 |
Thankfully I can STOP holding my nose and vote for Joe, who might do better than firing an experienced pandemic response official and replace him with a dog breeder.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Joe would be a better solution than the dufus.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
A little different outlook for Trump. Thank goodness the dems are the party of openness and fairness.
Michigan State Representative Karen Whitsett (D-Detroit) has recovered from the Wuhan coronavirus. Now, the lawmaker faces a censure from her Democratic colleagues for crediting Trump for her recovery.
Detroit Rep. Karen Whitsett says she was experiencing the worst symptoms associated with the coronavirus before she took the drug hydroxychloroquine. If it weren't for President Trump, Rep. Whitsett says the drug wouldn't have been accessible to patients like herself. Less than two hours after taking hydroxychloroquine, the lawmaker said she began feeling the first signs of relief.
"If President Trump had not talked about [hydroxychloroquine], it would not be something that's accessible" in Michigan "because of an order that was put down in my state," Whitsett explained on Fox News earlier this month.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronso...overy-n2567537
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I can see how you would think one geriatric might be as good as another
@JL
Snake oil testimonial. Well known the drug is used widely to treat other conditions including one of which this legistlator suffers, and has previously been treated effectively with drug, but telling is while she credits the drug for her recovery, her clinicians have not. Now I can see the dufus and his hopeful sycophants glomming on this spin, but you cannot ignore she may have recovered without it, as many have, or the studies that have shown it ineffective for corona19.
So of course her colleagues aren't happy this dem would help the dufus sell his snake oil. Ask Romney what happens when a repub crosses the dufus is a similar story.
Got something against old people?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I don't know if the drug helped her or not, but she is convinced it did. I just think it's interesting that the liberal democrat party is going to sanction one of it's own because she had the temerity to say something nice about the man they love to hate. And she is the second black pol in one week to draw the ire of the democrats for saying something positive about Trump. It sure seems that the democrats think they own black voters and politicians. "Hey over there! You get back in line. Who do you think you are, a free American or something?"
I thought the same thing, Tal. It was a strange comment.Quote:
Got something against old people?
Tal I'm older than both and more lucid than both, so no, but I don't believe people of that age belong in politicsQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
totally agree . Change the constitution. If 36 is the youngest a person can be to quailfy for President ,then double it and say nobody over 72 should qualify to run ,
Reagan was in his seventies for most of his presidency and he was the best we have had in a long time.
He was 69 when he ran in 1980.Biden is 77 which means that he is older than Reagan was at the end of his second term.
I would seriously advise against voting for Biden. His age is the least of his problems, but bear in mind that Reagan was 73 when he ran for re-election. Your Constitutional change would have prohibited that.
Such a change to the constitution would be a daunting challenge so we leave it to the peeps for now, though its an interesting prospect. Of course the peeps can deal with that by not nominating an old coot in the first place.
Very true. In fact I was thinking yesterday of how low the quality of younger pols must be to have Trump and Biden being the only two choices.Quote:
Of course the peeps can deal with that by not nominating an old coot in the first place.
incumbents don't count . that is the new amendment also :)Quote:
but bear in mind that Reagan was 73 when he ran for re-election. Your Constitutional change would have prohibited that.
tal I have understood for a long time that it is almost impossible to make amendments under the traditional way of Congress proposing them .That is why there has only been 3 passed since 1965 . But as you know I am in favor of a constitutional way where the "peeps " really have a say.
Do away with the electoral collge while you're at it, and political gerrymandering. It's a simple computer function.
like you said let the peope decide . Gerrymandering is not in the Constitution . It is a state's power. I don't believe an amendment would even pass through a convention of states . They are unlikely to give up one of their powers . Get rid of the electoral college then you get rid of federalism .You may as well dissolved states because states will be geographic constructs and not sovereign. You live in Texas . I doubt most Texans would like a nation where Texas doesn't have the influence and power it has .
Texas is already a geographical construct with amazing wealth. You better get here before it turns as blue as NY.
Better still get out before CV gets you
Texas is opening for business and testing is ramping up slowly. Just got my supply of masks.
Masks don't help, but using a antispetic gargle regularly might. Social distancing helps too but the best way is to be far away from the infection sitesQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
People are infection sites and masks may help though how much who can know. We do know the risk go up without them. Does mouth wash kill the virus? I didn't know that.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:55 PM. |