Trump White House exerted pressure on FDA for Covid-19 emergency use authorizations, House report finds. ... The Trump administration... tried to pressure the FDA to authorize the first Covid-19 vaccines ahead of the presidential election. When [former FDA Commissioner Stephen] Hahn testified to the subcommittee in January 2022, he said that White House officials said they would not sign off on emergency use authorization language that required a 60-day safety follow up for late-stage clinical trials. Ultimately, the FDA went ahead with the 60-day follow-up plan without an explicit blessing from the White House...
Mystere: Oh look! Another fake comment from Dervish Sanders.
You KNOW it is not a fake comment -- because YOU didn't write it. What you also didn't write was a comment having anything to do with this post. You ONLY attack me. Because you are a pea-brained comment faking POS stalker.
Qtard: You saying nasty-nasty dRump commensed vaccines to go to the people ASAP... to save more lives.
The post is about "what they did to us" (as per Jimmy Dore). I pointed out that donald tRump (as president) was a member of the "they" that lead to a small number of people being harmed by the vaccines. Though tRump provably didn't do it to save lives. He did it because he thought it would look good for him ahead of the election.
Then the rightturds started with the vaccine conspiracy theories and tRump pivoted. If he were REALLY interested in saving lives, he would have spoken against the vaccine conspiracy theories and encouraged people to get vaccinated. tRump only does what tRump perceives to be good for tRump.
BTW, Jimmy Does loves Orange because Orange supporters send him bigly green. He laughs that people suffered harm and even died. He is an evil person.
\\The post is about "what they did to us" (as per Jimmy Dore). I pointed out that donald tRump (as president) was a member of the "they" that lead to a small number of people being harmed by the vaccines. Though tRump provably didn't do it to save lives. He did it because he thought it would look good for him ahead of the election.
Oho.. interesting phylodophical question -- is it True Good? if it done with ulterior motives. Is it Bad? if holyest motives create evil results.
\\tRump only does what tRump perceives to be good for tRump.
You know you're dealing with a rightturder when they claim all politicians are equally bad. Yet (for example) it is only republicans who are ok with school children continuing to be blown away. There is absolutely nothing that can be done, they falsely claim.
While Democrats stand with The People -- a majority of who think that is bullshit. Laws addressing gun violence are not the "road to Hell".
Qtard: Do evildoers need to die? But who'll decide?
Nobody will decide if Jimmy Dore will be executed or not. He hasn't been convicted of murdering anyone. Murder is the only crime that, if someone is convicted of it, they could be put to death.
Re your "phylodophical question"... This "deliberate" misspelling is another of your lame "gotchas"? F*ck off.
\\You know you're dealing with a rightturder when they claim all politicians are equally bad.
And who said it's bad? ;-P Not me. Just that it's obvious.
\\Yet (for example) it is only republicans who are ok with school children continuing to be blown away. There is absolutely nothing that can be done, they falsely claim.
There is buddhist's koan. About giving a worm to a bird. But... you'd kill a worm, if you'd do. And... you'd kill a bird, if you'd NOT to.
Well, anyway. That is not my problem. Go decide in between yourself.
\\While Democrats stand with The People -- a majority of who think that is bullshit. Laws addressing gun violence are not the "road to Hell".
So? Why you still NOT solved that problem. If you have "majority"?
Maybe because that is hypocritical delusional self-rightepus bullshit.
YOU HAVE NONE. Or, more correctly, you concockted that "majority" on your whim. By your own decree assigning some sub-set of ALL people. Not that big sub-set. And DECLARED it "majority". That can order around ALL OTHER people.
\\Murder is the only crime that, if someone is convicted of it, they could be put to death.
And there is NO convicts, who was put to death... by mistake? ;-P
\\Re your "phylodophical question"... This "deliberate" misspelling is another of your lame "gotchas"? F*ck off.
If you'd look onto keyboard -- you'd be able to see that 's' and 'd' are close.
So... that is just a mistyping. But well, very ingenious. :-)))) As it seems, that with dopes as you are, only phylodopical questions can be discussed. :-))))))))))))))
Qtard: Or, more correctly, you concockted that "majority" on your whim.
No. I refer to polls that confirm this majority. For example an AP-NORC poll from last year says "71% of Americans say gun laws should be stricter, including about half of Republicans, the vast majority of Democrats and a majority of those in gun-owning households".
I didn't concoct the results of any of these polls. You say there are polls that show there are parents (or anyone) who are happy when kids get murdered in school shootings? Cite ONE.
Qtard: And there is NO convicts, who was put to death... by mistake?
Jimmy Dore is a free man. Not accused or convicted of any crime. He is a scumbag, but not a convict.
Same as dRump... but for him you do not have Presumption. ;-P
\\No. I refer to polls that confirm this majority. For example an AP-NORC poll from last year says "71% of Americans say gun laws should be stricter, including about half of Republicans, the vast majority of Democrats and a majority of those in gun-owning households".
Polls? It is not vote. And... that "gun laws should be stricter" is too fuzzy. ;-P
Your Captain Obvious.
\\I didn't concoct the results of any of these polls. You say there are polls that show there are parents (or anyone) who are happy when kids get murdered in school shootings? Cite ONE.
Yep. Thank you for demonstration of your Demn Hypocrisy. Like we have any need, any scarcity in that regard, from you, here. :-))))
Jimmy Dore has not been accused of any crime for me to presume him innocent of. Or maybe decide he is guilty of. Not at all "same as dRump".
The question, "should gun laws should be stricter" is not "fuzzy" at all. Either you think they should be stricter or not. Easy question to answer. A majority of Americans (not qtardians) say they should be stricter. Proven by many polls.
No "demonstration of Demn Hypocrisy" occurred. Except in Qtard's delusions.
\\Jimmy Dore has not been accused of any crime for me to presume him innocent of. Or maybe decide he is guilty of. Not at all "same as dRump".
So??? "Accused" is as good as "judged"? ;-P
\\The question, "should gun laws should be stricter" is not "fuzzy" at all.
Aha... like there is no difference between:
make more detailed list of what ammo and rifles is allowed
make all gun-bearers wear yellow... something
grab em all off their arms
allow to shut anybody with a gun without criminal.
Nothing fuzzy. And THEY ALL agree with last item in this list. ;-P Yes, Derpy?
\\A majority of Americans (not qtardians) say they should be stricter. Proven by many polls.
Yep. Manipulative Demn-aligned polls. ;-P
And Rep-aligned polls, which would ask "are you PRO preserving FREEDOM(of arms wealding in petite)", would give the same -- firm majority of Reps and most of Demns. ;-P
\\No "demonstration of Demn Hypocrisy" occurred. Except in Qtard's delusions.
Of coure you do not see your own hypocrisy. Cause you are i.v. :-))))))))
There is no presumption of innocence after judging (in a court). After judging guilt or innocence has been proven.
Aha... like there is no difference between:
At issue is the difference between "stricter", "keep laws the same" or "loosen laws". YOUR responses were not a part of the poll. The MAJORITY selected "stricter". Though, by "stricter" every respondent obviously had their own idea of what "stricter" laws would be acceptable to them. DUH. But there is ZERO fuzziness that a MAJORITY of Americans want stricter gun laws.
Qtard: Manipulative Demn-aligned polls.
Bullshit. Republicans who answered that they would like stricter laws to help combat the gun-violence epidemic were manipulated? HOW were they "manipulated"? btw, I don't know wtf a "Demn-aligned" poll is. "Demn" is a non-existent political party/group imagined by Qtard. There is no "n" in Democrat.
Qtard: Of coure you do not see your own hypocrisy. Cause you are i.v.
Of course Qtard does not see HIS own hypocrisy. And I STILL have no idea what "i.v." is. "Intelligent Valedictorian"?
Mystere: Dervish Sanders666 laughs that people suffered harm and died. He accuses others of the wicked spells he casts at the seances he hosts.
I have only ever "laughed" at vaccine disinformation spreaders who themselves died of covid. Because they (people like that "Lamb" a-hole) encouraged people to not get vaccinated. And thus caused deaths. I feel sorry for those who these a-holes duped and who died (and their loved ones). I have never cast a spell or held a seance. Spells and seances are BULLSHIT. As are your accusations, Mystere666.
I do not laugh that people suffered harm and died, asshole. I support people getting vaccinated so that they don't die. Even republican voters. Unlike you.
Mystere666 uptheEndo is one of Satan's utter fools.
Hmmm... Rattrapper said "Dervish bin Satan-Sanders is one of Satan's utter fools."
And now, Dervish is having an infantile temper tantrum over being called out, laughed at and owned by Rattrapper. ππππππππππ Dervish's fixation on calling Rattrapper "Mystere" and "Mystere666" shows signs of demonic possession. Dervish has proven by his lies and false accusations that he is involved in casting Satanic spells.
I'm going to follow Rattrapper's lead, Dervish bin Satan-Sanders666. Calling you Assface Dervish is too polite now. Creeps like you are going to take a huge fall, as you mock God by calling evil good.
\\There is no presumption of innocence after judging (in a court). After judging guilt or innocence has been proven.
You, Derpy was inquering "where's my hypocrisy???".
HERE IT IS.
My question was damn simple -- is there equal sign between "accused" == "judged"???
And what you did? You hypocritically squinted and started talking about "no presumption of innocence after judging".
Yes.
THAT is perfect example of your Demn hypocrisy.
Because you don't like to admit it openly and freely, something like "dRump is not judged, that mean he cannot be called duilty"... SAME as any other people, in the countries of the world that share principles of Human Right and Lawful Protection of Justice.
But you... because of your Demn political bias... freakingly cannot admit it.
That's why all I say about you being hypocritical control freak -- absolutely correct. ;-P
\\I do not laugh that people suffered harm and died, asshole. I support people getting vaccinated so that they don't die.
WTF???
Is that vaccine of some f*ing immortality? :-))))
Of course not.
And death rate is like 1%. Not that much deadly. And most time that is because of people having some chronical problems and/or old age.
So... yeah... vaccinate people "so that they don't die"... while 99% would not die ANYWAY. And other 1%... well, it's much easier and much cheaper -- then provide to them QUALIFED medical help BEFOREHAND. Instead of "magical shot"... with prolonged consequencies, which would not be assigned to this or that political side.
\\At issue is the difference between "stricter", "keep laws the same" or "loosen laws".
Bullshit. :-))))
That is manipulative poll with specially concockted "non-question".
Are you that stupid or illiterate to not know about such verbal treaks?
I'll enlight you.
That is known from old time thing called "sophisms". ;-)
Like
Sophism - Encyclopedia - The Free Dictionary encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com › Sophism The ancient “horn sophism,” which is ascribed to Eubulides, runs as follows; “That which you have not lost, you have. You have not lost horns.
The same as with that "poll", with "you are bad human if you do not want stricter laws".
Go learn it. And became wiser.
Or... go demonstrate that you know it. And use it deliberately. As heinous hypocrite.
Mystere (commenting as Q-Anon): I'm going to follow Rattrapper's lead...
Of course you're going to follow your own lead. You always do... use this moronic excuse to explain why all your IDs say the same things. Use the same phrases. ALL think exactly alike.
Qtard: You, Derpy was inquering "where's my hypocrisy???". HERE IT IS.
Not knowing wtf you're talking about isn't hypocrisy. Accused and judges are obviously not the same. Under the law. I can have any opinion I want regarding guilt or innocence when someone is accused of a crime. I don't care AT ALL about your primal scream of anger re my conclusion that tRump is guilty.
Qtard: dRump is not judged, that mean he cannot be called duilty.
Bullshit. I can (and have, and will continue to) call him guilty. That isn't "hypocrisy", that is me stating my opinion (based on the known facts). SAME as all the people Minus calls guilty re the non-judged crimes they allegedly committed with Jeff Epstein. Yet you don't say SQUAT about Minus declaring guilt with no judging. Because Qtard is a hypocrite.
Qtard: But you... because of your Demn political bias... freakingly cannot admit it.
Of course not. Because there is no such thing as "Demn political bias". As a Democrat (no "n") do I see things from a Leftist point of view? Yes. I can still judge facts despite my bias, however. As can republican "Never Trumpers". For example, the Never Trump group "The Lincoln Project" says tRump colluded with Russia.
So, are you going to respond with your "not my problem" dodge? Or will you use your "I'm a foreigner" dodge? Or maybe your "whoz zat?" dodge? Or maybe you think republicans have "Demn bias"?
Is that vaccine of some f*ing immortality? And death rate is like 1%. Not that much deadly.
No. People should get vaccinated so they don't die. FROM COVID. That is what we were discussing. Not so they don't die EVER. As for the percentage that die being low, Qtard says "so what"? tRump also said "so what". Joe Biden said "we can save these people and should NOT let them die".
That is manipulative poll with specially concockted "non-question".
It isn't. There is no manipulating. Either you think laws should be stricter, stay the same, or loosened. Not confusing or fuzzy. Easy to answer. YOU just don't like the results.
Qtard: When "majority from participants" of that "poll"??? Became "MAJORITY of Americans".
Right. Because that is how polls work. "Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals".
Try to keep your attention. Or... you can use Ctrl-F to search through our previous talks.
No. You think I give a crap what your "i.v." means? You think wrong. Keep it secret. Totally meaningless insult to me since I don't know wtf you're talking about.
\\Not knowing wtf you're talking about isn't hypocrisy. Accused and judges are obviously not the same.
Yep. But, only not when it about dRump. dRump is GUILTY, even without being judged. And anybody who point it -- ALSO guilty, in being "venerating dRump". And etc, and etc, and etc... :-)))))))))))
\\I can have any opinion I want regarding guilt or innocence when someone is accused of a crime.
Oh... that is FAT BS. :-)))))
\\I don't care AT ALL about your primal scream of anger re my conclusion that tRump is guilty.
You keep using my phrases. But in such an stupid disingenious way. Well, you are just an i.v. No need to wait for too much from you... :-))))))))
\\I can (and have, and will continue to) call him guilty.
Well... then, you'd continue to be mere spouter of non-factual non-sence. ;-P
And you are right... there are no law against i.v.s. :-))))) Yet. ;-P
\\That isn't "hypocrisy", that is me stating my opinion (based on the known facts).
No. That is EXACTLY is nothing else except hypocrisy. As in definition. Because, you CANNO HAVE IT BOTH -- state your non-factual opinion AND demand it to be venerated as Factual Truth. ;-P
And. Thank you. You added LAST needed piece to that puzzle. Because. Hypocrisy need to have conscious understanding of what hypocrite himself doing. ;-P
\\Yet you don't say SQUAT about Minus declaring guilt with no judging.
Do Joe haunt me with his accusations?
That's it. ;-)
\\Because Qtard is a hypocrite.
Baseless and non-factual. As always. Yawn. :-)))
But well, you admitted here yourself --that you nithing else than mere babbler of non-factual bs. ;-P
So. For at least. You doing everything in your character.
\\Because there is no such thing as "Demn political bias".
Yap-yap-yap. :-)))))))))
\\I can still judge facts despite my bias, however.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
That is while you showed for all this time that you will not admit FACT... even if it'll fall on your head and crack it open.
And now you even commited coming-out of being proud fact-denier. ;-P
\\People should get vaccinated so they don't die. FROM COVID.
Do you even understand that 1% chance mean?
Well, yeah, of coure you not.
La-a-a-ame.
\\As for the percentage that die being low, Qtard says "so what"? tRump also said "so what". Joe Biden said "we can save these people and should NOT let them die".
Despite that... that that is Under Trump that vaccines was developed and implemented. ;-P
And Biden just riding that "magical shot" horse... because that is SO DAMN easy... and so much fun -- to hijack political opponent's profit. ;-P
\\It isn't. There is no manipulating. Either you think laws should be stricter, stay the same, or loosened. Not confusing or fuzzy. Easy to answer. YOU just don't like the results.
:-))))))))))))))) Or... that is just YOU... who like that results too much. ;-P
As for me. I don't care. As foreigner. Have neither profit, no harm. NOT INTERESTED in that question AT ALL. As it NON-APPLYABLE, NOT IMPORTANT, NOT INTERESTING here, where I live.
\\Right. Because that is how polls work. "Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals".
Yep.
And do that poll have CORRECT "confidence intervals"?
But... why should you be interested in such questions? As you like results too much -- everything else, doesn't matter. Isn't it, Derpy? ;-P
Qtard: ...is Under Trump that vaccines was developed and implemented.
That the vaccines were "developed" under tRump is partially true. Quote, "hundreds of scientists had worked on mRNA vaccines for decades before the coronavirus pandemic brought a breakthrough". donald tRump was not president for decades. He was only president for 4 years.
The implementation did not begin until after the election of Joe Biden as president. That was mid-December. The majority of the work that went into the nationwide distribution program took place under Joe Biden. Joe Biden RAN on getting people vaccinated and Joe Biden WON the election (in part) for this reason.
FYI, it was under tRump that the U.S. slashed CDC staff inside China... Quote, "The Trump administration cut staff by more than two-thirds at a key U.S. public health agency operating inside China, as part of a larger rollback of US-funded health and science experts on the ground there leading up to the coronavirus outbreak ... Reductions at the U.S. agencies sidelined health experts, scientists and other professionals who might have been able to help China mount an earlier response to the novel coronavirus, as well as provide the U.S. government with more information about what was coming..."
Qtard: Biden just riding that "magical shot" horse... hijack political opponent's profit.
Qtard: Or... that is just YOU... who like that results too much. As for me. I don't care. As foreigner. Have neither profit, no harm. NOT INTERESTED in that question AT ALL.
Only pro-gun violence nutters would dislike the results. As for you not caring... of course. Because sociopaths don't care about things that don't affect them.
Qtard: And do that poll have CORRECT "confidence intervals"?
The "stricter" percentage for the specific poll I quoted might be high. Though I haven't seen any poll where people who support "stricter" is under 50%. You linked to or cited NO polls, yet you keep implying the results are wrong. You say people were "manipulated" into answering "stricter"... while offering no proof this happened. Because Qtard dislikes the results too much -- everything else doesn't matter.
\\My opinions are fact-based. That is how I form them. By examining the facts and then coming to a fact-based conclusion.
Ohhh... that is most amusing.
Can you elaborate it MOAR here???
HOW you do it????
When you showed on many-many examples (and no opposite) here that you do not know what Logic, and even what FACT is. ;-P
Would be most interesting to hear/rewad.
\\You keep talking about yourself while claiming you are talking about me.
That's... all in your head. All in your head. Go do checkup to psychiatrist. That can be damning symptome.
\\Around the world COVID-19 vaccines saved an estimated 20 million lives in 1 year. Qtard says "so what, they all should have died".<<<----INCORECT CITATION!!! AGAIN Should we have waited to see if covid killed more than 1% before acting? To be sure it was "worth it"?
Hallo!!! Is somebody at home???
There was WHOLE YEAR WITHOUT vaccines available.
And World Health... or how they spelled? Recently confirmed 7 (seven) millions of dead. Allegedly from COVID.
Well... how much it'll be, in case if there'd be NO vaccines -- who knows.
But this number "estimated 20 million lives in 1 year" -- smells bullshit.
My bet -- that number was chosen by perfectly psychological reasons. Like not be too little one digit... and not too big two digit. And good round 20... looks like "correct" and "profy" estimation. :-)))))))
\\That the vaccines were "developed" under tRump is partially true.
Yeah??? Seriously??? :-))))))))))
\\ Quote, "hundreds of scientists had worked on mRNA vaccines for decades before the coronavirus pandemic brought a breakthrough". donald tRump was not president for decades. He was only president for 4 years.
Well. SAME as Biden. ;-P
\\The majority of the work that went into the nationwide distribution program took place under Joe Biden. Joe Biden RAN on getting people vaccinated and Joe Biden WON the election (in part) for this reason.
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" go Google for it. ;-P
\\Bullshit. Joe Biden embraced vaccinations to combat the pandemic.
Yap-yap-yap.
And that JUST AFTER you yourself admitted that it HELPED him win elections.
Here (proper citation, again) "Joe Biden WON the election (in part) for this reason."
\\If developing and implementing the vaccination program was to tRump's profit, why was he the main anti-vaccination influencer on Twitter in 2020?
'Cause there was NO vaccines... for (almost) all 2020. And that would be brain dead stupid -- to go into elections with a promices one would not be able to fullfill, isn't it?
So, he tryed to belittle that problem.
The same as Biden did about some other issues.
\\Though I haven't seen any poll where people who support "stricter" is under 50%.
Yep. Because ask such question -- is manipulation.
It's like ask "are good lawful person?". And I bet even in jail numbers would be OVER 90% ;-P
"When you showed on many-many examples"... Zero is not "many-many".
"...estimated 20 million lives in 1 year smells bullshit"... Qtard's baseless rejection of the cited study's conclusion smells like bullshit.
"My bet -- that number was chosen by perfectly psychological reasons"... Qtard's bet based on his feelings about what facts must be. As opposed to what facts actually are.
"you yourself admitted that it HELPED him win elections"... Of course. People vote for the candidate that says they will work hard to solve problems.
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc"... No. donald tRump (if he had retained the presidency) would have bungled vaccine distribution. Just as his administration bungled the US pandemic response.
Joe Biden made the "brain dead stupid" (your words) promise to work hard to get everyone vaccinated. And Joe Biden delivered on his promise.
"Because ask such question -- is manipulation. It's like ask are good lawful person?".
Thank you for admitting that gun safety laws work! As per your own words. People were "manipulated" (convinced) by the facts. A bad thing in your opinion. As someone who hates facts as much as you do.
FYI, some people think more guns will make us safer. "An armed society is a polite society". They likely told the pollsters that they think laws should be loosened.
They did not say that because they see themselves as bad unlawful persons -- but because it is their honest (though incorrect and stupid) belief. Same as people who said they should be stricter.
\\"When you showed on many-many examples"... Zero is not "many-many".
But???
You doing it almost in every comment here.
And you posting so often... that it obviously CAN be counted as "many-many". ;-P
Well... yet one brainlessly fatuous cliam of yours. ;-P See, I'm able to learn -- while you are not. 'Cause you are Derpy The I.V. Whose utmost ability is -- only to repeat after opponent his factual, to the point and witty phrases. :-)))))))))))))))))
\\"...estimated 20 million lives in 1 year smells bullshit"... Qtard's baseless rejection of the cited study's conclusion smells like bullshit.
:-)))))))))))))))))) Yet one example how it is freakingly IMPOSSIBLE for Derpy to see, to understand facts.... even if they'll fall on its head.
My bese was -- not some "estimates", BUT direct and based on actual statistic -- from respectful orgnization as WHO (World Health Organisation) -- which stated only 7 (seven) millions of deathes fro COVI-19 so far.
But... for Derpy, who claim it "believe in facts"... some shady estimates, unfounded, suspicious -- looks much more "factual".
'Cause it like to believe in any shit... throwed into its feeding vessel. If only that is chaw from a pack with some certain brand on it. ;-P
\\Qtard's bet based on his feelings about what facts must be. As opposed to what facts actually are.
Of course.
Because.
That is how brains working.
First you percieve fact DIRECTLY, with your senses.
Then you translate that feelings into memories.
Then you use that memories in association with other people who also percieve that facts and accuire similar memories INTO some verbal markers.
Then... well, not all people doing, or able to come to this step -- you using logic and common sense to make some basic inferences from that memories and feelings.
Then... YET less people can do it -- not basic infernces, but based on some Logic and Science.
Then... yet less of people -- have Ability to self-correct and introspect own thinking to correct own biases.
Then... well, I'm already too damn far away inyo real og Inellect for such an i.v. like you even to start compehending EVEN very first bulletpoint of mine. ;-P
\\"Post hoc ergo propter hoc"... No. donald tRump (if he had retained the presidency) would have bungled vaccine distribution. Just as his administration bungled the US pandemic response.
Thank you for giving an example. ;-P
Of that kind of errorneous thinking.
But wait... that is not an example -- that is how you always do. :-)))))))))))))))
\\Joe Biden made the "brain dead stupid" (your words) promise to work hard to get everyone vaccinated. And Joe Biden delivered on his promise.
Aha... when vaccine(s) was ALREADY developed. And was certified by non-standard procedure. UNDER dRump. So, if some bad syumptoms from that vaccines would arise -- blame all on dRump.
And CDC would do that "everyone vaccinated" anyway -- as that is ONLY scientifically senseful procedure of doing it.
But you propose to praise Bidon -- as your Demn-Propganada teached you -- for doing... what exactly?
WHAT important role of Bidon in all of it was, again?? :-))))))))))))))))
So... he just hijacked previous adminstration achievments... and branded it as own.
\\Thank you for admitting that gun safety laws work! As per your own words. People were "manipulated" (convinced) by the facts. A bad thing in your opinion. As someone who hates facts as much as you do.
WAT???
Are you yourself understand your own babbling??? :-))))))))))))
\\FYI, some people think more guns will make us safer.
Not my problem.
\\They did not say that because they see themselves as bad unlawful persons -- but because it is their honest (though incorrect and stupid) belief.
Hah.
That way.
Can I hope that you understand that your "I believe in facts" is -- in your own words "it is their honest (though incorrect and stupid) belief"??? ;-)
Qtard: Thank you for giving an example. Of that kind of errorneous thinking.
Not "errorneous". Accurate and true.
Trump administration had no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan. There was no distribution plan for the coronavirus vaccine set up by the Trump administration as the virus raged in its last months in office, new President Joe Biden's chief of staff, Ron Klain, said...
"The process to distribute the vaccine, particularly outside of nursing homes and hospitals out into the community as a whole, did not really exist when we came into the White House", Klain said on NBC's Meet the Press. (Reuters 1/24/2021).
I suppose you will just say that Klain lied. As opposed to presenting any evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
Qtard: And CDC would do that "everyone vaccinated" anyway...
They would not have. See prior quoted Reuter's story.
Qtard: Are you yourself understand your own babbling???
You wrote, "It's like ask are good lawful person". Re people answering poll about gun safety laws by saying they should be stricter. WHY is answering "stricter" same as saying you are a "good lawful person"? "Stricter" is "good" because gun safety laws WORK. YOUR admission. Unless YOU were babbling.
\\Trump administration had no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan.
'Cause? There was no vaccines.
Your Captain Obvious. ;-P
And why should he help his political opponents??? Who'd either took that plan and called it their own. Or would blame him for deficiency and wrongness of that plan.
\\They would not have.
Then they are just a bunch of useless beaurocrats. ;-P
And dRump did rifgt to fire em. :-))))))))))))
\\You wrote, "It's like ask are good lawful person".
Naah. That is not. ;-P
Go say trhat you REALLY have such a cognitive DISability, that you even cannot understand written English correctly.
\\WHY is answering "stricter" same as saying you are a "good lawful person"? "Stricter" is "good" because gun safety laws WORK. YOUR admission. Unless YOU were babbling.
???
And not YOUR? YOU -- do not think that that people who want stricter gun laws are good and lawful??? :-))))))))))))))))
Qtard: "Trump administration had no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan"... 'Cause? There was no vaccines. Your Captain Obvious.
Good leadership involves planning ahead. You are an i.v. This comment (among many others) proves it.
Qtard: Go say trhat you REALLY have such a cognitive DISability, that you even cannot understand written English correctly.
That is YOUR disability. I'd cut you some slack (not being a native English speaker) but then you go and make such an absurd accusation. Proving yourself to be an i.v. YET AGAIN.
Qtard: YOU -- do not think that that people who want stricter gun laws are good and lawful???
I think they actually want to do something to address the US gun violence problem. Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a pedophile "good and lawful". Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a White collar criminal "good and lawful".
Planning that would be thrown out of the window? ;-P
As, I DO NOT SEE it -- that Demns would take anything dRump planned into execution. And, am I not right?
\\I'd cut you some slack (not being a native English speaker)
AT LAST.
You admitted that I am foreigner.
But. Contre-factually. You'd keep claiming that my ref to it -- is being a "dodge".
Isn't it, Derpy? :-)))))))))))))))
Be my guest. ;-P
\\but then you go and make such an absurd accusation. Proving yourself to be an i.v. YET AGAIN.
Obviously.
Because you unable to demonstrate where
\\\\You wrote, "It's like ask are good lawful person".
Or... how my words can be understood that way.
While I DIRECTLY pointed out -- that POLL should be IN PREASON.
Where... how many people would admit being criminals??? How do you think? ;-P
\\Qtard: YOU -- do not think that that people who want stricter gun laws are good and lawful???
\\I think they actually want to do something to address the US gun violence problem. Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a pedophile "good and lawful". Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a White collar criminal "good and lawful".
Qtard: that Demns would take anything dRump planned into execution. And, am I not right?
No. It depends on who tRump tasked with developing it. If Anthony Fauci came up with the plan (an official who worked for tRump and then continued in his job under Biden)... why would they throw it out?
Your i.v. question is irrelative anyway. The tRump administration should have come up with a vaccine distribution plan to be implemented by the tRump administration -- in tRump's second term. He still thought there were be one -- even after Joe Biden won. So why would he not plan accordingly?
Qtard: AT LAST. You admitted that I am foreigner.
How could I possibly "admit" this. I have no way of knowing if you are a foreigner or not. I have no way of knowing where you are located. I surely can't take your word (a proven liar) for anything I can't independently confirm. I only acknowledge that you SAY you are a foreigner.
You are a horrible speller. So maybe that is some kind of proof? Though you've never said that English isn't your native language. Or maybe you did and I don't remember. I do remember you said your misspelling of words is ON PURPOSE. As a moronic "gotcha".
Qtard: But. Contre-factually. You'd keep claiming that my ref to it -- is being a "dodge".
Of course. Because you DO use it as a dodge. This is not counterfactual, it is observably factual.
Qtard: how many people would admit being criminals?
WTF? Answering the poll by saying you think gun safety laws should stay the same or be loosened is NOT admitting to being a criminal. Is that why you say the poll should be conducted "in preason" (I assume you mean "in person")? So, if the person being polled answers anything other than "stricter", they can be immediately arrested?
Qtard: That was NOT what I was asked. Yawn.
OK. I was wrong. Your actual question was even dumber.
Qtard: you seemingly do not undersrand that for other people it could be the same...
Other people aren't ALL known liars. You are. If someone lies, then everything else they say is suspect. If I have no reason to believe a person is lying -- and if what they say conforms (in part) to what I already know to be true -- then I have no reason to disbelieve what they are telling me. Especially if backed up with facts. Even if (as is the case with the IC) they can't disclose ALL the facts they know. They didn't provide zero facts ("trust me" as you mischaracterize the situation).
Qtard: IF poll (about "being good lawful person") would be IN PRISON... how many people would admit being criminals?
So, answering "the same" or "looser" (re the gun poll) is same as admitting to being a criminal? BS.
But you DO NOT know what THAT THINGS called facts is.
Even after DEFINITION was provided to you.
Even if it would fact itself fell at you head.
Quite contrary, you keep claiming that you (what a moron) "believe in facts". :-))))))))))))))
\\Even if (as is the case with the IC) they can't disclose ALL the facts they know. They didn't provide zero facts ("trust me" as you mischaracterize the situation).
Then... where is that "non-zero facts"???? :-))))))
As you, yourself, correctly (OMG) stated: "If I have no reason to believe a person is lying -- and if what they say conforms (in part) to what I already know to be true -- then I have no reason to disbelieve what they are telling me."
But that is NOT the case in my case: I do not believe they NOT lying -- why not? if that is SO DAMN benefitial and not dangerous at all for them -- to lie. (and well, where and when you saw NOT lying spies?????? Like dr.No asking Bond: "Are you a spy?" and that says: "Yes, I am. And I came to kill you.") AND That they say DO NOT coroborates with other things I know as facts. ;-P
\\Qtard: IF poll (about "being good lawful person") would be IN PRISON... how many people would admit being criminals?
\\So, answering "the same" or "looser" (re the gun poll) is same as admitting to being a criminal? BS.
While quote is before its eye. And ABOUT (imaginary) POLL in prison. Among criminals. About em being "lawful citizens". To which they would answer "yes, for sure... I was setup by a dirty cops and corrupt kangaroo court"
But you DO NOT know what THAT THINGS called facts is. Even after DEFINITION was provided to you.
I do. And I go with the dictionary definition. Not your redefinition.
Qtard: Quite contrary, you keep claiming that you (what a moron) "believe in facts".
You (what a moron) keep insisting facts can't be believed. Facts can be disbelieved (what you do constantly). The opposite of disbelieving is to believe.
ad hominem dodge. Used because FM Qtard can't answer my question.
Qtard: It still keep asking about something else.
Of course. That "something else" being the ACTUAL topic of discussion. Poll about gun laws. NOT Qtard's (imaginary) poll of prisoners asking (imaginary) question, "are you good and lawful".
\\But you DO NOT know what THAT THINGS called facts is. Even after DEFINITION was provided to you.
\\I do. And I go with the dictionary definition. Not your redefinition.
And how my any different? It's just bulletpointed. For such an i.v. to understand.
But here is from dictinary one:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact
fact noun
Λfakt How to pronounce fact (audio)
Synonyms of factnext 1 a : something that has actual existence space exploration is now a fact b : an actual occurrence prove the fact of damage
MY self-evidant. MEANS actually occured
2 : a piece of information presented as having objective reality These are the hard facts of the case.
MY ref to Reality AKA objective reality
3 : the quality of being actual : ACTUALITY a question of fact hinges on evidence 4 : a thing done: such as
MY open and obvious
Go try to refute. ;-P
And confirm that you are i.v. To which it is IMPOSSIBLE to understand things... if it explained with a little different words. :-)))))))))))))
\\You (what a moron) keep insisting facts can't be believed.
Why not? I said that it "do not NEED to". But. You claimed that you believe. ;-P That's it. That is not impossible.
Only... fitting for an i.v. ;-P
\\Facts can be disbelieved (what you do constantly).
Not facts itself. Opinions about something being or not being fact.
Well... such an i.v.s like you -- can "disbewlieve" open and obviuous facts too. :-))))))))))))))
\\ad hominem dodge. Used because FM Qtard can't answer my question.
Yeah. It's easy for me to admit that I cannot answer that question.
\\\\So, answering "the same" or "looser" (re the gun poll) is same as admitting to being a criminal? BS.
Because. It's so idiotic. And not related to anything I have written. How can anyone answer something to such garbage question??? Only that it is a stopid question. So, that is what I did.
To which, you as proud idiot, declared that you "won an argument". :-)))))))))))
Go continue doing that -- that is successful tactic against me -- the more obviopusly moronic question you'll try to hurd on me -- the more successfully you'd "win". ;-P
\\Of course. That "something else" being the ACTUAL topic of discussion. Poll about gun laws. NOT Qtard's (imaginary) poll of prisoners asking (imaginary) question, "are you good and lawful".
I just explained you my point. In simplest possible for any layman to understand terms.
But you are not just any layman. You are proud idiot.
So that expalnation is wasted on you.
As yopu talking just to boost your EGO. Not for receiveing new information, gaining some knowledge and having good time, basicly.
For you... that is hard labour. For the sake of some your idiotic GOAL(S?). That's why you are so frantickly stubborn.
Why are you quoting a dictionary? You were clear that you don't believe in them. I called dictionary authors/compilers experts and you (in true FM fashion) disagreed. Because Qtard is a proud idiot.
I am talking just to boost my ego? Otherwise I would be willing to learn from the sage Qtard? As an idiot, you have no new information to impart. Only stupidity.
And as always. No quotes of my words. And only contre-factual claims.
r.b.s are so r.b.s. :-)))))))))))
\\I called dictionary authors/compilers experts and you (in true FM fashion) disagreed.
Experts in WHAT???
Making dictinaries? YES, they are.
Bur you called em "experts in English" -- which they cannot be. More then that -- they DO NOT claim to be.
That is just your r.b. delusion. ;-P
\\I am talking just to boost my ego? Otherwise I would be willing to learn from the sage Qtard? As an idiot, you have no new information to impart. Only stupidity.
That sounds proud idiot. ;-P
I, for emample -- able to find what to learn EVEN from an idiot.
\\If they are compiling an English language dictionary? Then they MUST be experts.
Experts in WHAT? ;-)
They are perfectly are (can be) experts in "compiling dictionary of English language".
But that is NOT THE SAME as vague and over-generalised "experts in English"...
WHAT that could mean EVEN???
That they can sing as best English singers too?
Or they can write poetry and prose as best English poet and writers?
Maybe they can scrib English texts in most fancy way, as only best scribs can???
No. No. And no.
They ONLY know how to "compile English dictionary".
Isn't that obvious and easy to understand... might be.
\\Qtard: More then that -- they DO NOT claim to be.
\\Huh? They all told you? I call BULLSHIT.
IF they are experts -- they MUST have that personal moral values of ANYONE who wanna be admitted being expert SHOULD have -- understanding limitations of their knowledge.
Basicly. Ability to say "I *know* this, this and this... but IF you'd ask me about THAT... here is an adress of expert in THAT sphere". ;-P
English major: The English Major (alternatively "English concentration", "B.A. in English") is a term in the United States and several other countries for an undergraduate university degree focused around reading, analyzing, and writing texts in the English language. The term may also be used to describe a student who is pursuing such a degree.
Students who major in English reflect upon, analyze, and interpret literature and film. ... A degree in English also helps to develop the needed critical thinking skills essential to a number of career fields, including writing, editing, publishing, teaching, research, advertising, public relations, law, and finance. [end Wikipedia Excerpt]
If someone has earned a BA in English studies, that person can SURELY say they are an expert in the English language. You claim people who earn such a degree would be lacking in moral values to say they are experts because you are a FM.
"as foreigner" = "as a FM".
That's how I read it. EVERY TIME you bring up being a foreigner.
Qtard is more educated and better mannered? The second claim definitely deserves a huge LOL. Re the first claim, why (if true) does Qtard demean the value of a BA degree by falsely calling it a "basic education"?
FYI, college is higher education. High school is basic education. I find your "more education" brag dubious given that you do not know this.
59 comments:
Trump White House exerted pressure on FDA for Covid-19 emergency use authorizations, House report finds. ... The Trump administration... tried to pressure the FDA to authorize the first Covid-19 vaccines ahead of the presidential election. When [former FDA Commissioner Stephen] Hahn testified to the subcommittee in January 2022, he said that White House officials said they would not sign off on emergency use authorization language that required a 60-day safety follow up for late-stage clinical trials. Ultimately, the FDA went ahead with the 60-day follow-up plan without an explicit blessing from the White House...
Jimmy Dore loves orange. No shit. Look at his face. Human suffering makes him so happy.
πΊOh look! Another fake comment from Dervish Sanders.πΊ
Dervish's brain keeps suffering more damage as the vaccine's nano particles invade his pee brain.
\\ The Trump administration... tried to pressure the FDA to authorize the first Covid-19 vaccines ahead of the presidential election.
So?
Now.
You saying nasty-nasty dRump commensed vaccines to go to the people ASAP... to save more lives. :-)))
Derpish will be coming by soon with the "Qtard" attacks.
Mystere: Oh look! Another fake comment from Dervish Sanders.
You KNOW it is not a fake comment -- because YOU didn't write it. What you also didn't write was a comment having anything to do with this post. You ONLY attack me. Because you are a pea-brained comment faking POS stalker.
Qtard: You saying nasty-nasty dRump commensed vaccines to go to the people ASAP... to save more lives.
The post is about "what they did to us" (as per Jimmy Dore). I pointed out that donald tRump (as president) was a member of the "they" that lead to a small number of people being harmed by the vaccines. Though tRump provably didn't do it to save lives. He did it because he thought it would look good for him ahead of the election.
Then the rightturds started with the vaccine conspiracy theories and tRump pivoted. If he were REALLY interested in saving lives, he would have spoken against the vaccine conspiracy theories and encouraged people to get vaccinated. tRump only does what tRump perceives to be good for tRump.
BTW, Jimmy Does loves Orange because Orange supporters send him bigly green. He laughs that people suffered harm and even died. He is an evil person.
\\The post is about "what they did to us" (as per Jimmy Dore). I pointed out that donald tRump (as president) was a member of the "they" that lead to a small number of people being harmed by the vaccines. Though tRump provably didn't do it to save lives. He did it because he thought it would look good for him ahead of the election.
Oho.. interesting phylodophical question -- is it True Good? if it done with ulterior motives.
Is it Bad? if holyest motives create evil results.
\\tRump only does what tRump perceives to be good for tRump.
Like any other politician. Yawn.
\\He is an evil person.
So?
Do evildoers need to die?
But who'll decide?
The road to hell is paved with good intentions...
Yap.
'Cause they... not technological. ;-P
Qtard: Like any other politician.
You know you're dealing with a rightturder when they claim all politicians are equally bad. Yet (for example) it is only republicans who are ok with school children continuing to be blown away. There is absolutely nothing that can be done, they falsely claim.
While Democrats stand with The People -- a majority of who think that is bullshit. Laws addressing gun violence are not the "road to Hell".
Qtard: Do evildoers need to die? But who'll decide?
Nobody will decide if Jimmy Dore will be executed or not. He hasn't been convicted of murdering anyone. Murder is the only crime that, if someone is convicted of it, they could be put to death.
Re your "phylodophical question"... This "deliberate" misspelling is another of your lame "gotchas"? F*ck off.
\\You know you're dealing with a rightturder when they claim all politicians are equally bad.
And who said it's bad? ;-P
Not me.
Just that it's obvious.
\\Yet (for example) it is only republicans who are ok with school children continuing to be blown away. There is absolutely nothing that can be done, they falsely claim.
There is buddhist's koan.
About giving a worm to a bird.
But... you'd kill a worm, if you'd do.
And... you'd kill a bird, if you'd NOT to.
Well, anyway. That is not my problem.
Go decide in between yourself.
\\While Democrats stand with The People -- a majority of who think that is bullshit. Laws addressing gun violence are not the "road to Hell".
So?
Why you still NOT solved that problem.
If you have "majority"?
Maybe because that is hypocritical delusional self-rightepus bullshit.
YOU HAVE NONE.
Or, more correctly, you concockted that "majority" on your whim.
By your own decree assigning some sub-set of ALL people.
Not that big sub-set.
And DECLARED it "majority". That can order around ALL OTHER people.
\\Murder is the only crime that, if someone is convicted of it, they could be put to death.
And there is NO convicts, who was put to death... by mistake? ;-P
\\Re your "phylodophical question"... This "deliberate" misspelling is another of your lame "gotchas"? F*ck off.
If you'd look onto keyboard -- you'd be able to see that 's' and 'd' are close.
So... that is just a mistyping.
But well, very ingenious. :-))))
As it seems, that with dopes as you are, only phylodopical questions can be discussed. :-))))))))))))))
Qtard: Or, more correctly, you concockted that "majority" on your whim.
No. I refer to polls that confirm this majority. For example an AP-NORC poll from last year says "71% of Americans say gun laws should be stricter, including about half of Republicans, the vast majority of Democrats and a majority of those in gun-owning households".
I didn't concoct the results of any of these polls. You say there are polls that show there are parents (or anyone) who are happy when kids get murdered in school shootings? Cite ONE.
Qtard:
And there is NO convicts, who was put to death... by mistake?
Jimmy Dore is a free man. Not accused or convicted of any crime. He is a scumbag, but not a convict.
\\He is a scumbag, but not a convict.
Same as dRump... but for him you do not have Presumption. ;-P
\\No. I refer to polls that confirm this majority. For example an AP-NORC poll from last year says "71% of Americans say gun laws should be stricter, including about half of Republicans, the vast majority of Democrats and a majority of those in gun-owning households".
Polls?
It is not vote.
And... that "gun laws should be stricter" is too fuzzy. ;-P
Your Captain Obvious.
\\I didn't concoct the results of any of these polls. You say there are polls that show there are parents (or anyone) who are happy when kids get murdered in school shootings? Cite ONE.
Yep.
Thank you for demonstration of your Demn Hypocrisy.
Like we have any need, any scarcity in that regard, from you, here. :-))))
Jimmy Dore has not been accused of any crime for me to presume him innocent of. Or maybe decide he is guilty of. Not at all "same as dRump".
The question, "should gun laws should be stricter" is not "fuzzy" at all. Either you think they should be stricter or not. Easy question to answer. A majority of Americans (not qtardians) say they should be stricter. Proven by many polls.
No "demonstration of Demn Hypocrisy" occurred. Except in Qtard's delusions.
\\Jimmy Dore has not been accused of any crime for me to presume him innocent of. Or maybe decide he is guilty of. Not at all "same as dRump".
So???
"Accused" is as good as "judged"? ;-P
\\The question, "should gun laws should be stricter" is not "fuzzy" at all.
Aha...
like there is no difference between:
make more detailed list of what ammo and rifles is allowed
make all gun-bearers wear yellow... something
grab em all off their arms
allow to shut anybody with a gun without criminal.
Nothing fuzzy. And THEY ALL agree with last item in this list. ;-P
Yes, Derpy?
\\A majority of Americans (not qtardians) say they should be stricter. Proven by many polls.
Yep. Manipulative Demn-aligned polls. ;-P
And Rep-aligned polls, which would ask "are you PRO preserving FREEDOM(of arms wealding in petite)", would give the same -- firm majority of Reps and most of Demns. ;-P
\\No "demonstration of Demn Hypocrisy" occurred. Except in Qtard's delusions.
Of coure you do not see your own hypocrisy.
Cause you are i.v. :-))))))))
No.
πΊπΊDervish Sanders666 laughs that people suffered harm and died. He accuses others of the wicked spells he casts at the seances he hosts.πΊπΊ
Dervish bin Satan-Sanders666 is one of Satan's utter fools.
Rattrapper7774777
Qtard: "Accused" is as good as "judged"?
There is no presumption of innocence after judging (in a court). After judging guilt or innocence has been proven.
Aha... like there is no difference between:
At issue is the difference between "stricter", "keep laws the same" or "loosen laws". YOUR responses were not a part of the poll. The MAJORITY selected "stricter". Though, by "stricter" every respondent obviously had their own idea of what "stricter" laws would be acceptable to them. DUH. But there is ZERO fuzziness that a MAJORITY of Americans want stricter gun laws.
Qtard: Manipulative Demn-aligned polls.
Bullshit. Republicans who answered that they would like stricter laws to help combat the gun-violence epidemic were manipulated? HOW were they "manipulated"? btw, I don't know wtf a "Demn-aligned" poll is. "Demn" is a non-existent political party/group imagined by Qtard. There is no "n" in Democrat.
Qtard: Of coure you do not see your own hypocrisy. Cause you are i.v.
Of course Qtard does not see HIS own hypocrisy. And I STILL have no idea what "i.v." is. "Intelligent Valedictorian"?
Mystere: Dervish Sanders666 laughs that people suffered harm and died. He accuses others of the wicked spells he casts at the seances he hosts.
I have only ever "laughed" at vaccine disinformation spreaders who themselves died of covid. Because they (people like that "Lamb" a-hole) encouraged people to not get vaccinated. And thus caused deaths. I feel sorry for those who these a-holes duped and who died (and their loved ones). I have never cast a spell or held a seance. Spells and seances are BULLSHIT. As are your accusations, Mystere666.
I do not laugh that people suffered harm and died, asshole. I support people getting vaccinated so that they don't die. Even republican voters. Unlike you.
Mystere666 uptheEndo is one of Satan's utter fools.
Hmmm... Rattrapper said "Dervish bin Satan-Sanders is one of Satan's utter fools."
And now, Dervish is having an infantile temper tantrum over being called out, laughed at and owned by Rattrapper. ππππππππππ Dervish's fixation on calling Rattrapper "Mystere" and "Mystere666" shows signs of demonic possession. Dervish has proven by his lies and false accusations that he is involved in casting Satanic spells.
I'm going to follow Rattrapper's lead, Dervish bin Satan-Sanders666. Calling you Assface Dervish is too polite now. Creeps like you are going to take a huge fall, as you mock God by calling evil good.
Hey Q, you do know that Dervish bin Satan-Sanders666's microscopic brain is deteriorating rapidly, don't you?
\\Qtard: "Accused" is as good as "judged"?
\\There is no presumption of innocence after judging (in a court). After judging guilt or innocence has been proven.
You, Derpy was inquering "where's my hypocrisy???".
HERE IT IS.
My question was damn simple -- is there equal sign between "accused" == "judged"???
And what you did? You hypocritically squinted and started talking about "no presumption of innocence after judging".
Yes.
THAT is perfect example of your Demn hypocrisy.
Because you don't like to admit it openly and freely, something like "dRump is not judged, that mean he cannot be called duilty"... SAME as any other people, in the countries of the world that share principles of Human Right and Lawful Protection of Justice.
But you... because of your Demn political bias... freakingly cannot admit it.
That's why all I say about you being hypocritical control freak -- absolutely correct. ;-P
\\I do not laugh that people suffered harm and died, asshole. I support people getting vaccinated so that they don't die.
WTF???
Is that vaccine of some f*ing immortality? :-))))
Of course not.
And death rate is like 1%. Not that much deadly.
And most time that is because of people having some chronical problems and/or old age.
So... yeah... vaccinate people "so that they don't die"... while 99% would not die ANYWAY.
And other 1%... well, it's much easier and much cheaper -- then provide to them QUALIFED medical help BEFOREHAND.
Instead of "magical shot"... with prolonged consequencies, which would not be assigned to this or that political side.
ALL POLITICAINS SHOULD BURN IN some special hell!
\\At issue is the difference between "stricter", "keep laws the same" or "loosen laws".
Bullshit. :-))))
That is manipulative poll with specially concockted "non-question".
Are you that stupid or illiterate to not know about such verbal treaks?
I'll enlight you.
That is known from old time thing called "sophisms". ;-)
Like
Sophism - Encyclopedia - The Free Dictionary
encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com › Sophism
The ancient “horn sophism,” which is ascribed to Eubulides, runs as follows; “That which you have not lost, you have. You have not lost horns.
The same as with that "poll", with "you are bad human if you do not want stricter laws".
Go learn it. And became wiser.
Or... go demonstrate that you know it. And use it deliberately. As heinous hypocrite.
Or, you just an uneducatable i.v. :-))))
\\But there is ZERO fuzziness that a MAJORITY of Americans want stricter gun laws.
YET ONE Demn-hypocrisy.
When it happen, argh? When "majority from participants" of that "poll"???
Became "MAJORITY of Americans"
Yeah. That is thing you Demn Hypocrites DO ALL OF THE TIME. :-)))))))))
So often. That you do not feel, do not understand THE DIFFERENCE anymore.
\\Qtard: Of coure you do not see your own hypocrisy. Cause you are i.v.
\\Of course Qtard does not see HIS own hypocrisy.
Well???
And you can show it? With proper citations of my correctly phrased words?
Don't think so. :-))))))
\\And I STILL have no idea what "i.v." is. "Intelligent Valedictorian"?
Try to keep your attention.
Or... you can use Ctrl-F to search through our previous talks. ;-P
Mystere (commenting as Q-Anon): I'm going to follow Rattrapper's lead...
Of course you're going to follow your own lead. You always do... use this moronic excuse to explain why all your IDs say the same things. Use the same phrases. ALL think exactly alike.
Qtard: You, Derpy was inquering "where's my hypocrisy???". HERE IT IS.
Not knowing wtf you're talking about isn't hypocrisy. Accused and judges are obviously not the same. Under the law. I can have any opinion I want regarding guilt or innocence when someone is accused of a crime. I don't care AT ALL about your primal scream of anger re my conclusion that tRump is guilty.
Qtard: dRump is not judged, that mean he cannot be called duilty.
Bullshit. I can (and have, and will continue to) call him guilty. That isn't "hypocrisy", that is me stating my opinion (based on the known facts). SAME as all the people Minus calls guilty re the non-judged crimes they allegedly committed with Jeff Epstein. Yet you don't say SQUAT about Minus declaring guilt with no judging. Because Qtard is a hypocrite.
Qtard: But you... because of your Demn political bias... freakingly cannot admit it.
Of course not. Because there is no such thing as "Demn political bias". As a Democrat (no "n") do I see things from a Leftist point of view? Yes. I can still judge facts despite my bias, however. As can republican "Never Trumpers". For example, the Never Trump group "The Lincoln Project" says tRump colluded with Russia.
So, are you going to respond with your "not my problem" dodge? Or will you use your "I'm a foreigner" dodge? Or maybe your "whoz zat?" dodge? Or maybe you think republicans have "Demn bias"?
Is that vaccine of some f*ing immortality? And death rate is like 1%. Not that much deadly.
No. People should get vaccinated so they don't die. FROM COVID. That is what we were discussing. Not so they don't die EVER. As for the percentage that die being low, Qtard says "so what"? tRump also said "so what". Joe Biden said "we can save these people and should NOT let them die".
That is manipulative poll with specially concockted "non-question".
It isn't. There is no manipulating. Either you think laws should be stricter, stay the same, or loosened. Not confusing or fuzzy. Easy to answer. YOU just don't like the results.
Qtard: When "majority from participants" of that "poll"??? Became "MAJORITY of Americans".
Right. Because that is how polls work. "Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals".
Try to keep your attention. Or... you can use Ctrl-F to search through our previous talks.
No. You think I give a crap what your "i.v." means? You think wrong. Keep it secret. Totally meaningless insult to me since I don't know wtf you're talking about.
\\Not knowing wtf you're talking about isn't hypocrisy. Accused and judges are obviously not the same.
Yep.
But, only not when it about dRump. dRump is GUILTY, even without being judged.
And anybody who point it -- ALSO guilty, in being "venerating dRump".
And etc, and etc, and etc... :-)))))))))))
\\I can have any opinion I want regarding guilt or innocence when someone is accused of a crime.
Oh... that is FAT BS. :-)))))
\\I don't care AT ALL about your primal scream of anger re my conclusion that tRump is guilty.
You keep using my phrases.
But in such an stupid disingenious way.
Well, you are just an i.v. No need to wait for too much from you... :-))))))))
\\I can (and have, and will continue to) call him guilty.
Well... then, you'd continue to be mere spouter of non-factual non-sence. ;-P
And you are right... there are no law against i.v.s. :-))))) Yet. ;-P
\\That isn't "hypocrisy", that is me stating my opinion (based on the known facts).
No.
That is EXACTLY is nothing else except hypocrisy.
As in definition.
Because, you CANNO HAVE IT BOTH -- state your non-factual opinion AND demand it to be venerated as Factual Truth. ;-P
And. Thank you. You added LAST needed piece to that puzzle.
Because.
Hypocrisy need to have conscious understanding of what hypocrite himself doing. ;-P
\\Yet you don't say SQUAT about Minus declaring guilt with no judging.
Do Joe haunt me with his accusations?
That's it. ;-)
\\Because Qtard is a hypocrite.
Baseless and non-factual. As always. Yawn. :-)))
But well, you admitted here yourself --that you nithing else than mere babbler of non-factual bs. ;-P
So. For at least. You doing everything in your character.
\\Because there is no such thing as "Demn political bias".
Yap-yap-yap. :-)))))))))
\\I can still judge facts despite my bias, however.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
That is while you showed for all this time that you will not admit FACT... even if it'll fall on your head and crack it open.
And now you even commited coming-out of being proud fact-denier. ;-P
\\People should get vaccinated so they don't die. FROM COVID.
Do you even understand that 1% chance mean?
Well, yeah, of coure you not.
La-a-a-ame.
\\As for the percentage that die being low, Qtard says "so what"? tRump also said "so what". Joe Biden said "we can save these people and should NOT let them die".
Despite that... that that is Under Trump that vaccines was developed and implemented. ;-P
And Biden just riding that "magical shot" horse... because that is SO DAMN easy... and so much fun -- to hijack political opponent's profit. ;-P
\\It isn't. There is no manipulating. Either you think laws should be stricter, stay the same, or loosened. Not confusing or fuzzy. Easy to answer. YOU just don't like the results.
:-)))))))))))))))
Or... that is just YOU... who like that results too much. ;-P
As for me. I don't care. As foreigner. Have neither profit, no harm. NOT INTERESTED in that question AT ALL.
As it NON-APPLYABLE, NOT IMPORTANT, NOT INTERESTING here, where I live.
\\Right. Because that is how polls work. "Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals".
Yep.
And do that poll have CORRECT "confidence intervals"?
But... why should you be interested in such questions?
As you like results too much -- everything else, doesn't matter.
Isn't it, Derpy? ;-P
Qtard: you CANNO HAVE IT BOTH -- state your non-factual opinion AND demand it to be venerated as Factual Truth.
My opinions are fact-based. That is how I form them. By examining the facts and then coming to a fact-based conclusion.
Qtard: You keep using my phrases.
You keep talking about yourself while claiming you are talking about me.
Qtard: That is while you showed for all this time that you will not admit FACT.
"You" = Qtard. Qtard is talking about himself again.
Qtard: Do you even understand that 1% chance mean? Well, yeah, of coure you not.
Around the world COVID-19 vaccines saved an estimated 20 million lives in 1 year. Qtard says "so what, they all should have died". Should we have waited to see if covid killed more than 1% before acting? To be sure it was "worth it"?
Qtard: ...is Under Trump that vaccines was developed and implemented.
That the vaccines were "developed" under tRump is partially true. Quote, "hundreds of scientists had worked on mRNA vaccines for decades before the coronavirus pandemic brought a breakthrough". donald tRump was not president for decades. He was only president for 4 years.
The implementation did not begin until after the election of Joe Biden as president. That was mid-December. The majority of the work that went into the nationwide distribution program took place under Joe Biden. Joe Biden RAN on getting people vaccinated and Joe Biden WON the election (in part) for this reason.
FYI, it was under tRump that the U.S. slashed CDC staff inside China... Quote, "The Trump administration cut staff by more than two-thirds at a key U.S. public health agency operating inside China, as part of a larger rollback of US-funded health and science experts on the ground there leading up to the coronavirus outbreak ... Reductions at the U.S. agencies sidelined health experts, scientists and other professionals who might have been able to help China mount an earlier response to the novel coronavirus, as well as provide the U.S. government with more information about what was coming..."
Qtard: Biden just riding that "magical shot" horse... hijack political opponent's profit.
Bullshit. Joe Biden embraced vaccinations to combat the pandemic. If developing and implementing the vaccination program was to tRump's profit, why was he the main anti-vaccination influencer on Twitter in 2020?
Qtard: Or... that is just YOU... who like that results too much. As for me. I don't care. As foreigner. Have neither profit, no harm. NOT INTERESTED in that question AT ALL.
Only pro-gun violence nutters would dislike the results. As for you not caring... of course. Because sociopaths don't care about things that don't affect them.
Qtard: And do that poll have CORRECT "confidence intervals"?
The "stricter" percentage for the specific poll I quoted might be high. Though I haven't seen any poll where people who support "stricter" is under 50%. You linked to or cited NO polls, yet you keep implying the results are wrong. You say people were "manipulated" into answering "stricter"... while offering no proof this happened. Because Qtard dislikes the results too much -- everything else doesn't matter.
\\My opinions are fact-based. That is how I form them. By examining the facts and then coming to a fact-based conclusion.
Ohhh... that is most amusing.
Can you elaborate it MOAR here???
HOW you do it????
When you showed on many-many examples (and no opposite) here that you do not know what Logic, and even what FACT is. ;-P
Would be most interesting to hear/rewad.
\\You keep talking about yourself while claiming you are talking about me.
That's... all in your head. All in your head.
Go do checkup to psychiatrist. That can be damning symptome.
\\Around the world COVID-19 vaccines saved an estimated 20 million lives in 1 year. Qtard says "so what, they all should have died".<<<----INCORECT CITATION!!! AGAIN Should we have waited to see if covid killed more than 1% before acting? To be sure it was "worth it"?
Hallo!!! Is somebody at home???
There was WHOLE YEAR WITHOUT vaccines available.
And World Health... or how they spelled? Recently confirmed 7 (seven) millions of dead. Allegedly from COVID.
Well... how much it'll be, in case if there'd be NO vaccines -- who knows.
But this number "estimated 20 million lives in 1 year" -- smells bullshit.
My bet -- that number was chosen by perfectly psychological reasons.
Like not be too little one digit... and not too big two digit.
And good round 20... looks like "correct" and "profy" estimation. :-)))))))
\\That the vaccines were "developed" under tRump is partially true.
Yeah??? Seriously??? :-))))))))))
\\ Quote, "hundreds of scientists had worked on mRNA vaccines for decades before the coronavirus pandemic brought a breakthrough". donald tRump was not president for decades. He was only president for 4 years.
Well. SAME as Biden. ;-P
\\The majority of the work that went into the nationwide distribution program took place under Joe Biden. Joe Biden RAN on getting people vaccinated and Joe Biden WON the election (in part) for this reason.
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" go Google for it. ;-P
\\Bullshit. Joe Biden embraced vaccinations to combat the pandemic.
Yap-yap-yap.
And that JUST AFTER you yourself admitted that it HELPED him win elections.
Here (proper citation, again) "Joe Biden WON the election (in part) for this reason."
\\If developing and implementing the vaccination program was to tRump's profit, why was he the main anti-vaccination influencer on Twitter in 2020?
'Cause there was NO vaccines... for (almost) all 2020.
And that would be brain dead stupid -- to go into elections with a promices one would not be able to fullfill, isn't it?
So, he tryed to belittle that problem.
The same as Biden did about some other issues.
\\Though I haven't seen any poll where people who support "stricter" is under 50%.
Yep.
Because ask such question -- is manipulation.
It's like ask "are good lawful person?". And I bet even in jail numbers would be OVER 90% ;-P
But what would it mean?
Yep, that u r i.v.
"When you showed on many-many examples"... Zero is not "many-many".
"...estimated 20 million lives in 1 year smells bullshit"... Qtard's baseless rejection of the cited study's conclusion smells like bullshit.
"My bet -- that number was chosen by perfectly psychological reasons"... Qtard's bet based on his feelings about what facts must be. As opposed to what facts actually are.
"you yourself admitted that it HELPED him win elections"... Of course. People vote for the candidate that says they will work hard to solve problems.
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc"... No. donald tRump (if he had retained the presidency) would have bungled vaccine distribution. Just as his administration bungled the US pandemic response.
Joe Biden made the "brain dead stupid" (your words) promise to work hard to get everyone vaccinated. And Joe Biden delivered on his promise.
"Because ask such question -- is manipulation. It's like ask are good lawful person?".
Thank you for admitting that gun safety laws work! As per your own words. People were "manipulated" (convinced) by the facts. A bad thing in your opinion. As someone who hates facts as much as you do.
FYI, some people think more guns will make us safer. "An armed society is a polite society". They likely told the pollsters that they think laws should be loosened.
They did not say that because they see themselves as bad unlawful persons -- but because it is their honest (though incorrect and stupid) belief. Same as people who said they should be stricter.
\\"When you showed on many-many examples"... Zero is not "many-many".
But???
You doing it almost in every comment here.
And you posting so often... that it obviously CAN be counted as "many-many". ;-P
Well... yet one brainlessly fatuous cliam of yours. ;-P See, I'm able to learn -- while you are not. 'Cause you are Derpy The I.V. Whose utmost ability is -- only to repeat after opponent his factual, to the point and witty phrases. :-)))))))))))))))))
\\"...estimated 20 million lives in 1 year smells bullshit"... Qtard's baseless rejection of the cited study's conclusion smells like bullshit.
:-)))))))))))))))))) Yet one example how
it is freakingly IMPOSSIBLE for Derpy to see, to understand facts.... even if they'll fall on its head.
My bese was -- not some "estimates", BUT direct and based on actual statistic -- from respectful orgnization as WHO (World Health Organisation) -- which stated only 7 (seven) millions of deathes fro COVI-19 so far.
But... for Derpy, who claim it "believe in facts"... some shady estimates, unfounded, suspicious -- looks much more "factual".
'Cause it like to believe in any shit... throwed into its feeding vessel.
If only that is chaw from a pack with some certain brand on it. ;-P
\\Qtard's bet based on his feelings about what facts must be. As opposed to what facts actually are.
Of course.
Because.
That is how brains working.
First you percieve fact DIRECTLY, with your senses.
Then you translate that feelings into memories.
Then you use that memories in association with other people who also percieve that facts and accuire similar memories INTO some verbal markers.
Then... well, not all people doing, or able to come to this step -- you using logic and common sense to make some basic inferences from that memories and feelings.
Then... YET less people can do it -- not basic infernces, but based on some Logic and Science.
Then... yet less of people -- have Ability to self-correct and introspect own thinking to correct own biases.
Then... well, I'm already too damn far away inyo real og Inellect for such an i.v. like you even to start compehending EVEN very first bulletpoint of mine. ;-P
\\"Post hoc ergo propter hoc"... No. donald tRump (if he had retained the presidency) would have bungled vaccine distribution. Just as his administration bungled the US pandemic response.
Thank you for giving an example. ;-P
Of that kind of errorneous thinking.
But wait... that is not an example -- that is how you always do. :-)))))))))))))))
\\Joe Biden made the "brain dead stupid" (your words) promise to work hard to get everyone vaccinated. And Joe Biden delivered on his promise.
Aha... when vaccine(s) was ALREADY developed. And was certified by non-standard procedure. UNDER dRump.
So, if some bad syumptoms from that vaccines would arise -- blame all on dRump.
And CDC would do that "everyone vaccinated" anyway -- as that is ONLY scientifically senseful procedure of doing it.
But you propose to praise Bidon -- as your Demn-Propganada teached you -- for doing... what exactly?
WHAT important role of Bidon in all of it was, again?? :-))))))))))))))))
So... he just hijacked previous adminstration achievments... and branded it as own.
\\Thank you for admitting that gun safety laws work! As per your own words. People were "manipulated" (convinced) by the facts. A bad thing in your opinion. As someone who hates facts as much as you do.
WAT???
Are you yourself understand your own babbling??? :-))))))))))))
\\FYI, some people think more guns will make us safer.
Not my problem.
\\They did not say that because they see themselves as bad unlawful persons -- but because it is their honest (though incorrect and stupid) belief.
Hah.
That way.
Can I hope that you understand that your "I believe in facts" is -- in your own words "it is their honest (though incorrect and stupid) belief"??? ;-)
Qtard: Thank you for giving an example. Of that kind of errorneous thinking.
Not "errorneous". Accurate and true.
Trump administration had no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan. There was no distribution plan for the coronavirus vaccine set up by the Trump administration as the virus raged in its last months in office, new President Joe Biden's chief of staff, Ron Klain, said...
"The process to distribute the vaccine, particularly outside of nursing homes and hospitals out into the community as a whole, did not really exist when we came into the White House", Klain said on NBC's Meet the Press. (Reuters 1/24/2021).
I suppose you will just say that Klain lied. As opposed to presenting any evidence whatsoever to the contrary.
Qtard: And CDC would do that "everyone vaccinated" anyway...
They would not have. See prior quoted Reuter's story.
Qtard: Are you yourself understand your own babbling???
You wrote, "It's like ask are good lawful person". Re people answering poll about gun safety laws by saying they should be stricter. WHY is answering "stricter" same as saying you are a "good lawful person"? "Stricter" is "good" because gun safety laws WORK. YOUR admission. Unless YOU were babbling.
\\Trump administration had no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan.
'Cause? There was no vaccines.
Your Captain Obvious. ;-P
And why should he help his political opponents???
Who'd either took that plan and called it their own. Or would blame him for deficiency and wrongness of that plan.
\\They would not have.
Then they are just a bunch of useless beaurocrats. ;-P
And dRump did rifgt to fire em. :-))))))))))))
\\You wrote, "It's like ask are good lawful person".
Naah.
That is not. ;-P
Go say trhat you REALLY have such a cognitive DISability, that you even cannot understand written English correctly.
\\WHY is answering "stricter" same as saying you are a "good lawful person"? "Stricter" is "good" because gun safety laws WORK. YOUR admission. Unless YOU were babbling.
???
And not YOUR?
YOU -- do not think that that people who want stricter gun laws are good and lawful??? :-))))))))))))))))
Qtard: "Trump administration had no coronavirus vaccine distribution plan"... 'Cause? There was no vaccines. Your Captain Obvious.
Good leadership involves planning ahead. You are an i.v. This comment (among many others) proves it.
Qtard: Go say trhat you REALLY have such a cognitive DISability, that you even cannot understand written English correctly.
That is YOUR disability. I'd cut you some slack (not being a native English speaker) but then you go and make such an absurd accusation. Proving yourself to be an i.v. YET AGAIN.
Qtard: YOU -- do not think that that people who want stricter gun laws are good and lawful???
I think they actually want to do something to address the US gun violence problem. Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a pedophile "good and lawful". Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a White collar criminal "good and lawful".
\\Good leadership involves planning ahead.
Planning that would be thrown out of the window? ;-P
As, I DO NOT SEE it -- that Demns would take anything dRump planned into execution. And, am I not right?
\\I'd cut you some slack (not being a native English speaker)
AT LAST.
You admitted that I am foreigner.
But. Contre-factually. You'd keep claiming that my ref to it -- is being a "dodge".
Isn't it, Derpy? :-)))))))))))))))
Be my guest. ;-P
\\but then you go and make such an absurd accusation. Proving yourself to be an i.v. YET AGAIN.
Obviously.
Because you unable to demonstrate where
\\\\You wrote, "It's like ask are good lawful person".
Or... how my words can be understood that way.
While I DIRECTLY pointed out -- that POLL should be IN PREASON.
Where... how many people would admit being criminals??? How do you think? ;-P
\\Qtard: YOU -- do not think that that people who want stricter gun laws are good and lawful???
\\I think they actually want to do something to address the US gun violence problem. Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a pedophile "good and lawful". Support for stricter gun laws does not make (for example) a White collar criminal "good and lawful".
That was NOT what I was asked. Yawn.
Qtard: that Demns would take anything dRump planned into execution. And, am I not right?
No. It depends on who tRump tasked with developing it. If Anthony Fauci came up with the plan (an official who worked for tRump and then continued in his job under Biden)... why would they throw it out?
Your i.v. question is irrelative anyway. The tRump administration should have come up with a vaccine distribution plan to be implemented by the tRump administration -- in tRump's second term. He still thought there were be one -- even after Joe Biden won. So why would he not plan accordingly?
Qtard: AT LAST. You admitted that I am foreigner.
How could I possibly "admit" this. I have no way of knowing if you are a foreigner or not. I have no way of knowing where you are located. I surely can't take your word (a proven liar) for anything I can't independently confirm. I only acknowledge that you SAY you are a foreigner.
You are a horrible speller. So maybe that is some kind of proof? Though you've never said that English isn't your native language. Or maybe you did and I don't remember. I do remember you said your misspelling of words is ON PURPOSE. As a moronic "gotcha".
Qtard: But. Contre-factually. You'd keep claiming that my ref to it -- is being a "dodge".
Of course. Because you DO use it as a dodge. This is not counterfactual, it is observably factual.
Qtard: how many people would admit being criminals?
WTF? Answering the poll by saying you think gun safety laws should stay the same or be loosened is NOT admitting to being a criminal. Is that why you say the poll should be conducted "in preason" (I assume you mean "in person")? So, if the person being polled answers anything other than "stricter", they can be immediately arrested?
Qtard: That was NOT what I was asked. Yawn.
OK. I was wrong. Your actual question was even dumber.
\\How could I possibly "admit" this. I have no way of knowing if you are a foreigner or not.
Isn't my lapses with using English and not knowing some basic trivia are self-evidant?
\\I surely can't take your word (a proven liar) for anything I can't independently confirm. I only acknowledge that you SAY you are a foreigner.
For at least.
You just NOW showed that you understand concept of "sombody-somebdy who says something-something". ;-P
And restrain to take as granted somebody's claims.
PLUS for you.
While... it leaves me puzzled -- why you seemingly do not undersrand that for other people it could be the same... cause you i.v.?
\\ I do remember you said your misspelling of words is ON PURPOSE. As a moronic "gotcha".
Then why you get cought on it??? If it is so moronic? Ah??? :-)))))
Isn't that self-revealing. From your side. ;-P
\\Of course. Because you DO use it as a dodge. This is not counterfactual, it is observably factual.
And HOW can you be SO SURE... if you just claimed that YOU CANNOT confirm that I'm a foreigner?
Basics of logic -- you cannot be.
If you have a rational thinker *integrity*. AKA Intellectual Honesty.
Which.
Logically.
Confirms that you are mere i.v. ;-P
\\WTF? Answering the poll by saying you think gun safety laws should stay the same or be loosened is NOT admitting to being a criminal.
WTF. Indeed.
And I EVEN wrote it with caps.
\\While I DIRECTLY pointed out -- that POLL should be IN PREASON.
IF poll (about "being good lawful person") would be IN PRISON... how many people would admit being criminals??? How do you think?
\\Is that why you say the poll should be conducted "in preason" (I assume you mean "in person")?
See.
Isn't that damn shameful "err". For any native English speaking.
\\OK. I was wrong. Your actual question was even dumber.
:-))))))))))))))
Qtard: you seemingly do not undersrand that for other people it could be the same...
Other people aren't ALL known liars. You are. If someone lies, then everything else they say is suspect. If I have no reason to believe a person is lying -- and if what they say conforms (in part) to what I already know to be true -- then I have no reason to disbelieve what they are telling me. Especially if backed up with facts. Even if (as is the case with the IC) they can't disclose ALL the facts they know. They didn't provide zero facts ("trust me" as you mischaracterize the situation).
Qtard: IF poll (about "being good lawful person") would be IN PRISON... how many people would admit being criminals?
So, answering "the same" or "looser" (re the gun poll) is same as admitting to being a criminal? BS.
\\Especially if backed up with facts.
But you DO NOT know what THAT THINGS called facts is.
Even after DEFINITION was provided to you.
Even if it would fact itself fell at you head.
Quite contrary, you keep claiming that you (what a moron) "believe in facts". :-))))))))))))))
\\Even if (as is the case with the IC) they can't disclose ALL the facts they know. They didn't provide zero facts ("trust me" as you mischaracterize the situation).
Then... where is that "non-zero facts"???? :-))))))
As you, yourself, correctly (OMG) stated: "If I have no reason to believe a person is lying -- and if what they say conforms (in part) to what I already know to be true -- then I have no reason to disbelieve what they are telling me."
But that is NOT the case in my case:
I do not believe they NOT lying -- why not? if that is SO DAMN benefitial and not dangerous at all for them -- to lie. (and well, where and when you saw NOT lying spies?????? Like dr.No asking Bond: "Are you a spy?" and that says: "Yes, I am. And I came to kill you.")
AND
That they say DO NOT coroborates with other things I know as facts. ;-P
\\Qtard: IF poll (about "being good lawful person") would be IN PRISON... how many people would admit being criminals?
\\So, answering "the same" or "looser" (re the gun poll) is same as admitting to being a criminal? BS.
Mental. Cognitive deficiency clearly seen, isn't it?
While quote is before its eye. And ABOUT (imaginary) POLL in prison. Among criminals. About em being "lawful citizens". To which they would answer "yes, for sure... I was setup by a dirty cops and corrupt kangaroo court"
It still keep asking about something else.
But you DO NOT know what THAT THINGS called facts is. Even after DEFINITION was provided to you.
I do. And I go with the dictionary definition. Not your redefinition.
Qtard: Quite contrary, you keep claiming that you (what a moron) "believe in facts".
You (what a moron) keep insisting facts can't be believed. Facts can be disbelieved (what you do constantly). The opposite of disbelieving is to believe.
Qtard: Mental. Cognitive deficiency clearly seen, isn't it?
ad hominem dodge. Used because FM Qtard can't answer my question.
Qtard: It still keep asking about something else.
Of course. That "something else" being the ACTUAL topic of discussion. Poll about gun laws. NOT Qtard's (imaginary) poll of prisoners asking (imaginary) question, "are you good and lawful".
\\But you DO NOT know what THAT THINGS called facts is. Even after DEFINITION was provided to you.
\\I do. And I go with the dictionary definition. Not your redefinition.
And how my any different? It's just bulletpointed. For such an i.v. to understand.
But here is from dictinary one:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact
fact
noun
Λfakt How to pronounce fact (audio)
Synonyms of factnext
1
a
: something that has actual existence
space exploration is now a fact
b
: an actual occurrence
prove the fact of damage
MY self-evidant. MEANS actually occured
2
: a piece of information presented as having objective reality
These are the hard facts of the case.
MY ref to Reality AKA objective reality
3
: the quality of being actual : ACTUALITY
a question of fact hinges on evidence
4
: a thing done: such as
MY open and obvious
Go try to refute. ;-P
And confirm that you are i.v. To which it is IMPOSSIBLE to understand things... if it explained with a little different words. :-)))))))))))))
\\You (what a moron) keep insisting facts can't be believed.
Why not? I said that it "do not NEED to".
But.
You claimed that you believe. ;-P
That's it.
That is not impossible.
Only... fitting for an i.v. ;-P
\\Facts can be disbelieved (what you do constantly).
Not facts itself.
Opinions about something being or not being fact.
Well... such an i.v.s like you -- can "disbewlieve" open and obviuous facts too. :-))))))))))))))
\\ad hominem dodge. Used because FM Qtard can't answer my question.
Yeah. It's easy for me to admit that I cannot answer that question.
\\\\So, answering "the same" or "looser" (re the gun poll) is same as admitting to being a criminal? BS.
Because.
It's so idiotic.
And not related to anything I have written.
How can anyone answer something to such garbage question???
Only that it is a stopid question. So, that is what I did.
To which, you as proud idiot, declared that you "won an argument". :-)))))))))))
Go continue doing that -- that is successful tactic against me -- the more obviopusly moronic question you'll try to hurd on me -- the more successfully you'd "win". ;-P
\\Of course. That "something else" being the ACTUAL topic of discussion. Poll about gun laws. NOT Qtard's (imaginary) poll of prisoners asking (imaginary) question, "are you good and lawful".
I just explained you my point.
In simplest possible for any layman to understand terms.
But you are not just any layman. You are proud idiot.
So that expalnation is wasted on you.
As yopu talking just to boost your EGO. Not for receiveing new information, gaining some knowledge and having good time, basicly.
For you... that is hard labour. For the sake of some your idiotic GOAL(S?). That's why you are so frantickly stubborn.
See. You the open book to me. ;-P
Qtard: For the sake of some your idiotic GOAL(S?). That's why you are so frantickly stubborn. See. You the open book to me.
You are convinced that the stupidity you just wrote concerning my motivation is correct. Because Qtard is "frantickly stubborn".
Why are you quoting a dictionary? You were clear that you don't believe in them. I called dictionary authors/compilers experts and you (in true FM fashion) disagreed. Because Qtard is a proud idiot.
I am talking just to boost my ego? Otherwise I would be willing to learn from the sage Qtard? As an idiot, you have no new information to impart. Only stupidity.
\\You were clear that you don't believe in them
WAT???
And as always. No quotes of my words. And only contre-factual claims.
r.b.s are so r.b.s. :-)))))))))))
\\I called dictionary authors/compilers experts and you (in true FM fashion) disagreed.
Experts in WHAT???
Making dictinaries? YES, they are.
Bur you called em "experts in English" -- which they cannot be.
More then that -- they DO NOT claim to be.
That is just your r.b. delusion. ;-P
\\I am talking just to boost my ego? Otherwise I would be willing to learn from the sage Qtard? As an idiot, you have no new information to impart. Only stupidity.
That sounds proud idiot. ;-P
I, for emample -- able to find what to learn EVEN from an idiot.
"I, for emample -- able to find what to learn EVEN from an idiot".
So, what Qtard is saying is that he learns from himself. Is that effective in increasing your level of stupidity? That seems to be your goal.
Qtard: Bur you called em "experts in English" -- which they cannot be.
If they are compiling an English language dictionary? Then they MUST be experts.
Qtard: More then that -- they DO NOT claim to be.
Huh? They all told you? I call BULLSHIT.
\\If they are compiling an English language dictionary? Then they MUST be experts.
Experts in WHAT? ;-)
They are perfectly are (can be) experts in "compiling dictionary of English language".
But that is NOT THE SAME as vague and over-generalised "experts in English"...
WHAT that could mean EVEN???
That they can sing as best English singers too?
Or they can write poetry and prose as best English poet and writers?
Maybe they can scrib English texts in most fancy way, as only best scribs can???
No. No. And no.
They ONLY know how to "compile English dictionary".
Isn't that obvious and easy to understand... might be.
\\Qtard: More then that -- they DO NOT claim to be.
\\Huh? They all told you? I call BULLSHIT.
IF they are experts -- they MUST have that personal moral values of ANYONE who wanna be admitted being expert SHOULD have -- understanding limitations of their knowledge.
Basicly. Ability to say "I *know* this, this and this... but IF you'd ask me about THAT... here is an adress of expert in THAT sphere". ;-P
"WHAT that could mean EVEN???"... It means they probably have an English degree. Qtard has no idea because he is a FM.
Hmmm... And what that "English degree" mean? ;-P
I, as foreigner, obviously do not know it.
English major: The English Major (alternatively "English concentration", "B.A. in English") is a term in the United States and several other countries for an undergraduate university degree focused around reading, analyzing, and writing texts in the English language. The term may also be used to describe a student who is pursuing such a degree.
Students who major in English reflect upon, analyze, and interpret literature and film. ... A degree in English also helps to develop the needed critical thinking skills essential to a number of career fields, including writing, editing, publishing, teaching, research, advertising, public relations, law, and finance. [end Wikipedia Excerpt]
If someone has earned a BA in English studies, that person can SURELY say they are an expert in the English language. You claim people who earn such a degree would be lacking in moral values to say they are experts because you are a FM.
"as foreigner" = "as a FM".
That's how I read it. EVERY TIME you bring up being a foreigner.
\\"as foreigner" = "as a FM".
\\That's how I read it. EVERY TIME you bring up being a foreigner.
Of course. Cause you are r.b. ;-P
With totalitarian streak.
And like to think bad about peopl. ;-P
Cause... it rises your sore loser self-esteem. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) NOT ;-P
\\If someone has earned a BA in English studies, that person can SURELY say they are an expert in the English language.
Yep.
Perfectly what uneducated and unteachable r.b. would say.
As it do not know what education is. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\You claim people who earn such a degree would be lacking in moral values to say they are experts because you are a FM.
Yeah.
Claiming "being expert" on that base... would be morally flawed?
No. It would be bona fide idiotic.
Thank you for proving my point. That you are uneducated and unteachable r.b. ;-P
"No. It would be bona fide idiotic"... From the point of view of a FM.
"lacking in moral values" to falsely claim being experts while recieving just a basic eductaion?
Really, that is idea that can visit mind of u.u.r.b. or FM(f*g moron).
And. FM like to call other, more educated and well-mannered people FMs.
Cause... that is whole chance to have "moral satisfaction", as they think.
Qtard is more educated and better mannered? The second claim definitely deserves a huge LOL. Re the first claim, why (if true) does Qtard demean the value of a BA degree by falsely calling it a "basic education"?
FYI, college is higher education. High school is basic education. I find your "more education" brag dubious given that you do not know this.
\\Re the first claim, why (if true) does Qtard demean the value of a BA degree by falsely calling it a "basic education"?
Because it is basic. ;-P
Captain Obvious says.
\\FYI, college is higher education.
It is just called this way, historically.
From times when only very few of chosen have had a chance of having it.
Today... do you know percentage of BA in your country? ;-P
Well... my point was -- that even with BA people are hardly enough educated to understand current state of science and complexity of the world.
Multi-disciplinary education needed. For that.
And even that would be just a beginning of the path. ;-)
Well... anyway "having BA degree" is hardly enough to be called an expert... in anything.
For sure.
But you, can show how much you are u.u.r.b. with opposing to that obvious fact. ;-P
Derpy Derpy Doo, where r u??? :-)))))))))))))
Post a Comment