 |
Yep. Blatant partisanship will do it every time!
Dodging questions does it, too. "I cannot understand why you are so quick to criticize Trump for simply saying he thought a particular drug showed promised in treating CV, while going so far out of your way to make excuses for Obama."
Nobody understands why you keep using the same Benghazi meme for every criticism of the dufus either.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Just like, I suppose, no one understands why the whole issue of the elderly couple taking fish tank cleaner could have ever been blamed on Trump having pointed out the value of a prescription med. I do dearly love to highlight what seems to be such partisanship in giving Obama a pass for something he was clearly responsible for while throwing mud at Trump over something he had no control over. I guess an even-handed approach to being critical is what I'm after.
I NEVER gave him a pass as the buck stopped with him, his words, and actions. The same standard that the dufus should be held to. That doesn't seem to be enough for you and that's too bad, and sad.
It was much too early to throw out possible remedy names. Plus, Trump knows how gullible his true believers are.
I've never given anyone a pass for Benghazi.
not buying it . His comments were taken out of context by the selective c/p job Athos did . Here is his full comment ;keeping in mind that the very next day ,the FDA approved it as a compassionate use trial .
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...ess-briefing-6Quote:
The FDA has also approved compassionate use for a significant number of patients. You know what that means. We’re also reviewing drugs that are approved abroad or drugs approved here for other uses.And, you know, one of the things that I’m most proud of that I got was Right to Try. That’s where somebody who’s ill, somebody who’s very sick — terminally ill, usually. In past administrations — we signed this a year and a half ago — you wouldn’t be able to even think about getting any of the drugs that may be showing great promise. Now — and they’ve been trying for many decades to get this approved and it sounds simple, but it’s not because there’s liability involved and lots of other things. And I was able to get it approved, working with Congress. Right to Try.This is beyond Right to Try. What we’re talking about today is beyond Right to Try. Right to Try has been, by the way, a tremendous success. People are living now that had no chance of living, where we take treatments that would — things that — that would have to go through years of a process. And if somebody was terminally ill — and I would say, “Why wouldn’t they be able to try this?” They’d go to Asia, they’d go to Europe, they’d go all over the world to try and find something. Or some people, if they had no money, would go home to die. They’d go home to die; they had no hope.Right to Try has been an incredible success. But this is beyond Right to Try. If treatments known to be safe in Europe, Japan, or other nations are effective against the virus, we’ll use that information to protect the health and safety of American people. Nothing will stand in our way as we pursue any avenue to find what best works against this horrible virus.Now, a drug called chloroquine — and some people would add to it “hydroxy-.” Hydroxychloroquine. So chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. Now, this is a common malaria drug. It is also a drug used for strong arthritis. If somebody has pretty serious arthritis, also uses this in a somewhat different form. But it is known as a malaria drug, and it’s been around for a long time and it’s very powerful. But the nice part is, it’s been around for a long time, so we know that if it — if things don’t go as planned, it’s not going to kill anybody.When you go with a brand-new drug, you don’t know that that’s going to happen. You have to see and you have to go — long test. But this has been used in different forms — very powerful drug — in different forms. And it’s shown very encouraging — very, very encouraging early results. And we’re going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately. And that’s where the FDA has been so great. They — they’ve gone through the approval process; it’s been approved. And they did it — they took it down from many, many months to immediate. So we’re going to be able to make that drug available by prescription or states.I spoke with Governor Cuomo about it at great length last night, and he wants to be right on — on the — he wants to be first on line. And so I think that’s a tremendous — there’s tremendous promise, based on the results and other tests. There’s tremendous promise. And normally the FDA would take a long time to approve something like that, and it’s — it was approved very, very quickly and it’s now approved, by prescription. Individual states will handle it. They can handle it. Doctors will handle it. And I think it’s going to be — I think it’s going to be great.Then we’re quickly studying this drug, and while we’re continuing to study it — but the studying is going to be also done in — as it’s given out to large groups of people, perhaps in New York and other places. We’ll study it there.
So informing people on the 19th ;and the FDA approved it on the 20th is "much too early" ?
The FDA didn't approve it for just anyone. Apparently, that couple wasn't the only one who has a problem understanding. The sentence is, "The FDA has also approved compassionate use for a significant number of patients."Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
and that was a true statement . NYC began their compassionate use trial last week . https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coro...-know/2341931/
and the operative words throughout his comment is by prescription. He advises no one to take the drug on their own
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-8W1msXoAEywgZ.jpg
How do you know it was much too early? Even Clete had already been talking here about the drugs being successful in Australia. It was well known to just about everyone.Quote:
It was much too early to throw out possible remedy names. Plus, Trump knows how gullible his true believers are.
Oh? So you do think it's fair to hold Obama and HC responsible for the loss of four lives?Quote:
I've never given anyone a pass for Benghazi.
The same standard? So you do agree that it's fair to hold Obama and HC responsible for the loss of four lives, and that's it's trivial nonsense to suggest that Trump has any responsibility at all for the tragic situation with the elderly couple, and that even the smallest suggestion that it amounted to "Trump's first kill of an American" is foolishness on a very high level?Quote:
I NEVER gave him a pass as the buck stopped with him, his words, and actions. The same standard that the dufus should be held to. That doesn't seem to be enough for you and that's too bad, and sad.
Much too early for a non-medical person to throw it out as a possibility -- and that's all it was at that time, a possibility. Trump was foolish on a very high level.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Yes, if they're guilty.Quote:
Oh? So you do think it's fair to hold Obama and HC responsible for the loss of four lives?
How do you it was much too early? Too early based on what standard?Quote:
Much too early for a non-medical person to throw it out as a possibility -- and that's all it was at that time, a possibility. Trump was foolish on a very high level.
The magical "if". It's the pass you're giving to Obama. You just can't help yourself.Quote:
Yes, if they're guilty.
Nothing official had yet been said about that as a remedy. It needs to undergo clinical trials. Hyping it wasn't his call as a non-medical person.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Why did the Republicans let it pass?Quote:
The magical "if". It's the pass you're giving to Obama. You just can't help yourself.
@Tom.
Shame to promise people something that could still be months off even if it works in other places. Even if they found someone who could use it now as a last resort, you would have to release liability for the doctor and hospital so why is everybody all jacked up when despite the claims and high hope NOBODY in the world is doing any wide spread uses with VERIFIED results.
@JL
When you going to accept the results of 7 investigations by multiple entities and stop pestering people to join your lynch mob after how many years? Okay Obama and HC bear responsibility for Benghazi! What exactly do you want from that?
EXACTLY! What's wrong with your fellow conservatives WG?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Of course there had been official statements. Studies had been conducted both in France and China with the use of the drug and the results had been encouraging and had been publicized, so your statement was not correct. Now granted the studies were not complete, but the results had been encouraging, and that was what Trump referrering to. If a person wants to say that Trump should have been more reserved in his statement, then that's fine, but to suggest that he is somehow responsible for a person ingesting fish tank cleaner is lunacy, or to state that, "Trump was foolish on a very high level," is really getting WAYYY too much sugar for a dime.Quote:
Nothing official had yet been said about that as a remedy. It needs to undergo clinical trials. Hyping it wasn't his call as a non-medical person.
Now Obama's State Department had known for weeks that the Benghazi consulate needed more security. Nothing was done. They then knew the place was under attack. Again, nothing was done. They knew it was a premeditated act of terror, but they sent Susan Rice out to lie to the American people and say it was a spontaneous reaction to an offensive video.
Might add that not a single person was ever held responsible by Obama for the Benghazi disaster.
So tell me. Who do you consider to be the truly guilty party in this discussion?
Good to hear you say that. So I guess my statement that Trump is still three people "killed" short of Obama is correct?Quote:
Okay Obama and HC bear responsibility for Benghazi! What exactly do you want from that?
She is about as much of a conservative as I am a liberal dem.Quote:
EXACTLY! What's wrong with your fellow conservatives WG?
How do you figure?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Perhaps I'm wrong. Give us your conservative bonafides. I have noticed nothing from your posts that strikes me as conservative, but I'm willing to listen.
Here is why people lose confidence in the press. The first headline is from the NY Times. "President Trump Called Hydroxychloroquine a 'Game Changer,' But Experts Warn Against Self-Medicating With the Drug. Here’s What You Need to Know." On what planet did Trump suggest that people self medicate? When did we need to be told that a person should not self medicate with a couple of drugs that require a prescription?
The other is from, of all places, Weather.com. "Coronavirus Could Kill 200,000 in U.S. in Best Case Scenario; Americans Told to Stay Home Through April." I watched the press conference. The range she gave was 80 to 160 thousand, and she said she hoped it would be below the 80 figure. Later they had this headline. "1.6 to 2.2 million U.S. Deaths if No Precautionary Measures Taken." Well, aren't we taking precautionary measures?
This is one of our problems. In an effort to get traffic, these news agencies are going with the most sensational headlines possible.
Obviously the couple in question acted from a profound fear, and were desperate enough to self medicate on POISON. Knowing that people are very afraid and even desperate, caution and discretion are advised, but nobody can ever accuse the dufus of either, and while he isn't responsible for their actions, a callous disregard for the effects of his words has always been a trademark of his style.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
They all do it. Always have in recent memory. There is a lot of competition for viewers.Quote:
The other is from, of all places, Weather.com. "Coronavirus Could Kill 200,000 in U.S. in Best Case Scenario; Americans Told to Stay Home Through April." I watched the press conference. The range she gave was 80 to 160 thousand, and she said she hoped it would be below the 80 figure. Later they had this headline. "1.6 to 2.2 million U.S. Deaths if No Precautionary Measures Taken." Well, aren't we taking precautionary measures?
This is one of our problems. In an effort to get traffic, these news agencies are going with the most sensational headlines possible.
If Trump had NOT mentioned the two drugs, then libs would be endlessly criticizing him for failing to promote hope.
I have no issue with criticizing Trump for his mindless mouth running. I'll join with you on that, but to suggest that he killed someone with his remark is taking it way, way too far.
I think the distinctions in the reacts to the dufus words and actions are subject to the perspectives of those that have certain opinions. Of course the range wildly, but as I said some hold him responsible for the death, some do not, and know he has a big mouth, and some know he is a liar who must be looked at closely and verified.
No doubt where we all fall in our opinions, but I've never criticized him for his big mouth just the lies and exaggerations and I consider them dangerous.
all politicians who try to disseminate information at this time, instead of leaving it to experts, are going to get it wrong, Trump issued some "fake news" it had the ring of truth, but was ill informed and the weak minded followed the news trail and died as a result, this will be no different to many other false news trails like focusing on ventilators when ventilators will be needed by few, or focusing on hand sanitiser when soap and water will do
Are you talking about the hydroxycholroquine?Quote:
all politicians who try to disseminate information at this time, instead of leaving it to experts, are going to get it wrong, Trump issued some "fake news" it had the ring of truth
If the experts didn't specify, why would a politician?
The experts did specify.
I think the experts have said they are looking and testing a number of things for a treatment and vaccine. I see no wholesale selling of any particular treatment on humans have you? A lack of testing though has been on the frontlines of both containment and developing treatments, and it remains the lack of resources and manpower that's the main focus.
Yes as a physician administered cure it may be effective but disinfectant will probably kill it too but not if ingestedQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I'm not following you on this one. You said, "Trump issued some "fake news" it had the ring of truth, but was ill informed and the weak minded followed the news trail and died as a result." In what way was it "fake news"? Weren't you the one who posted here a couple of weeks ago that scientists in Australia were using hydroxychloroquine as a successful treatment for CV? When Trump mentioned it the use of the drug was already fairly widely known. He was hardly the first person to mention it, so in what way was it "fake news"?
I think the dufus was grossely exaggerating the facts to make it look like he knew what he was talking about. He has a way of spinning things to make himself look better. Like the Australian cure for covid-19, yet have no numbers to go with it.
Yeah. Thank goodness Pelosi, Obama, and HC never did that.Quote:
He has a way of spinning things to make himself look better.
jeeeze one fn moron couple took a dose of fish tank cleaner . This argument is pathetic. If people are going to committ suicide they are going to commit suicide ! Tragic stupidity . Blaming it on Trump is just plain political BS !!!!!!!!Quote:
all politicians who try to disseminate information at this time, instead of leaving it to experts, are going to get it wrong, Trump issued some "fake news" it had the ring of truth, but was ill informed and the weak minded followed the news trail and died as a result, this will be no different to many other false news trails like focusing on ventilators when ventilators will be needed by few, or focusing on hand sanitiser when soap and water will do
Well, our beloved gov just issued a "shelter in place" order for our county for the next two weeks. We have sort of shot up to 35 cases in just a few days. I guess my wild nighttime parties will just have to wait a couple of weeks.
been living with it for a couple weeks . would've been much worse if I wasn't so "essential " My advice is to find a way to get outside ;soak in the Vitamin D from the sun ; take a walk before the government decided to shut down the recreation spots . Find a way to keep yourself occupied ;hobby ,new learning experience ,take on a delayed project et .
Thanks, Tom. I've got a good bit to do so I think I can stay busy. We'll see at any rate. I stay outside a lot as we live kind of in the country.
Courtesy of Australia
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/he...4f4fd890bd4c2c
yes we have done it again, and no need to wait
There is actually a great reason to wait. No human studies have yet been done. It's all been done in petri dishes.Quote:
no need to wait
Great point!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
And once again we agree on something! Don't you think that proves there is hope for America?Quote:
Great point!
Have a great day. Keep safe.
you will all be safe but sick
I intend to be safe but not sick.
I ain't sick nor feel safe, fresh food run this weekend! Somebody get Tom a mask, gloves and hand sanitizer. I'm out and he needs it. Let never forget those indispensables that keep things going as we cringe in the corners. Can't be as easy as they make it look on a daily basis.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:14 PM. |