddressed.Those areas eat up hundreds of billions of dollars a year. I wouldn't call that going "unaddressed".

Any plan takes leadership and competence to executeYou mean like good ole Barack "I'm Fiscally Responsible" Obama did?

You mean like good ole Barack "I'm Fiscally Responsible" Obama did?
No, more like much, much older Donald "my rich buddies and I don't give a hoot about you losers" Trump does.

Isn't it more like Trump opposes abortion and you resent that? Besides, Trump did more for the poor with an electric economy than Obama ever did.


much olderWhat would him being "much, much older" have to do with anything? Why would you even mention that? Are you prejudiced against the aged?

Like what exactly has the dufus done for the poor? The unemployment was already low, and he lowered it another point so what has he really done for poor people? Oh wait, if you load the rich guys with loot then the chump change trickle down to the poorest! Except in reality the middle class scarfs that up and screw the poor! let 'em eat cheese and salty peas, and listen to sermons for a bag of groceries.

Obama made jobs and gave the poor doctors. The dufus and repubs want to take that away.

Isn't it more like Trump opposes abortion and you resent that? Besides, Trump did more for the poor with an electric economy than Obama ever did.
Electric economy. Yeah, right. Bwahahahaha. And he screwed that up real fast!


What would him being "much, much older" have to do with anything? Why would you even mention that? Are you prejudiced against the aged?
His decline in his old age is amazing! Look at videos from 30-40 years ago -- he was articulate, personable, even charming, said intelligent things in complete sentences without meaningless superlatives thrown in. I know you refuse to Google, so let me know if you want me to post a link or two.

Nope, I'm not prejudiced against the aged.

Electric economy. Yeah, right. Bwahahahaha. And he screwed that up real fast!What a silly statement. It's like blaming the banking crisis for the economic mess Obama had in his first year. No one could have anticipated this virus. You are being completely prejudiced by your hatred of all things Trump.







His decline in his old age is amazing! Look at videos from 30-40 years ago -- he was articulate, personable, even charming, said intelligent things in complete sentences without meaningless superlatives thrown in. I know you refuse to Google, so let me know if you want me to post a link or two.Post links all you want. I hear him enough to know he is completely lucid. Your problem is that you don't like his content.


Nope, I'm not prejudiced against the aged.Then why the need to post "much, much older"? Sure sounded prejudiced to me.


Like what exactly has the dufus done for the poor? The unemployment was already low, and he lowered it another point so what has he really done for poor people? Oh wait, if you load the rich guys with loot then the chump change trickle down to the poorest! Except in reality the middle class scarfs that up and screw the poor! let 'em eat cheese and salty peas, and listen to sermons for a bag of groceries.

Obama made jobs and gave the poor doctors. The dufus and repubs want to take that away.Only a member of the privileged middle class would make a statement like that. What has he done for the poor? How about having an economy that had provided jobs for anyone who wanted one? That's especially important for those of us who realize that having a job, or two or three, is the ONLY way out of poverty. Obama "made" jobs? Obama knew nothing about making jobs. He never owned or operated a business. All he knew was to borrow, borrow, borrow, and then borrow some more.

Are you talking about the rich guys who pay more than 85% of income taxes???

What a silly statement.
Always the putdown...


No one could have anticipated this virus. You are being completely prejudiced by your hatred of all things Trump.
Nope. He could have stopped avoiding the issue early on, stopped lying about the virus, the masks, the PPEs, the numbers of sick and dead American citizens, but NO, his enormous ego wouldn't allow that.

Always the putdown...Only when you post something...silly.


Nope. He could have stopped avoiding the issue early on, stopped lying about the virus, the masks, the PPEs, the numbers of sick and dead American citizens, but NO, his enormous ego wouldn't allow that.Now that's a somewhat fair statement. However, he did make the enormously important move of limiting travel with China, a move which your beloved dems harshly criticized him for. Correct?

Isn't it more like Trump opposes abortion and you resent that?

Trump was in favor of abortion before he opposed it. He began to oppose it when he discovered a large base out in mid-America that opposed it and would vote for him. He once made a crucial error when he suggested women having abortions should be punished. This was never the anti-abortion stance and he backtracked on that mistake the very next day.

From an interview with Tim Russert before Trump ran for president.

“I’m very pro-choice,” Trump says. “I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.”

Russert clarifies his original point: Would you ban partial-birth abortion? “No,” Trump replies.


Yes, people can change their mind on principle. But the only principle Trump has, or ever had, is self-aggrandizement. A malignant narcissist lacks empathy.

Then why the need to post "much, much older"? Sure sounded prejudiced to me.

Um, you failed math? (I can do putdowns too -- learned how from you!)

How old was he 30-40 years ago? (Hint: he was born in 1946.) Don't forget to send him a card when he turns 74 on June 14, 2020. He's much, much older than he was 30-40 years ago. I am too. OMG! YOU ARE TOO!!!

Trump was in favor of abortion before he opposed it.Kind of like Obama was opposed to gay marriage before he supported it? I'm only interested in what he is now.


Um, you failed math? (I can do putdowns too -- learned how from you!)Fraid not. Your putdown makes no sense.


How old was he 30-40 years ago? (Hint: he was born in 1946.) Don't forget to send him a card when he turns 74 on June 14, 2020. He's much, much older than he was 30-40 years ago. I am too. OMG! YOU ARE TOO!!!And he'll be even older tomorrow. So?

'Fraid not. Your putdown makes no sense.
You have trouble with subtraction?


And he'll be even older tomorrow. So?
You questioned my speaking of Trump's being "much, much older."

You have trouble with subtraction?You see, you're trying way too hard. I did no subtraction. In fact, I did no math at all. The key is the person has to actually make a nonsensical statement. You have to wait for that.


You questioned my speaking of Trump's being "much, much older."Your response seems to be that since he is "much, much older", then he is much, much dumber. I think you're digging your hole even deeper.

Whatever happened to Vac? He just sort of disappeared.

You see, you're trying way too hard. I did no subtraction. In fact, I did no math at all. The key is the person has to actually make a nonsensical statement. You have to wait for that.
Ah! You skipped the math part and went right to the word interpretation part! "Now I see," said the blind man....


Your response seems to be that since he is "much, much older", then he is much, much dumber. I think you're digging your hole even deeper.
The process of getting much, much older hasn't been kind to him in all sorts of ways.

Whatever happened to Vac? He just sort of disappeared.
I suspect the worst but pray for the best. ADDED: I did a fsirly quick search. The last posts he made were at the end of January 2020.

Ah! You skipped the math part and went right to the word interpretation part! "Now I see," said the blind man....There was no math part. There was no mention of math. You are right on the precipice!!


The process of getting much, much older hasn't been kind to him in all sorts of ways.
Has it been to anyone? Still, I understand the man works 15 hour days. Not too shabby.

There was no math part. There was no mention of math. You are right on the precipice!!
30-40 years ago. Born 1946. Now much, much older.


Has it been to anyone? Still, I understand the man works 15 hour days. Not too shabby.
He works fifteen-hour days? Surely you jest. The word is that he watches tv all day when he's not golfing. With covid-10, wonder how often he's allowed to travel to Bedminster?

I'm much, much older but still in Mensa. And on the grammar/spelling/punctuation police force.

30-40 years ago. Born 1946. Now much, much older.And now you are over the precipice. I never questioned your math. There was, in fact, no math to question. "30-40 years ago. Born 1946," is data but not math. I did question your motive for saying he was, "much, much older". You have now earned putdown #2, but I will try to be understanding and not issue it.


He works fifteen-hour days? Surely you jest. The word is that he watches tv all day when he's not golfing. With covid-10, wonder how often he's allowed to travel to Bedminster? If you can convince one other person that Trump, "watches tv all day when he's not golfing," then two people on the earth will believe it.

And now you are over the precipice. I never questioned your math. There was, in fact, no math to question. "30-40 years ago. Born 1946," is data but not math. I did question your motive for saying he was, "much, much older". You have now earned putdown #2, but I will try to be understanding and not issue it.
I was giving you help to figure out that he truly is much, much older.

If you can convince one other person that Trump, "watches tv all day when he's not golfing," then two people on the earth will believe it.
Direct quotes from his WH caretakers, oops, staff.

Athos and tal might want to weigh in with what they've heard and read. If he was a hardworking businessman in his younger years, he certainly is no longer that!

I was giving you help to figure out that he truly is much, much older.Keep on digging. There was NO MATH.


Direct quotes from his WH caretakers, oops, staff.
I want to see those quotes that he, "watches tv all day when he's not golfing." I know that's not true since I've seen him do press conferences DURING THE DAY. Perhaps you are engaging in hyperbole?

You should follow his tweets, He is an instigator not a healer, leader, or even a good human. NEVER has been...except to similar birds of his feather. You aren't even curious where the money to banks to help small businesswent went JL. You weren't curious about the bigest lie the dufus has told and keeps repeating about China taririffs going to farmers. Not just you though, but repubs too, but repubs KNEW he was LYING and said nothing. They KNOW the small biz SBA loans was scarfed up by big biz and dufus cronies already, yet said nothing.

Tom knows it too, yet conservatives would rather open the economy back up during rising infection numbers and deaths and send the workers back to be infected. I guess though until workers get tired of being screwed and bearing the brunt of every economic downturn then it's okay for thedufus, and the banks to do what they do. You may as well bring back the whips and chains and call it what it is...modern day slavery.

If we don't work, then we have no economy. If we have no economy, then who pays the bills? In that case even your treasured model of charity where you force people other than yourself to support the poor won't work.


You may as well bring back the whips and chains and call it what it is...modern day slavery.Have you always been such a drama queen? Good grief. Do you think the Martians are coming as well?

The goony goo-goo conservatives have always been here and talking crazy. Didn't say a peep when you issued those deficit funded tax cuts to the rich in perpetuity, but giving sick leave to ordinary folks during a pandemic is unthinkable?

Infections are rising, people are dying, and all you got is whose paying for it? You still got life and BS all mixed up, but I'm the drama queen?

I'm the drama queenYes, you are. Glad we agree on something.


all you got is whose paying for it?Being a liberal, I figured you wouldn't care. You're the same guy who confessed he didn't care about loading debt onto the shoulders of his grandchildren. Sick.

don't worry hyper inflation will take care of it

Yes, you are. Glad we agree on something.

Just stating facts makes me a drama queen? Well which stated facts are those?


Being a liberal, I figured you wouldn't care. You're the same guy who confessed he didn't care about loading debt onto the shoulders of his grandchildren. Sick.

Go back a find where I offered my opinions about dealing with the debt in a responsible manner, but current conditions require safety first well before business as usual. The flaw in your debt logic is we will shoulder it, then our kids, before the grandkids can shoulder it, but current events makes it all our responsibilities NOW.

Just so you know half my grand kids are grown and on their own and dealing with the reality of NOW. That's how they were raised, like their parents were too. Despite your reservation though this has been a growing issue for decades and the hypocrisy is all of a sudden AFTER rich guys got theirs off the credit card, it's an issue when ordinary people need theirs too in this current crisis.

The SBA funding was jacked by rich guys the banks favored over the small businesses and when we get the list you will see that ordinary folks got screwed again.

https://abc7ny.com/shake-shack-coronavirus-new-york-ny-cases-in/6116662/

The company statement says it all.

...Shake Shack, like all restaurant businesses in America, is doing the best we can to navigate these challenging times. We don't know what the future holds. Our people would benefit from a $10 million PPP loan but we're fortunate to now have access to capital that others do not. Until every restaurant that needs it has had the same opportunity to receive assistance, we're returning ours.

This statement got you the DQ (Drama Queen) Whopper award. "You may as well bring back the whips and chains and call it what it is...modern day slavery." If you open your eyes and look, the demonstrations occurring around the country are protesting the CLOSING of the economy, not the opening of it.


The SBA funding was jacked by rich guys the banks favored over the small businesses and when we get the list you will see that ordinary folks got screwed again.If you ever have any real proof of that, then I'll join you in being critical of the legislation passed by Pelosi and the dems in Congress that allowed it.

This statement got you the DQ (Drama Queen) Whopper award. "You may as well bring back the whips and chains and call it what it is...modern day slavery." If you open your eyes and look, the demonstrations occurring around the country are protesting the CLOSING of the economy, not the opening of it.

You really have no clue about what goes on in your own country. The protesters and slave masters want it open now, whether it's safe or not. I noticed you didn't comment on that part.

If you ever have any real proof of that, then I'll join you in being critical of the legislation passed by Pelosi and the dems in Congress that allowed it.[/QUOTE]

Nancy can't pass legislation into law without repubs and the president duh. Minuchin gave the loot to the big banks, and the big banks gave it to their big rich cronies..I mean customers. We know of two national restaurant chains so far, but the rest of list will be revealed.

There are no slave masters in this country, so I found no reason to reply to that.

Interesting how when dems pass lousy legislation, even that is Trump's fault in your view. Just another symptom of your TDS.

Interesting how when dems pass lousy legislation, even that is Trump's fault in your view. Just another symptom of your TDS.
The House can only initiate. The senate passes it -- or not. If the Senate passes it, the president signs it into law.

The House actually writes it. So Pelosi and the dems wrote the bill. Now if you want to suggest that Trump and the repub Senate share some blame, if there is indeed blame to begin with, then that's fine, but this, "It's all Trump's fault," mantra becomes old and weary after a while.

Tom knows it too, yet conservatives would rather open the economy back up during rising infection numbers and deaths and send the workers back to be infected

. You see those empty shelves in the grocery store ? Who do you suppose stocks them ? You see the meat ? How do you think it gets there ? You see the trucks bringing the food across the land ?Yes someone is working in the factories to fill those trucks ,and there are truck drivers who bring the goods . God help your liberal states like NY if truckers were too afraid to cross the Hudson River Bridges to deliver the goods .

The President set guidlines for the opening of the economy and handed them to the Governors for implementation. Some low impacted states plan on opening May 1 . Others where the impact has been greater will wait. It is the goveror's call as it should be .


The protests are about people who want their rights back .... rights that have been snatched in just a few weeks time. You want to know who is a threat ? How about that dystopian 1984 despot running NYC . Sandinista Bill . He is urging Neighbors to spy on Neighbors ,take pictures and text them to his goon squad so they can nail residents
for violations of social distancing protocols.(
text it to 311-692.) In Orwell's 1984 everyone was a snitch .
Governments dumping tons of sand into the skate parks to keep them from being used. Cops patrolling streets with bullhorns to warn people to stay away from each other. Government threatening to turn off the power to your business if you do not close like you’re told. Laws im Michigan
that you may not drive from your house, in your car, to another property you own.
You may not go to drive-in church services, again even if you never leave your car. You may not go fishing. You may not assemble together in any way(a clear 1st amendment violation) . You will be forcefully pulled off a bus without a face mask. You will be fined in San Diego $1,000 for sitting in your car watching the sun set . We are being intered in our homes the way Japanese Americans were in WWII .Protests being organized on Facebook are being removed at the direction of the governement .(
Zuckerberg just shut the movement down on Facebook at the request of the governors.
) State and local parks are shut down denying us the receration that our tax dollar pays for .

So yeah if the President takes the side of liberty then I am on his side .

"It's all Trumps's fault"
Trump could have NOT signed it. Thus, the blame lies on him.

if the President takes the side of liberty then I am on his side .




Tom, are you aware that a virus is all over the globe making people sick and many dying? And that the USA is the most affected country?

And that Trump did nothing for 70 days when measures could have been taken to save lives?

I don't think those rights extend to people killing other people through their criminal behavior. Behavior that is known world-wide to contribute to the virus spreading.

Trump knows nothing about liberty. His interest in opening is the stock market, and his chances for re-election. Could you have imagined anything more bizarre than Trump's delaying life-saving payments to Americans so he could get his name on the checks? Of course, he denied that but who in the world would have thought of something like that other than Trump?

It is time to drop your ideology, Tom, and replace it with common sense. You can always go back when this is all over.

I have no problem with the bill itself, but the execution and implementation, is incompetent. The same argument for voter ID laws Tom I made years ago. The same argument I made with immigration policy, fiscal responsibility and a number of other subjects. Implementation and execution by repubs is lousy, incompetent, cruel and inhumane period, even when it's a good idea. You can complain about your states folks, I certainly complain about mine, but at this time the dufus passing the buck, scarfing the credit, and as always tooting his own horn and making other toot it as well is dispicable.

As to the bill, rest assured a lot more will be revealed and in the coming weaks we;ll see now won't we. Go ahead support the profits as the people suffer, and relief of the suffering should be the priority rather than seeking relief through the profit. For sure this virus crisis has exposed us to being greedy selfish b@stards thinking capitalism and trickle down is the way to go, and even conservatives see that folly but still some will push it anyway.

Either way 4 million tests of the needed hundreds of millions ain't cutting it. Whatever the costs to get there we just better bear it and get where we need to be and flying blind is no way to make America great again. YUP, I drank the kool aid, as we ain't so great right now as the fear of losing money and power has gripped us.

Thank you dufus for us needing to make America great again but I doubt that happens on your watch.

Trump could have NOT signed it. Thus, the blame lies on him.I think they have a shot now you can take for TDS. I feel pretty sure they will move you right to the front of the line.


I have no problem with the bill itselfYou've read the bill? If you have not, and I feel pretty safe in guessing you have not, then how would you know you have no problems with it?


His interest (is)...his chances for re-electionYeah. Thank goodness Pelosi, Biden, and the other dems have no interest at all in the election.

It is time to drop your ideology, Tom, and replace it with common sense.
I don't see liberty as an ideology . Liberty is
the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.Was it irresponsible for Jacksonville to reopen their beaches ? They have 20 cases a day . When should people get their liberty back ? When there are no cases ? You are silly ,

Trump's delaying life-saving payments "Life saving"?

Hows this for "life saving "consequences of imposed isolation ?


https://www.newsweek.com/us-alcohol-sales-increase-55-percent-one-week-amid-coronavirus-pandemic-1495510

Those ole unintended consequences usually come back to bite you.

Did the feds just send out checks at any time during the Great Depression? They did create jobs programs, but I don't think there were any free checks.

I did my homework, but only read the summary. (https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/748) Then we can DISCUSS.

Those ole unintended consequences usually come back to bite you.

Did the feds just send out checks at any time during the Great Depression? They did create jobs programs, but I don't think there were any free checks.

There you go with that ancient stuff. The depression was not fueled by a health crisis the likes we have never seen. Can't even blame it on the dufus, but we can criticize what he does about it, giving leeway to the fact it's a huge daunting task.

There you go with that ancient stuff. The depression was not fueled by a health crisis the likes we have never seen. Can't even blame it on the dufus, but we can criticize what he does about it, giving leeway to the fact it's a huge daunting task.
You can't blame Trump for an increase in alcohol consumption, he didn't cause CV, what you have to blame is people. I haven't increased my alcohol consumption because of isolation so someone who does just can't manage their time. A shutdown is a knee jerk reaction which says we cannot rely on people to be responsible, keep their distance and have good sanitation

You're right, we should just keep doing what we did before and let it run it's course right? Even with things shutdown this virus is growing Clete, but why be broke and sick, right?

There you go with that ancient stuff. The depression was not fueled by a health crisis the likes we have never seen. Can't even blame it on the dufus, but we can criticize what he does about it, giving leeway to the fact it's a huge daunting task.The GD was much, much worse than what we are experiencing now. You can't even compare the two. People would work any kind of job they could find. It went on for years.


I did my homework, but only read the summary. (https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/748) Then we can DISCUSS.So the answer is no. Even so, what did you think of the controls they put in place to control SBA loans?

1.The GD was entirely different, wholly economic. This one will have a virelant disease component. Solve that you solve the economy.

2. The controls appear adequate on there face, and intentions, but only as good as the enforcement put behind them. There are plenty of holes in which to drive a truck through, but capitalizing the big banks wasn't the way to reach the intended small businesses, and another bill to correct that may not be as bi partisan as that one was nor as easy to craft.

I generally just read the summary first as it takes time to study the entire bill. The summary is like a table of contents to find specific data.

I have to remind you the feds were pushing money at this also, but in what ways is unknown. I had read that the regional banks were more the focus of the feds. Not enough facts to really connect those dots in any appreciable way yet.

The controls appear adequate on there face, and intentions, but only as good as the enforcement put behind them. There are plenty of holes in which to drive a truck through.So the controls are so adequate that there are many holes in which to drive trucks through? Well yes, that makes complete sense.

You're right, we should just keep doing what we did before and let it run it's course right? Even with things shutdown this virus is growing Clete, but why be broke and sick, right?

It is interesting Tal it is growing there and declining elsewhere it seems about three months sees the worst, so as you say why be sick and broke but dead when after three months you can be back to just being broke

So the controls are so adequate that there are many holes in which to drive trucks through? Well yes, that makes complete sense.

You left out the part about enforcement, and my reference to the feds efforts (https://thehill.com/policy/finance/492834-federal-reserves-efforts-on-coronavirus-raise-eyebrows), crucial to the overall execution and implementation of the legislation.

It is interesting Tal it is growing there and declining elsewhere it seems about three months sees the worst, so as you say why be sick and broke but dead when after three months you can be back to just being broke

Not every place here started at the same time, nor is everyone broke. Do we even know we can count on herd immunity after that 3 months? Nobody knows but many seem willing to find out.

I don't see liberty as an ideology .

When an ideology starts killing people, it's time to adjust that ideology.


Liberty is the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views

Key phrase - OPPRESSIVE restrictions by authority, etc. Restrictions designed to save lives during a health crisis are not oppressive. That's why your ideology needs adjustment.


Was it irresponsible for Jacksonville to reopen their beaches ? They have 20 cases a day

Absolutely irresponsible. What will you say when those cases increase followed by people dying?


When should people get their liberty back ?

They've never lost it. If you mean when will things return to normal, there will be a new normal when a vaccine is developed.


You are silly ,

And you are foolish.

The dufus touts the death rate and opening up states and I'll be darned if repub governors have decided to ease restrictions, and as yet none has sited the data that supports it. At least not publicly, nor have they shown they are prepared for it despite the Phase I guidelines for reopening. Among them the guy in Georgia who two weeks ago didn't know that the virus could be spread by people who look healthy and show no symptoms.

You think he was listening to Dr. Fauci, or the dufus?

Can we face an obvious fact? The virus will go through the population and infect more than half of us eventually . Then pray it doesnt mutate , The restrictions were put in place NOT to save lives . They were put in place so that public health facilities would not be over whelmed . Mission accomplished ,Now we need medicines and vaccines .Testing will only confirm what we know ….that many people have had it and did not show symptoms .
This isolation protocol is unsustainable .
Suppressing transmission means that we won’t build up herd immunity The trade off of success is that we are driving the infection rate down to such a low level that we have to keep those isolation measures in place to maintain that success.
Are we to keep the economy of the world shut down until vaccines are created ? And what happens if this is like other covid viruses like the common cold where immunity lasts about 3 months ?
I predict you will see an uptick in the death rates when people start going back to work no matter when restrictions are lifted . Still it has to be done . This isolation protocol is unsustainable . It creates it's own public health issues .

https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/suicide_prevention/docs/Literature_Review_FSTP_Unemployment_FINAL_508_8-19-2019.pdf


No society can safeguard public health for long at the cost of its overall economic health. I know for a fact that private practices are shutting down ;or have not been able to treat patients for weeks . What happens when their patients are unemployed and no longer have coverage ? Many of the practices closing will not reopen. I have encountered that in the last week. I have had some telemed sessions with hospital run services . But I already know we will have to look for other primary care when all is said and done.

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/independent-frontline-primary-care-practices-covid-19-coronavirus-layoffs-Senate-stimulus-bill/574694/

I agree with most of what you said but the mitigating argument is after the health care/hospital system is kept stable the focus and priority must be ramping up RELIABLE testing protocols and supply chains that facilitate those tests. Heck everybody screens for drug use for new hires and random testing for all employees. Yes the virus challenge is daunting and has changed things but can't we make adjustments as we learn and adopt?

Aren't those video visits great? Stay well my friend.

This isolation protocol is unsustainable .

I predict you will see an uptick in the death rates when people start going back to work no matter when restrictions are lifted . Still it has to be done . This isolation protocol is unsustainable . It creates it's own public health issues .Yep. Risk management at work. We think the virus is bad, but if this economy goes south and stays there, then we will get a new definition of bad.

Have a friend in Zimbabwe. They are all VERY concerned about this virus. Unemployment there is well over 50%. Doctors are few and far between. Money is very, very scarce. Everyone is locked in their homes, but that can't continue forever. We are such a blessed country to have what we have. We are living in great abundance. Even the poor in America have abundance compared to many other parts of the world. If you don't believe that, then you need to get out more.

Aren't those video visits great? Stay well my friend. I would not have minded getting a chest x ray .But I refuse to go to the emergency room unless my symptoms get much worse .

I would not have minded getting a chest x ray .But I refuse to go to the emergency room unless my symptoms get much worse .
Won't your primary slide you through, right into getting a chest x-ray at the hospital? There are portable units available; one might even be brought to your home. Or, what about a walk-in clinic that does x-rays? Of course, call first to find out any of the above is available.

Avoid ER right now! Even back in normal times, too often it was a zoo. During my last visit in May 2018, an unattended and mostly naked patient jumped off the exam table that was in a curtained cubicle and ran up and down the hallway.

We have private imaging and testing clinics appointments only. Our separate GP's also share a lab. Same healthcare network.

Our hospital won't do testing unless you are already a patient at the hospital . I had to show up at 8 AM to a public park converted to a testing location . Drive into a tent and then take the alien probe up the nose . I will explore other options if I get worse .

Hope you get better soon, Tom.

Well folks give him credit for trying! After his hydroxychloroquine cure being debunked he has a new cure for his Faux News audience to get behind. Lysol injections and sticking ultra violet lights down your throats. (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-asked-if-disinfectants-could-be-injected-to-kill-coronavirus-inside-the-body-doctors-answered-people-will-die/ar-BB137Yr7?ocid=spartandhp) Heat and light would be an excellent treatment for those infected with the virus. He even dragged a Homeland Security official with him to his presser to show his "suggestion" was being taken seriously, and touted to doctors in his administration. When asked what Dr. Binx though of this idea, she said she never heard of this treatment before, but heat was a good treatment for the flue, no reference to the virus.

Noteworthy was her visible cringing discomfort through out his rifting presser. This follows his other presser when he claimed the virus would disappear when the weather warmed, and yet another presser that claims it was going to disappear and not come back, while not just his own experts dispute, but everybody else too!

I'll leave it to you for the world wide reaction to his latest words and antics, which was met with incredulous skepticism and out right derision. If you're not rolling your eyes in total disgust at this point, I have to question your sanity.

I listened to the link. At no point did Trump suggest injecting Lysol into people or sticking lights down their throats, so where did you get this from? He talked about the potential benefits of UV light and heat, both of which are hardly radical.

The hydroxy cure has not been debunked. Several studies came out supporting it and you were doubtful. One study comes out negative and all of a sudden you have your mind made up. It's sad and sick that you liberals so desperately want that drug to not work just so you can increase your criticism of Trump.

I'll admit readily to a bit of editorial exageration in presenting what the dufus rifted as I know you would point out that's not what he said JL, and miss entirely he did say disinfectants, which you must think is viable as heat, and UV's. It's NOT, and experts have said so, and for non doctor types like the dufus with his public position, don't you think he should have run that by his experts before he blurted stuff like that out? Or was he just distracting from the fact he is an utter dufus with no clue, and everybody around him is enabling his idiocy with silence and the strongest of push back. I mean he got away with the hydroxy deaths, because we sluffed it off as crazy, instead of recognizing even one person listening and acting on his ludicrous suggestions is one to many, and there are those that will. That's what makes him dangerous, he is listened to.

Case in point is your own acceptance of his ideas, and refusal to call it crazy as hell, suggesting you and the dufus share a common lunacy. Please don't drink the Lysol with or without bleach, and for god sake don't stick a black light up your arse! Now most of this post is tongue and cheek, to lighten up a serious subject and should not be taken radically personal. Chalk it up to cabin fever.

Sunshine and great weather will do that to even the most ardent hermit!