The Times Inflates Trump's Foolishness into Monstrousness

[LeafByNiggle]

Nearly everybody agrees that Trump speaks foolishly. What he does, on the other hand, was leading the nation into unprecedented prosperity.

Nope. He was tagging along, taking credit for what others have done.

 

[gam197]

There is an aversion to the selling of snake-oil; we would like people to use their money and their opportunity with cures that are safe and effective, and not subject them to false hopes that squander money and opportunity. Some object to regulations - especially would be snake-oil dealers.

It is their choice, what do you care? They are dying anyways.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Nope. He was tagging along, taking credit for what others have done.

He ran on a platform of regulatory reform and cutting taxes.

He put people in charge of agencies who cut regulations.

He got massive tax cuts through congress.

Yeah, it was all Obama. Nothing will change some intransigent minds.

 

[F_Marturana]

Not really. Biden suffered a brain aneurysm. Often that type of brain injury could cause speech issues.

Alzheimer’s is a global brain disease, meaning it affects the entire brain,

Aneurysm’s and strokes affect localized parts of the brain. Often causing issues with speech.

Speech being affected doesn’t necessarily mean dementia.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

dvdjs:

There is an aversion to the selling of snake-oil; we would like people to use their money and their opportunity with cures that are safe and effective, and not subject them to false hopes that squander money and opportunity. Some object to regulations - especially would be snake-oil dealers.

It is their choice, what do you care? They are dying anyways.

It is a Christian thing, for some reason, to care about injustice.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Nope. He was tagging along, taking credit for what others have done.

He ran on a platform of regulatory reform and cutting taxes.

He put people in charge of agencies who cut regulations.

He got massive tax cuts through congress.

Yeah, it was all Obama. Nothing will change some intransigent minds.

It is just the ideologoy if the political right that these are all things that lead to prosperity.

 

[Maximus1]

It was an expectation. An ideal.
True or not, after 250 years, pretty clear it is no more after 2016.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Seemed to be working pretty well. By nearly every possible measure the nation’s economy was skyrocketing as was personal incomes and wealth.

 

[gam197]

It is a Christian thing, for some reason, to care about injustice.

Injustice. Elderly have a right to decide their own existence and if they are dying, they have a right to manage their own care. You may not like it but it is their right to decide.

People certainly don’t seem to care that they die alone.

Oh wait. they have a ventilator.

 

[dvdjs]

It is their choice, what do you care? They are dying anyways.

Why should I not care for them?
Why would I not want them to keep them away from hucksters who would have them spend their money and chances ineffectively?
And why would the answer not be obvious on a Catholic board?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Seemed to be working pretty well. By nearly every possible measure the nation’s economy was skyrocketing as was personal incomes and wealth.

It is just a matter of faith that these things happened as a result of cutting regulations and taxes. Never mind that the trajectory of prosperity was exactly the same under Obama. If Trump made such a difference we would be able to see it a dramatic change in the trajectory.

 

[dvdjs]

Seemed to be working pretty well. By nearly every possible measure the nation’s economy was skyrocketing as was personal incomes and wealth.

Indeed. A constant trajectory upward since coming out of the Bush recession. Next thing you know, all gone.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

I’m sorry. He speaks like a fool. Whether he is actually a fool is something each person has to decide for himself.

He is not a fool. He speak politically incorrect which is a part of his generation.

I don’t buy that. Not sure I ever did. But his ramblings about light and cleansers indicates someone who has some serious cognitive issues. Calling his statements “not politically correct” is a pretty painfully pathetic attempt at deflecting from the actual content.

What he’s saying is absolute nonsense. It’s garbage. It’s ramblings that in anyone else would be considered signs of serious intellectual or emotional problems. If it was some 70-odd year old anybody else, folks around them would be seriously thinking it’s time for a psychological assessment.

He is 73 years old and if he want to take it, why should doctors have the right to refuse him. If he is on a ventilator his changes are not good. Ninety per cent of people on ventilators die so why it may make sense to help people, it has not been shown to be that effective.

Which bring me to another thought, if your father is dying why do you not have the right to visit if you are in your 40’s.

Because you will walk out of that ward as a potential asymptomatic carrier, and infect other people.

The germ theory of disease isn’t exactly new. We’ve known about how pathogens spread since the 19th century. We have examples of how to successfully combat pandemics for a century or more.

You keep pleading emotionally here, but viruses aren’t emotional. They don’t care about you. They don’t care about anything. You can’t scare a virus. You can’t deflect with fallacious appeals, bravado or incoherence. You can only defeat a pandemic by strict physical distancing measures to attack it right where it spreads.

 

[Maximus1]

Perhaps you are not familiar with the Christian God. I say that because there is a constellation of wrong it seems.

 

[dscath]

Again why should the aged be refused a drug that may/may not help them. It is their choice as their chances are slim.

Because as Catholics, we are Pro-life which means from conception to the grave…and its not a matter that it may or may not help them, preliminary studies are pointing to the possibility that it may kill them.

If it does cause death, its no better than euthanasia which we cannot support, morally.

Until sufficient data is in, showing both efficacy and safety, the prudent course for the President would have been to remain silent!

 

[gam197]

Why should I not care for them?
Why would I not want them to keep them away from hucksters who would have them spend their money and chances ineffectively?
And why would the answer not be obvious on a Catholic board?

The quote posted was about his making different statements, one on a controversial drug.

So you become the controller over my parent’s decision whether to take a drug. You set yourself as authority.

Do you think they are not going to die? They are.

 

[dvdjs]

Do you think they are not going to die? They are.

We all will die.

Why subject those who may be trying to live to those would use their desperation to their own advantage?

Do you also oppose laws against fraud?
Do you oppose rules against cheating?

 

[niceatheist]

Again why should the aged be refused a drug that may/may not help them. It is their choice as their chances are slim.

We make all this fuss about ventilators when 90 per cent die on them.

Why can’t younger people visit their elderly parents who are dying?

Just so much hype.

Could you provide the citation for the 90% claim?

Survival following mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure in adult men - PubMed

We conclude that age, cause of acute respiratory failure, and duration of mechanical ventilation have specific influences on the generally poor outcome of mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

“Survival rates were 66.6 percent to weaning, 61.1 percent to ICU discharge, 49.6 percent to hospital discharge, and 30.1 percent to 1 year after hospital discharge. When our data were combined with 10 previously reported series, mean survival rates were calculated to be 62 percent to ventilator weaning, 46 percent to ICU discharge, 43 percent to hospital discharge, and 30 percent to 1 year after discharge.”

 

[gam197]

We all will die.

Why subject those who may be trying to live to those would use their desperation to their own advantage?

Do you also oppose laws against fraud?
Do you oppose rules against cheating?

They are dying today. The drug has mixed results and there is no time for testing. I have no problem with any dying person taking a drug that they think might help. Give them plasma too if they want it.

 

[gam197]

“Survival rates were 66.6 percent to weaning, 61.1 percent to ICU discharge, 49.6 percent to hospital discharge, and 30.1 percent to 1 year after hospital discharge. When our data were combined with 10 previously reported series, mean survival rates were calculated to be 62 percent to ventilator weaning, 46 percent to ICU discharge, 43 percent to hospital discharge, and 30 percent to 1 year after discharge.”

That is not with SARS.

Unfortunately, a high rate of barotrauma (34%) has been reported.4 This highlights the importance of a low tidal volume lung protective strategy. Other complications of mechanical ventilation reported include ventilator-associated pneumonia, acute renal failure, deep-vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism.4 Further research is necessary to provide early identification of the subgroup of patients with SARS who may progress to severe ARDS.