Political discussions about everything
By johnforbes
#123765
Media outlets have made much of the need for ventilators, but Dr. Stephen Smith says that, after 4 days on HCQ, patients do not need a ventilator.

Also the main folks at risk would have co-morbidity factors such as high BMIs and diabetes.

HCQ can also be used by docs and nurses to prevent coronavirus.
By sillydaddy
#123768
Obama is to blame for the medical equipment shortages...But the media will never report it..

When Obama created the ACA, he also created 2.3% excise tax on the manufacture of medical devices.
The tax was to help pay for the expanding health insurance...
That forced medical equipment manufacturers to go overseas...
In 2018 the Trump administration introduced and passed a bill to eliminate the tax..
Even so, in the House, Among Democrats, 57 voted for the measure and 131 opposed it.
But as we all know, it takes a long time to bring back oversea jobs, once they're gone..! :O
By Clownkicker
#123770
Of course, that tax had nothing to do with those manufacturers moving anywhere (if they even moved at all.) The proof is that Trump and Republicans gave millions to companies like Carrier and Harley Davidson, they took the money, then moved the jobs to other countries anyway.

But now sillydummy (with johnforbes) is thrilled that a ventilator that cost $25,000 last year is now selling for $50,000. Surprise, surprise. Predatory capitalism at work.

When sillydummy needs one of those ventilators, he won't be crowing any more. He will be bitching about his Medicare and Veteran's benefits not getting him one of them because Trump didn't move soon enough.
By elklindo69
#123774
From what I remember Trump sent 18 tons of PPE to China to deal with coronavirus. So now I'm getting the impression that it was a mistake to put a his moronic and his sneering dipshit son in law in charge of allocating our nation's healthcare resources.
By johnforbes
#123826
Elkin, you were saying that Trump's sons were ignorant, so I merely noted their educational background and asked in what way your own was superior.

That was a reasonable query.

Kushner has MBA and JD degrees, and despite his youth would be an asset on pretty much any task given that wide general background in business and law.

Just like -- ahem -- some other people you may have "met" online.
By elklindo69
#123881
No Johnnie an ad hominem attack is intellectually feeble becuase why attack the argument when you can attack the person.

There are plenty of people who are vastly more qualified and more mature to do the job than Kushner. So Kushner gets up on the podium and in a sneering response claims that "it's our stockpile"?

Kushner was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he got a whole silverware set. Kushner was born to wealthy parents, married a wealthy woman in a marriage of convenience and learned how to kiss his father in laws ass...that's what he's been successful in life. Everything else he was pretty much a failure.
By johnforbes
#123884
But Elkin, it was you who attacked the person Kushner without evening knowing he had MBA and JD degrees (which you probably don't).
By Clownkicker
#123887
johnny, who CARES if he has an MBA and a JD? (I mean, besides obsequious boot lickers like you., obviously.)

It doesn't mean jack shit and you know it. Everybody sees how ignorant your own education left YOU.

But everyone DID notice that you failed to refute anything said about Kushner. You've got nothin', as always, and the only people you fool are fellowTrump supporters too dimwitted to notice or think critically. (That includes yourself. You actually think you made a devastating point when you said nothing at all.)
By johnforbes
#123891
So, as their way of attacking personal attacks, both Elkin and Clown do what?

They mount personal attacks.

Were it not for their low standards, they would have none.
By Clownkicker
#123898
Dimwit, my post was not a personal attack. It addressed the issue raised.

That you are demonstrably a dumbbell is not presented as the sole reason you are wrong. (That's what you do; a personal attack.)

You are wrong because you didn't address any point elklindo raised, whereas I refuted your point.

Now do you understand, you ignorant turd? (Again, that is not my argument. It's merely an ADDITIONAL observation.)
By Clownkicker
#123908
No, in saying I did not make a personal attack I showed rationally that you misunderstand the term "personal attack" and then also showed you are an ignoramus.

I never said you are wrong because you're obese, for example. (That would be a personal attack of the sort you make in place of a relevant response to a devastating argument.)
I said you were wrong when I addressed your point and you couldn't refute my argument. That is not a personal attack.

Then I also said you are ignorant independent to my point, because you are. (That's just an additional proven observation. It was never my argument against your mush-brained partisan nonsense.)
By johnforbes
#123913
In responding to a personal attack made by Clown, Clown launched another personal attack, and then followed up with another personal attack.

Other than mentioning Clown's exogenous obesity and submaximal IQ, I have never done that.
By Clownkicker
#123921
johnny, you make personal attacks as a response to an argument because you have no facts or reason to support your position. Then you slink off after whining and embarrassing yourself.

But I don't substitute a personal attack for an argument the way you do. I devastate your idiotic arguments with facts and reason.

Only additionally do I point out your dishonesty, hypocrisy, partisanship, ignorance, and foolishness which caused you to make the stupid statements in the first place. But that's just a bonus for me, it's never my argument. Your personal attacks are used in lieu of an argument because you can never intelligently refute a thing I say.
User avatar
By RealJustme
#123922
Clown - No, in saying I did not make a personal attack I showed rationally that you misunderstand the term "personal attack" and then also showed you are an ignoramus.
That's today's liberal dudes.
By Clownkicker
#123927
Of course johnforbes can't show any example of me ever using an ad hominem argument to attack anyone's arguments.

His comment is just one more case of his mental impotence. <---(see, johnny, that is not an example of an ad hominem argument. It is just an observation AFTER I demolished your pointless argument with reason and fact.)
By johnforbes
#123965
Clown, please just take a breath on this ventilator thread.

Your forced expiratory volume may constrain this very thread to expire.
By Clownkicker
#123972
As I said, johnforbes couldn't show even one example of me ever using an ad hominem argument to attack anyone's arguments.

johnforbes is intellectually impotent. Q.E.D.
By johnforbes
#123980
In replying to my objection to his insult, Clown posted an insult, then followed that with an insult clarifying his earlier insult, then added another insult, then responded with an insult relating to the earlier insult, which led to his most recent personal attack.

Were it not for Clown's exogenous obesity and alopecia, I would insult him.
By Clownkicker
#123982
In desperately avoiding any reply to the salient points I made, johnforbes posted an insult, then he followed my reiteration of my point with an insult following his earlier insult, then added another insult, then responded with an insult relating to the earlier insult, which led to his most recent personal attack. Dishonest ad hominem arguments are all he ever has.

Were it not for johnforbes' simple mind and egregious intellectual impotence, I would insult him.
By johnforbes
#124030
The casino industry in Atlantic City failed.

Indian casinos were competition, and so was online gambling.

This has been explained to Elkin many times, but he is too dumb to get it.

Elkin is so naïve that he thinks the path to wealth is smooth, easy, unbroken, and calm.

That is why Elkin is poor in addition to being dumb.
By elklindo69
#124039
So dummy....how has the gambling business done in Vegas?

I'm not sure how you can lose money in a casino business when the payout ratios established by NJ are 83%. So for every dollar that goes in to a slot, then Trump could take 17 cents. That is a 17% return on the slots. You can't lose with those kinds of numbers?

So Trump seems be quite consistent by mismanaging the casinos and the coronavirus response.

I suppose nobody could have figured that one out. I think the email lady warned us of that a while back.
By johnforbes
#124041
Vegas was and is different in many ways from Atlantic City, and Trump participated there as well.

And Elkin, please don't make yourself look ridiculous by calling others dumb.
Obliterated what?

johnforbes simply can't stop himself from talking […]

Amazing. I merely report the well documented facts[…]

Having the Clintons Testify

Having the Clintons testify about the Epstein mess[…]

Come on Elkin, if you had ever been there, you'd k[…]

Evidence from the Durham Annex

"Now evidence from the Durham annex proving t[…]

Remember Brooke Shields in her Calvin Klein Jeans?[…]

Mr Forbes has never cited AI. In the most charmin[…]