pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 5, 2022 15:09:16 GMT -5
But you do not remember what trump fucked up, so I have questions about your long term memory
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 5, 2022 18:07:56 GMT -5
there is a 99*% chance that this will not be his last SOTU address. there is a 75% chance he will win re-election, just based on the raw data. you seem like a better gambler than this, so my money is on TROLLING. i would ask you to stop, but i think it is all you have left in you at this point. at least on the political board. hopefully you are getting some joy out of it that merits the abject humiliation. now that Paul is gone, i guess you are the replacement GOP caricature? They do not have anyone else left to go after after Paul left. Years ago I believe it was Gambler they came after. Then they denounced Virgil..... Then they came for Paul....... Now they came for me......... Who is next? BTW, I am not sure why you had to post 99% chance this would not be his last SOTU Speech. Do you think there are enough democrats around to force him out in the next 11 months? That is the only scenerio that I see could do it, and that is not happening. Yes, you are probably correct he can win re-election. The electorate have such a short memory of everything he has fucked up in a year, I do not. Oh, get off your cross...we need the wood. Nobody is 'going after' anybody. A difference of political opinion is not denouncing or going after anyone. Stop with your martyrdom. Not our fault you picked the wrong team. Suck it up, buttercup.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2022 18:19:42 GMT -5
They do not have anyone else left to go after after Paul left. Years ago I believe it was Gambler they came after. Then they denounced Virgil..... Then they came for Paul....... Now they came for me......... Who is next? BTW, I am not sure why you had to post 99% chance this would not be his last SOTU Speech. Do you think there are enough democrats around to force him out in the next 11 months? That is the only scenerio that I see could do it, and that is not happening. Yes, you are probably correct he can win re-election. The electorate have such a short memory of everything he has fucked up in a year, I do not. Oh, get off your cross...we need the wood. Nobody is 'going after' anybody. A difference of political opinion is not denouncing or going after anyone. Stop with your martyrdom. Not our fault you picked the wrong team. Suck it up, buttercup. no shit. this attempt to rob the moral capital of R. Neimoeller is both transparently pathetic and stupid. we didn't come after Paul. he was posting 2:1 over every other poster on this board before i joined. he never engaged in a reasonable argument in the 10 years i posted with him. NEVER. when things got difficult, he left. he was here for one reason: to propagandize. HE ADMITTED IT. is that why you are here, now? because if so, you can find the door, too. i liked Virgil fine. got on well with him, generally. though i found him occasionally intensely pompous. i am sure others think the same of me. i already said why Biden had a 1% chance of not making it. read the edit line to my post. you were once a reasonable poster, VB. you were a KASICH voter. there was honor in that. this business of propping up that human dog turd and tearing down a fundamentally decent president degrades what once was a respectable position.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 5, 2022 18:43:25 GMT -5
Then there was Old Coyote and Lady Gaga Snerd. They LEFT. I don't know what happened to Old Coyote, but she went to an AllTrump, All The Time board. Nobody ran them off. OC used to bait people all the time, but if you, VB, prefer to think he was 'run off', suit yourself.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 5, 2022 19:06:25 GMT -5
there is a 99*% chance that this will not be his last SOTU address. there is a 75% chance he will win re-election, just based on the raw data. you seem like a better gambler than this, so my money is on TROLLING. i would ask you to stop, but i think it is all you have left in you at this point. at least on the political board. hopefully you are getting some joy out of it that merits the abject humiliation. now that Paul is gone, i guess you are the replacement GOP caricature? They do not have anyone else left to go after after Paul left. Years ago I believe it was Gambler they came after. Then they denounced Virgil..... Then they came for Paul....... Now they came for me......... Who is next? BTW, I am not sure why you had to post 99% chance this would not be his last SOTU Speech. Do you think there are enough democrats around to force him out in the next 11 months? That is the only scenerio that I see could do it, and that is not happening. Yes, you are probably correct he can win re-election. The electorate have such a short memory of everything he has fucked up in a year, I do not. What has he fucked up: 1. US became greatest oil producing nation 2. Record job growth 3. Workers wages rising 4. 6%GDP growth first year 5. Instituted vaccination program for the not low IQ public 6. Got us out of the stupid Repo-Con Afghan boondoggle. 13 deaths better that 6000! 7. Reacquired international respect squandered by Trump’s bellicosity
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2022 19:17:41 GMT -5
They do not have anyone else left to go after after Paul left. Years ago I believe it was Gambler they came after. Then they denounced Virgil..... Then they came for Paul....... Now they came for me......... Who is next? BTW, I am not sure why you had to post 99% chance this would not be his last SOTU Speech. Do you think there are enough democrats around to force him out in the next 11 months? That is the only scenerio that I see could do it, and that is not happening. Yes, you are probably correct he can win re-election. The electorate have such a short memory of everything he has fucked up in a year, I do not. What has he fucked up: 1. US became greatest oil producing nation 2. Record job growth 3. Workers wages rising 4. 6%GDP growth first year5. Instituted vaccination program for the not low IQ public 6. Got us out of the stupid Repo-Con Afghan boondoggle. 23 deaths better that 6000! 7. Reacquainted international respect squandered by Trump’s bellicosity this was a stated goal of Trump that he never even came close to. he didn't even have a 1.5% QUARTER.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,107
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 6, 2022 9:23:20 GMT -5
there is a 99*% chance that this will not be his last SOTU address. there is a 75% chance he will win re-election, just based on the raw data. you seem like a better gambler than this, so my money is on TROLLING. i would ask you to stop, but i think it is all you have left in you at this point. at least on the political board. hopefully you are getting some joy out of it that merits the abject humiliation. now that Paul is gone, i guess you are the replacement GOP caricature? They do not have anyone else left to go after after Paul left. Years ago I believe it was Gambler they came after. Then they denounced Virgil..... Then they came for Paul....... Now they came for me......... Who is next? Oh, don't be so melodramatic. People here only "go after" those who write really stupid things. If you or certain others qualify that's not really on us. There are good conservative arguments to be made on most issues. Try making one instead of just saying stupid stuff. I'd bet the reception would be a LOT better. Hell, I could make better arguments for conservatives than the conservatives here!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2022 10:50:00 GMT -5
right. i think that part of the problem is that perhaps their best argument is consistently undermined by the data. ie, the least independent states are the red states. they are the "welfare queens" of the US.
when your biggest plank is coated with a thick layer of hypocrisy, what is your "next best" argument?
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 10:56:38 GMT -5
Not only are they welfare queens, they fail at what government is supposed to do. Care for the general welfare. All of those so called “conservative paradises” have abysmal life expectancies and health metrics compared to the profligate blue states. The ones that are not hortible have significant blue swatches. But the will never acknowledge how poorly they do in this regards
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Mar 6, 2022 13:14:22 GMT -5
right. i think that part of the problem is that perhaps their best argument is consistently undermined by the data. ie, the least independent states are the red states. they are the "welfare queens" of the US. when your biggest plank is coated with a thick layer of hypocrisy, what is your "next best" argument? Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 6, 2022 13:43:42 GMT -5
right. i think that part of the problem is that perhaps their best argument is consistently undermined by the data. ie, the least independent states are the red states. they are the "welfare queens" of the US. when your biggest plank is coated with a thick layer of hypocrisy, what is your "next best" argument? Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally.And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.? The states are responsible for funding education. The Feds only pay for 8%. If you have issues with education, blame the Red States themselves. They pay the teachers less than the national average. Bubba is the most vocal in decrying educacation, thinking those damn colleges are teaching socialism and godlessness. Texas GOP rejected the teaching of critical thinking skills. Look it up. Canada is also a nation of immigrants. 22% of Canadians were born someplace else, vs 14.4% in the US, but Canada is the most educated country on earth. Why? We don't have Republicans here, mucking things up and demanding we teach creationism in schools. EVERY party is a strong proponent of a good education.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 6, 2022 13:47:34 GMT -5
right. i think that part of the problem is that perhaps their best argument is consistently undermined by the data. ie, the least independent states are the red states. they are the "welfare queens" of the US. when your biggest plank is coated with a thick layer of hypocrisy, what is your "next best" argument? Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.? re the bolded: Congress is currently embroiled in a debate and stalemate over the reauthorization of ESEA, the 2001 NCLB. Major issues include the purpose and role of the federal government in education, funding, and the extent to which the federal government should play a role in public education. Role Of Federal Government In Public Education: Historical Perspectives Which state's Senators and Representatives have traditionally fought against federal involvement?
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 14:24:25 GMT -5
right. i think that part of the problem is that perhaps their best argument is consistently undermined by the data. ie, the least independent states are the red states. they are the "welfare queens" of the US. when your biggest plank is coated with a thick layer of hypocrisy, what is your "next best" argument? Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.? We don’t need immigrants to bring our health statistics down, we are capable all on our own. The states with lower rates of foreign born residents are at the bottom. The life expectancy of whites in this states is still lower than in those at the top. It is as much as 10 years between whites and blacks. The US southeast is the stroke belt, heart attack belt, stone belt. Lung cancer rates are the disproportionate driver of cancer death rates. Guess where those deaths are highest. Pulmonary disease rates are driven by smoking, so your point about pulmonary disease is incorrect too. Southern states have the worst health metrics. Remove than, and the rest of the US performs much better. But those are conservative utopia according to republicans. And their governors are actively taking steps to make it worse
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2022 14:29:32 GMT -5
Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. that is because the red states chronically underfund education, and do a disproportionate amount of home schooling. this gets back to the "independence" of conservatism, which as you just pointed out, ultimately leads to greater dependence.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2022 14:31:43 GMT -5
Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.? We don’t need immigrants to bring our health statistics down, we are capable all on our own. The states with lower rates of foreign born residents are at the bottom. The life expectancy of whites in this states is still lower than in those at the top. It is as much as 10 years between whites and blacks. The US southeast is the stroke belt, heart attack belt, stone belt. Lung cancer rates are the disproportionate driver of cancer death rates. Guess where those deaths are highest. Pulmonary disease rates are driven by smoking, so your point about pulmonary disease is incorrect too. Southern states have the worst health metrics. Remove than, and the rest of the US performs much better. But those are conservative utopia according to republicans. And their governors are actively taking steps to make it worse DeSgustus is the poster child for insolent whiteness. he makes little boys look responsible and mature by comparison.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 6, 2022 14:53:04 GMT -5
Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.? We don’t need immigrants to bring our health statistics down, we are capable all on our own. The states with lower rates of foreign born residents are at the bottom. The life expectancy of whites in this states is still lower than in those at the top. It is as much as 10 years between whites and blacks. The US southeast is the stroke belt, heart attack belt, stone belt. Lung cancer rates are the disproportionate driver of cancer death rates. Guess where those deaths are highest. Pulmonary disease rates are driven by smoking, so your point about pulmonary disease is incorrect too. Southern states have the worst health metrics. Remove than, and the rest of the US performs much better. But those are conservative utopia according to republicans. And their governors are actively taking steps to make it worse ....not to mention that many Americans don't have health insurance. Even those who do, are hesitant to go to the doctor because the deductible costs so much. They wait until the health problem is too much to bear, and end up in the ER. By then, the problem is too grave to be fixed.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Mar 6, 2022 14:55:41 GMT -5
Which also lined up along blue/red lines. Red states were less likely to expand Medicaid under the ACA, which allowed uninsured rates to stay high. Can’t let those Undesirables get too much
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2022 15:27:01 GMT -5
Which also lined up along blue/red lines. Red states were less likely to expand Medicaid under the ACA, which allowed uninsured rates to stay high. Can’t let those Undesirables get too much poor whites have a lot more in common with "Undesireables" than they do their own legislators, who are by and large of, by and for the elite. it is amazing how red states voters carry water for those that mean to drown them.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,593
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 6, 2022 15:34:04 GMT -5
right. i think that part of the problem is that perhaps their best argument is consistently undermined by the data. ie, the least independent states are the red states. they are the "welfare queens" of the US. when your biggest plank is coated with a thick layer of hypocrisy, what is your "next best" argument? Unfortunately most of the red states have a poor history of a proper education for the children. Education is the foundation for living a healthy life, physically and mentally. And I think some of the sothern red states were allowed to suffer in this area because until a few decades ago the federal government and state governments were still fighting the Civi War so to speak and the feds were welling to let them stay poor and broken because they were still acting like the war was still on and they let the state leaders keep the populance in a perpetual mess of being poor and under educated. Since large industrial giants never invested in manufacturing in the south like they did in the north, it was hard to break the poverty numbers Then again, the cancer clusters and bad pulmonary rates up north in the industrial sections of the north suggest we are not quite as healthy as we are told either. A question because I do not have the answer. We are a nation of immigrants, some nationalized citizens some not. Do these groups affect our lower health living/age standings in the world rankings where the countries have lesss immigration and are much more of a homogenous population? I am sure all these stats are broken out by nationalities, but are the people who moved here and die due to longterm sickness back in the old country part of the mix for the U.S.? The states also decide who qualifies for unemployment, how generous their Medicaid is and other policies. While they get a pool of money from the federal government, good ole state's rights determine how it is spent. The south usually has the worst outcomes in the US because of obesity and diabetes. Most of that shows up in Americans, not recent immigrants. It usually takes until the second generation for bad American eating habits to manifest. Because of state's rights, the states determine more who stays poor and who does not. Who might be lifted out of poverty or who they want to leave by the wayside. Blue states on average do a better job of lessening poverty of their citizens. It's a choice and often involves higher taxes and the willingness to address the issues.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 6, 2022 16:26:29 GMT -5
Value Buy...this is YOUR party! Absolutely shameful! You must be so proud!
That unholy bitch, Lauren Boebert, says that Canada should be 'liberated' like the Ukraine. I guess she advocates the shelling of hospitals,apartment buildings and the slaughter of civilians, like the c*nt that she is.
Then you wonder why people are 'picking on' Republicans? Give me a break!
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,593
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 6, 2022 18:18:39 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2022 20:48:47 GMT -5
it's not confusing at all. not to me, any way. and we could solve it in an instant, if we wanted to.
|
|