The latest stimulus package won't pass at all.

NONE of that supports the claim that we have this under control

 

Talk over what - You made a false assertion - what more did you wish me to say on the issue - your post had no more content than this false assertion .. I did not talk over your assertion - I addressed it head on - as I was being accused of something I did not say - nor infer.

It is you who has simply ignored and talked over the information and arguments in my post - Do not project your failings on to me por favor.

Nowhere in my post do I condone letting the virus run rampant - to the contrary - I liken the USA to "a clown show" for letting the virus run rampant.

Perhaps you should revisit my post - rather than simply ignore it as "Gish Gallop" when you appear to have no clue what was in my post.

1 more chance to respond coherently

 

Oh gee...one more chance...after being non-responsive.

Fine.
What is your method of dealing with the virus? It looks to me like you have none. But hey...maybe I misunderstand. Explain your position on that please. How would you mitigate?
Do you think the economy can withstand the amount of infection and death that your mitigation or lack of it will cause?

 

You are projecting and lying to yourself - I have responded to all of your claims - regardless of how silly - mostly consisting of strawman fallacy and so on.

You are the one who has not responded to the material put forward - "Gish Gash" you said - and then proved you had no idea of the content of my post by suggesting I wanted to let the virus run rampant when my post said the opposite. .. in true Romper Room fashion.

I asked you if you wanted a serious discussion - or romper room - up to this point - you have been mostly RR.

I explained my method of dealing with the virus in part in my previous post- Lock Down - and Lock Down Hard ... when the curve flattens to an acceptable and previously agreed upon level - related to the factors previously explained - you open back up.

This however is not "My Method" - I gave you a number examples of successful use of "This Method" including numbers of deaths and so on - Sweden and Italy ..

Please explain how you missed all that ? in the "Gish Gash"

 

A. That had not happened. The curve has not been flattened except on the Northeast

B. Sweden has not been successful

so where does that leave your “reasonable discussion”?

 

And the term is “Gish Gallup”

look it up

 

I said we had it's number, we know how to deal with it and have effective cures. Do we have the flew under control? People die of it every year.

 

We know how to deal with it and yet people like you are resisting those methods

We do NOT have effective cures and it is NOT "a flew"

 

The Gish gallop is a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott and named after the creationist Duane Gish, who used the technique frequently against proponents of evolution.[1][2]

 

Yes we do have effective cures and Treatments Rendesavere, I suspect had Trump not mentioned it we'd be using hydroxychloroquin as well. Though it wouldn't be as popular because no one makes money of of it.

 

Dems have trimmed their offer by a trillion...the GOP refuses to budge...so folks are going without.

Thank you Moscow Mitch and Mark Meadows

 

While Remdesevir is a moderately effective TREATMENT...it is in no way a cure.

As evidenced by the ONE THOUSAND deaths per day

 

You are obviously a Republican. Republicans see so much corruption in their ranks that they assume everybody is corrupt.

I don't assume that. There are corrupt people, and there are honest people. I don't assume that anybody is corrupt until I have a reason to.

 

I just heard Mark Shields promote this theory on PBS News hour. It does make sense. The GOP sure didn't mind $1.5 trillion debt when they pushed through their tax cuts for the rich. Now, that the unemployed, who lost their jobs through no fault of their own, have to be supported, they found their fiscal responsibility again. Hypocrisy at its finest.

 

They're hoping that their lack of fiscal control pre pandemic will get lost in the very real need for pandemic spending

And if history is any judge...they'll be moderately successful...with their base

 

Neither do I. It is the system that is corrupt and it corrupts people. I am not a republican.

 

Lol...no, just fake melodrama.

 

The system doesn't corrupt people. People corrupt people... I just said that to sound like a bumper sticker . Fact is that only corrupt people do corrupt things. I have known many people (both in the political arena and people with work ethics) that having had an opportunity to commit corrupt acts, refused to do so.

 

Yes there are exceptions to every rule. The "system" to which I refer is partisanship. It replaces individual thought with managed thought.

 

I do not agree that corruption is the rule. I think this is what corrupt politicians would like us to believe. That way they dilute their corruption by making it "normal". I completely reject that notion. I think that the vast majority of politicians are honest people who are trying to do a job. However, corrupt ones stand out most in our minds.

Fact is that politicians do try to manipulate voters. That is not what I view as corruption. It's what any job applicant does with their interviewer. They want to be hired. Once in their job, the vast majority of people act honestly.

Corruption is abuse of power. Being more concerned about re-election than about doing their job. Using their position for personal benefit. We see plenty of that in this administration. But if we view it historically it is not the norm.

I don't consider corruption if a politician tries to add "pork" to a bill to benefit their constituents, for example. It's a "dirty" political move. But not corruption. It's up to their constituents if they want to re-elect them or not. Breaking the law is a different matter. Even if they don't face legal consequences. Taking advantage of our slow judicial system is most definitely corrupt.

 

I think you are naive. Honestly. Yes pork is corruption. It is taking your money and mine and spending it on something that is not national. I believe federal government should treat everyone with equality. I also believe it should be illegal for federal government to provide money to state and local governments unless they are buying something from them. Bribing state and local governments is as clearly corrupt as anything I can imagine.

 

Not national? Obviously if it's meant to benefit some other country, it's very suspect of being corruption.

I completely disagree. The federal government is a government of all the people in all the states and localities. No idea how or why the federal government would "bribe" local governments. And if there is some way or reason, so long as it's done for the benefit of the people, and not of the politician personally, it's not corruption. Benefiting the people is not corruption. Politicians who benefit the people they serve should be re-elected. That's what they are elected to do! But, in any case, even if you disagree with this, this is not corruption. It's a political disagreement.

 

Pork is used to fund favored local projects that help a politician get re-elected. They don't affect the nation. Federal government has no business doing it. Giving money to another country is also corrupt in my view.

Federal government sends funds to state and local governments routinely in order to get them to do what it wants. It is bribery. It goes on every day. Federal government should not be allowed to benefit some people. Its benefits need to be national in scope. The founders were after equality. Obviously they weren't successful. Federal funds for activites that affect all states and locales. State and local funds for those that do not. No surprise we disagree.

 

Is pork legal? I thought they did away with it and that was the moment that Congress became dysfunctional?

Bringing pork back was one of the positions that Andrew Yang ran on in his campaign for President.

 

Local communities are part of the nation.

I have no idea what you're talking about. What IT wants?

I don't have any problem with the federal government benefiting communities that need those benefits (I would be against federal aid to residents of Beverly Hills, for example.) But even if you don't agree, that's just a political disagreement. Not corruption. And saying that it's corruption simply degrades the term and allows politicians who fill their own pockets with cash to get away with it by simply saying "all politicians are corrupt. Therefore, what I did is normal".

Corruption is not normal. And it's corrupt politicians the only ones who benefit from you saying that it is.