Trump to be indicted in GA?

[sjt18]

So what happened to healing the country? Because this just nuked any chance of unifying.

What have they been doing for a year plus? They should have had all the evidence they needed when he was still president. There is a reason they didnt prosecute Nixon.

They waited until the midterms on purpose. This is just cheap political points because everything that Biden has touched has died. And the Dems now need some talking points, so they just revived their go to, after that they had to change tune on Covid, their other bellcow.

Ford pardoned him. If I remember correctly, the Dems at the time did not protest because they didn't want to put the country through it either. Times have changed.

 

[sjt18]

Are you really this ignorant? It seems impossible. You must know that you are nothing more than another nobody, telling spoon fed lies from the right wing lie factories. Have you no pride? No shame?

If you don't recognize that Biden is a grotesque liar and incompetent then you have no moral standing to judge the lies being spoon fed to anyone.

What Dems are doing to Biden is elder abuse. The guy is Bernie with radical leftists using him as a puppet.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Jimmy Carter was elected partly because southerners thought he would work to overturn Roe. He chose political convenience instead.

I would also argue that a "moral man" would not say or believe the things he does about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I don't think a good man would have abandoned the good people of Iran like he did. They were essentially a success story for increasing freedom and rights (including women's rights) in the Middle East. He had the power to stop the mullahs... and didn't. Generations have now suffered because of it.

He has become more and more anti Israel since he left the White House. He has sat in the Democrat stew pot of leftism so long that he is not the man he once was for sure. But in his time in office, i believe his heart was in the right place. He just listened to bad advisers and lacked the strength of Will to make the tough decisions

 

[hog88]

He has become more and more anti Israel since he left the White House. He has sat in the Democrat stew pot of leftism so long that he is not the man he once was for sure. But in his time in office, i believe his heart was in the right place. He just listened to bad advisers and lacked the strength of Will to make the tough decisions

JC didn't have a clue on foreign policy.

 

[luthervol]

All your posts!

I was specifically talking about the vaccine being handed out based on race.

 

[luthervol]

You can vote for whoever you want, so long as you're intellectually honest about it and can admit it was a ****** choice, just less ****** then the other in your opinion.

My issue is with those who can't call a turd a turd

I agree. Or those who will not admit that some turds are less disgusting than others.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Jimmy Carter was elected partly because southerners thought he would work to overturn Roe. He chose political convenience instead.

I would also argue that a "moral man" would not say or believe the things he does about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I don't think a good man would have abandoned the good people of Iran like he did. They were essentially a success story for increasing freedom and rights (including women's rights) in the Middle East. He had the power to stop the mullahs... and didn't. Generations have now suffered because of it.

@luthervol says all the millions of Americans and those all over the world were just too stupid to understand Carter’s genius

 

[0nelilreb]

Video of perp walk will be some great campaign ad fodder

You dummy’s on the left just continue to try to cut your own throats and make a folk hero out of Trump. The absolute best things you can do as a party is to forget about him .

 

[luthervol]

Despicable people can sometimes do good things. Trump nominatied and saw confirmed three solid constitutionally aware justices to the Supreme Court. These three individuals may save our entire nation for a generation. For that cause alone, I am darn glad that we had Trump as our President. Would you rather have a despicable person as President who makes good decisions or an honourable person who makes lousy decisions?

That's close to a toss up. We can all agree that Trump was despicable, but we do not agree in the least that his justices are good.
If we had honorable person who we all agreed was honorable (Jimmy Carter), many might view some of his decisions as poor (not me), but I still think we come out better in the long run as a nation.
We will hardly ever agree as a country on whether or not a decision is good or bad, but we should be able to agree on what is honorable and not.

 

[Rickyvol77]

That's close to a toss up. We can all agree that Trump was despicable, but we do not agree in the least that his justices are good.
If we had honorable person who we all agreed was honorable (Jimmy Carter), many might view some of his decisions as poor (not me), but I still think we come out better in the long run as a nation.
We will hardly ever agree as a country on whether or not a decision is good or bad, but we should be able to agree on what is honorable and not.

Let me guess you don’t think Barrett is a good justice but Sotomayer is right up your alley?

 

[luthervol]

If you were truly interested in "truth"... you could have spent the 2 minutes I just spent to find these articles.


Opinion | New York’s Race-Based Preferential Covid Treatments

Dems’ COVID-19 drug policies biased against Whites, legal scholars charge

FDA urges race, ethnicity be considered in COVID-19 drug treatment

N.Y. Rationing COVID Drugs Based on Race

I read all 4. Seems like an overblown reaction by the right.
Do you believe that the medication should be handed out based on certain risk factors?
Age? Is that fair to a 64 year old if the risk factor line is 65?
Weight? It that fair to someone with a body mass index one percent below what is considered obese?
It also looks like race is recommended to be a vey small factor in the overall calculation.
If race and ethnicity is a know risk factor to certain things, is it wrong to consider it?

It all looks sort of like race baiting by the right to me. I can almost close my eyes and hear the Fox coverage now.

 

[sjt18]

I read all 4. Seems like an overblown reaction by the right.

Of course you do.... Since when is The Hill, right? The FDA?

Do you believe that the medication should be handed out based on certain risk factors?

Race in and of itself is not a risk factor. Did you really read the articles?

Age? Is that fair to a 64 year old if the risk factor line is 65?

Depends on which other factors weigh in.

Weight? It that fair to someone with a body mass index one percent below what is considered obese?

Again... an objective, measurable criteria with quantifiable probabilities.

It also looks like race is recommended to be a vey small factor in the overall calculation.
If race and ethnicity is a know risk factor to certain things, is it wrong to consider it?

Race can be associated with college success rates. Should that be considered in admissions? Men are 2.5 times more likely to have an IQ over 140. Should that factor into job or education opportunities?

It all looks sort of like race baiting by the right to me. I can almost close my eyes and hear the Fox coverage now.

No. That's just your hardened bias disallowing any FACT that might call to question your belief in leftist narratives.

 

[luthervol]

Let me guess you don’t think Barrett is a good justice but Sotomayer is right up your alley?

I don't know much about either. I would have an immediate suspicion to anyone highly recommended by the right just as you would have an immediate suspicion of anyone highly recommended by the left. That's why I think a balance should be maintained.

 

[VolStrom]

That's close to a toss up. We can all agree that Trump was despicable, but we do not agree in the least that his justices are good.
If we had honorable person who we all agreed was honorable (Jimmy Carter), many might view some of his decisions as poor (not me), but I still think we come out better in the long run as a nation.
We will hardly ever agree as a country on whether or not a decision is good or bad, but we should be able to agree on what is honorable and not.

Good lord man, so you can honestly say that the dumb ass comments that Sotomayer and Kagen made were worthy of supreme court justices? Both of them are dumber than a box of rocks. They may know how to memorize books, but they don't belong on the supreme court to decide whether something is constitutional or not.

 

[luthervol]

Of course you do.... Since when is The Hill, right? The FDA?
Race in and of itself is not a risk factor. Did you really read the articles?
Depends on which other factors weigh in.
Again... an objective, measurable criteria with quantifiable probabilities.
Race can be associated with college success rates. Should that be considered in admissions? Men are 2.5 times more likely to have an IQ over 140. Should that factor into job or education opportunities?


No. That's just your hardened bias disallowing any FACT that might call to question your belief in leftist narratives.

I didn't say those sources were right leaning. Those sources were not making a big deal out of it. My guess is that the big deal is being propagandized by the right.
You didn't answer my question....should risk factors be considered when deciding who gets the medication?
If so, race/ethnicity in and of itself can very well be a risk factor, as well as weight, age, etc...
From what the four articles said, all possible risk factors are considered with race potentially being a minor consideration.

An ant hill being turned into a mountain by the right in order to anger their base and further divide the country.

 

[sjt18]

I didn't say those sources were right leaning. Those sources were not making a big deal out of it. My guess is that the big deal is being propagandized by the right.

It is a big deal. At the behest of Biden and other policy makers these rules are being considered arbitrarily and politically because results among black people have not been as good as among white people. But there are a LOT of personal factors that have nothing to do with race particularly... that are CHOICES... that make this both unjust AND rank racism.

You didn't answer my question....should risk factors be considered when deciding who gets the medication?

Objective risk factors. Yes. The color of a person's skin is NOT such a factor.

If so, race/ethnicity in and of itself can very well be a risk factor, as well as weight, age, etc...

Nope. Not unless you tie some objective, biological, genetic cause-effect to it. Blacks are about 25% more likely to smoke than whites. Is that justification for denying lung cancer treatments to whites who have never smoked in favor of a lifelong black smoker?

From what the four articles said, all possible risk factors are considered with race potentially being a minor consideration.

An ant hill being turned into a mountain by the right in order to anger their base and further divide the country.

LOL... you seriously believe what you just said, don't you? I'm sure you think the right was to blame for the George Floyd riots, right? It couldn't be a false left wing narrative. I'm even more familiar with Ferguson where prominent Democrats jumped to the conclusion that Brown was unjustly shot.... and pushed that narrative while "funded" protestors were bussed into MO to create mayhem. But that wasn't "divisive"... was it?

 

[UT_VOLS13]

I was specifically talking about the vaccine being handed out based on race.

You have you answer on thaT!

 

[luthervol]

You have you answer on thaT!

I do. It was once again "much ado about nothing."

 

[sjt18]

@luthervol

Here's a proposal. Agree to restoring my RIGHTS according to the US Constitution in total and as intended... and we can just live and let live. OK? In fact, let's reassert the 10th Amendment so that you can go to a state that implements the policies and ideals that you believe in... and I can do the same. You can find a state that imposes mandates and unions and acceptance of gay marriage and regulation and a huge welfare state and high taxes and any other liberal policy you want to see applied to those who agree with you. Then we can learn by watching the successes and failures of our ideals.

What do you say? Are you ready to agree to restore the Federal government to its strict AND LEGAL Constitutional boundaries? Are you ready to truly be "pro-choice" when it comes to something other than killing an innocent human being to avoid the consequences of a freely made choice?

 

[sjt18]

I do. It was once again "much ado about nothing."

So racism... is much ado about nothing? We SHOULD judge people based on racial stereotypes?

 

[luthervol]

So racism... is much ado about nothing? We SHOULD judge people based on racial stereotypes?

What??????
That makes no sense.

 

[UT_VOLS13]

I do. It was once again "much ado about nothing."

@luthervol, ignores anything negative about Democrat and believes a Democrat can do not wrrong and do anything better than any Republican!

 

[VolStrom]

What??????
That makes no sense.

So you agree with your dear leaders party when they say that covid medicines should be prioritized based on race?

 

[luthervol]

@luthervol, ignores anything negative about Democrat and believes a Democrat can do not wrrong and do anything better than any Republican!

I didn't ignore it. I read all four articles linked. Did you?

 

[luthervol]

So you agree with your dear leaders party when they say that covid medicines should be prioritized based on race?

No one said that. At least not in the four articles I read that were provided.
If you have a link where they said that, please provide it.
What I saw was that race/ethnicity could be considered as one minor factor among many.