Quote:

---

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 .....

Quote:

---

“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/artic...18cZMiNLh7eI4Y

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

All 20-20 hindsight horse poo .

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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

Quote:

---

"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/12170...761152?lang=en

Quote:

---

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-m...TL8rB4yw5uiFQo

Quote:

---

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

---

Very 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, 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” should they continue to use the medication."


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mic...onavirus-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!

Quote:

---

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/...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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

"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/...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

Quote:

---

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

Quote:

---

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

---

Especially 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................

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

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.

Quote:

---

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

---

Who?

Quote:

---

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 bef

---

You 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?

Quote:

---

don't tell me to celebrate the end of this dilemma until then.

---

I haven't told you to.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.n...6b&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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Many words but no quotes

---

So what?

Quote:

---

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

---

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

Quote:

---

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

---

Never wade in water over your head.

Quote:

---

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!

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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!

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

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).