Rep. Chaffetz demands surgeon general head Ebola efforts.

[sandorski]

Point being, it's not a case of "not making the grade". But you already knew that.

Kids playing games on the internet. Wheee! What fun, so clever.

Dude said something that wasn't flattering about Guns. That's what got him blocked from the job.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Dude said something that wasn't flattering about Guns. That's what got him blocked from the job.

"Didn't make the grade" indeed.

 

[thraashman]

Well, they do have the hotter women. You gotta admit it. Way easier on the eyes than watching Maddow! Was that her wearing pajamas, telling us we need to have a conversation about healthcare? The only women on Fox that I wouldn't cast a bone to would be Gretta and Hasselbeck.

Because on the left we'd rather the people who talk about politics know what they're talking about and be intelligent. Sure Maddow may not be a model, but she's literally more politically knowledgeable and intelligent than every female on Fox combined (and honestly all the men combined too).

So why did Obama just give up when his first choice for SG didn't make the grade? Did it just become too difficult at that point?

He shouldn't have to nominate someone else when he already nominated one of the best possible people for the job. Just because the NRA has decided that there aren't enough gun deaths to satisfy their bloodlust doesn't mean they should have a single fucking say in who the surgeon general is.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Because on the left we'd rather the people who talk about politics know what they're talking about and be intelligent. Sure Maddow may not be a model, but she's literally more politically knowledgeable and intelligent than every female on Fox combined (and honestly all the men combined too).

<snip>
.

HEAR, HEAR!

Clearly some folks here are more concerned about getting their rocks off instead of getting informed reporting, "they just don't get it"

 

[Matt1970]

Sure Maddow may not be a model, but she's literally more politically knowledgeable and intelligent than every female on Fox combined (and honestly all the men combined too).

The only reason you think she is more intelligent than every person at Fox news combined is because she is spewing out exactly what you agree with, just like those who listen to Rush. Fox and MSNBC have the same formula. Get a political nutjob to spew their commentary on exactly what topic they choose to discuss and then get 2 or 3 others to elaborate on it that strangely enough happen to agree with them. There are some exceptions to that but that is the bread and butter for both networks.

 

[Moonbeam]

The only reason you think she is more intelligent than every person at Fox news combined is because she is spewing out exactly what you agree with, just like those who listen to Rush. Fox and MSNBC have the same formula. Get a political nutjob to spew their commentary on exactly what topic they choose to discuss and then get 2 or 3 others to elaborate on it that strangely enough happen to agree with them. There are some exceptions to that but that is the bread and butter for both networks.

As a carrier of a rather extreme case of CBD, you can't be trusted to produce anything but false equivalencies. Remember that some folk don't have as much trouble distinguishing what is real and what is altered reality and don't have your scientifically demonstrated need to deny reality when it provides facts you don't agree with. The reason the left appears to be so fucked up is because you always see the side of yourself you can't see in yourself in them.

You do not know how to impartially introspect. You are trying to protect a bunch of sacred cows that are really a huge pile of worthless cabbage. Just give it up and die. You'll be fine. Mommy and Daddy can't beat you anymore if you don't conform. It's ok to be pissed off at them so long as you remember they couldn't do other than what they did. They were asleep too. Please do not tell fellow posters to die. -Admin DrPizza

 

[the DRIZZLE]

Is your position that no one on the Right can ever voice on an opinion on government handling of a potential pandemic because of how Reagan handled AIDS 30 years ago?

IMO the Congressman made a good point about why the (acting) Surgeon General isn't handing this rather than a Czar with no apparently relevant experience. The fact that he made himself look ignorant of the confirmation fight doesn't make his point any less valid.

 

[cubby1223]

Because on the left we'd rather the people who talk about politics know what they're talking about and be intelligent. Sure Maddow may not be a model, but she's literally more politically knowledgeable and intelligent than every female on Fox combined (and honestly all the men combined too).

He shouldn't have to nominate someone else when he already nominated one of the best possible people for the job. Just because the NRA has decided that there aren't enough gun deaths to satisfy their bloodlust doesn't mean they should have a single fucking say in who the surgeon general is.

You do realize the conflict between these two quotes from the same post, right? Which media outlet was it that formed your belief that the NRA has bloodlust desiring more deaths by guns? Was it MSNBC? Was it a guest analyst on the Maddow show?


To a larger point, the formula for Rachel Maddow is this:

Base Facts + Inherent Bias (Belief of how the world works & how groups interact with each other) = Conclusion

Where: Inherent Bias >> Base Facts

People who watch her show love to point out her use of facts in her arguments. But the only people who frequently watch her show are those who share the same bias, believe she is a genius for being the only person to see that conclusion, completely oblivious that much of what she uses to form her conclusions are not facts but opinions.

Fox News injects a lot of bias into their equation. Their larger failing is that they are often wrong about their base facts. But the failing of the partisans is believing that Fox's problems equates to their correctness.

 

[boomerang]

He shouldn't have to nominate someone else when he already nominated one of the best possible people for the job. Just because the NRA has decided that there aren't enough gun deaths to satisfy their bloodlust doesn't mean they should have a single fucking say in who the surgeon general is.

Well, I'm sure that wraps it up all neat and tidy for you but that's not how our government works. If his first nominee can't get through the gauntlet it's his responsibility to try and try again but you must know that as one of the self-proclaimed really smart guys here. It's one of the numerous responsibilities of the job Obama sought not just once, but twice. So, he decided it was just too hard - fine. Not even a smidgen of surprise to me.

It's been said that liberalism is a mental disorder. You don't have to keep proving it over and over. We got it.

 

[Matt1970]

As a carrier of a rather extreme case of CBD, you can't be trusted to produce anything but false equivalencies. Remember that some folk don't have as much trouble distinguishing what is real and what is altered reality and don't have your scientifically demonstrated need to deny reality when it provides facts you don't agree with. The reason the left appears to be so fucked up is because you always see the side of yourself you can't see in yourself in them.

You do not know how to impartially introspect. You are trying to protect a bunch of sacred cows that are really a huge pile of worthless cabbage. Just give it up and die. You'll be fine. Mommy and Daddy can't beat you anymore if you don't conform. It's ok to be pissed off at them so long as you remember they couldn't do other than what they did. They were asleep too.

Wow dude, just fucking wow.

 

[Moonbeam]

Wow dude, just fucking wow.

I keep forgetting how hysterical you can be. I am talking about psychic death, not dying physically. It's what happens to saints and to drunks that bottom out, a psychological transformation. I call it, letting go of cabbage. I wouldn't want you to do anything I haven't tested out as being safe first.

 

[Matt1970]

I keep forgetting how hysterical you can be. I am talking about psychic death, not dying physically. It's what happens to saints and to drunks that bottom out, a psychological transformation. I call it, letting go of cabbage. I wouldn't want you to do anything I haven't tested out as being safe first.

Really, that's what you are going to go with?

 

[lopri]

Obviously. You sure you're not a young, single woman who's like healthy and hot and running around without a care in the world? Because you sure do sound like that.....you just don't get it.

History:

I do not understand why one has to begin an otherwise informational post with a childish attack like this?

 

[Moonbeam]

Really, that's what you are going to go with?

You would go with something because you rationalize. All I did was tell you what I mean, but you knew what I meant. You just can't help playing the victim card. See, your stupidity isn't really stupidity because it isn't congenital, it's willful. You are motivated to catastrophize.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's been said that liberalism is a mental disorder. You don't have to keep proving it over and over. We got it.

Yeah, that gets said a lot by people suffering from a CBD. But it's scientists that can show conservatives deflect facts more than liberals do. That sort of makes a CBD opinion seem rather worthless. Unfortunately, for you of course, your inability to deal with reality will succeed in obscuring these facts from your rational consideration. Don't let the knee jerk hit you in the head.

 

[thraashman]

You do realize the conflict between these two quotes from the same post, right? Which media outlet was it that formed your belief that the NRA has bloodlust desiring more deaths by guns? Was it MSNBC? Was it a guest analyst on the Maddow show?


To a larger point, the formula for Rachel Maddow is this:

Base Facts + Inherent Bias (Belief of how the world works & how groups interact with each other) = Conclusion

Where: Inherent Bias >> Base Facts

People who watch her show love to point out her use of facts in her arguments. But the only people who frequently watch her show are those who share the same bias, believe she is a genius for being the only person to see that conclusion, completely oblivious that much of what she uses to form her conclusions are not facts but opinions.

Fox News injects a lot of bias into their equation. Their larger failing is that they are often wrong about their base facts. But the failing of the partisans is believing that Fox's problems equates to their correctness.

I've actually never watched MSNBC. I've seen clips of Maddow here and there. And she is clearly a very intelligent woman. The clips of others I've seen from MSNBC I've found generally pretty hard to watch. The people on Fox are hired for their looks or their ability to keep a straight face while telling a blatant lie. I personally try my best to avoid getting any news from partisan sources. If you look you'll find WAY more partisan right wing sources than left wing though. Granted, you'll also notice that conservatives tend to claim anything that isn't biased to the far right wing is automatically liberally biased, so I guess partisanship is up to interpretation (for the hyper partisan at least).

As far as my knowledge (lets be honest, it's only belief if it's not fact) about the NRA having bloodlust, is their own views. Things 20 years ago they would agree were good gun policy they now call against the 2nd Amendment. Even if those policies will succeed in curbing gun violence. The fact that the NRA successfully lobbied Congress in the 90's to get a ban on the CDC studying ways to prevent gun violence proves beyond any doubt that they have a bloodlust or at the very least that public safety takes a back seat to selling more guns to those who would commit horrific violence.

It's been said that liberalism is a mental disorder. You don't have to keep proving it over and over. We got it.

Dude, paraphrasing Hitler does not do much to lend credence to your argument.

 

[thraashman]

Wow dude, just fucking wow.

For the record, while I tend to not ideologically agree with you on much, I consider you one of the most reasonable on this board whom I would disagree with. Moonbeam is like the left's michal1980 on here, we're kinda ashamed of him.

 

[MongGrel]

Well that's all very interesting. It didn't even begin to answer my question but I will give you a red star for your effort.

Yes it did.

 

[MongGrel]

Obviously. You sure you're not a young, single woman who's like healthy and hot and running around without a care in the world? Because you sure do sound like that.....you just don't get it.

History:

HIV was first described in 1981. By Feb. 1, 1983, 1,025 AIDS cases were reported, and at least 394 had died in the United States. On April 23, 1984, the CDC announced 4,177 reported cases in America and 1,807 deaths.

Pres. Reagan first publicly addressed the issue of HIV on May 31, 1987 (near the end of his second term), at the Third International Conference on AIDS in Washington. When he spoke, 36,058 Americans had been diagnosed with AIDS and 20,849 had died. The disease had spread to 113 countries, with more than 50,000 cases.

In the six years HIV was known and spreading, Reagan said nothing. But that's not surprising given the conservative view on HIV, summed up by Pat Buchanan pretty well in a 1983 syndicated op-ed piece when he wrote: "The poor homosexuals. They have declared war against nature, and nature is exacting an awful retribution."

And let us not forget the pronouncement by the Rev. Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral Majority PAC which had been a significant source of Reagan's support from the religious right. Falwell said "AIDS is the wrath of God upon homosexuals."

Those two statements epitomize the conservative thought about HIV in the 1980's. It was the "gay" disease and therefore could be ignored and those infected, ridiculed.

Reagan could have chosen to end the homophobic rhetoric that flowed from so many in his administration. Dr. C. Everett Koop, Reagan's surgeon general, has said that because of "intradepartmental politics" he (Dr. Koop) was cut out of all AIDS discussions for the first five years of the Reagan administration. The reason, he explained, was "because transmission of AIDS was understood to be primarily in the homosexual population and in those who abused intravenous drugs." The president's advisers, Koop said, "took the stand, 'They are only getting what they justly deserve.' "

This.

 

[MongGrel]

The only reason you think she is more intelligent than every person at Fox news combined is because she is spewing out exactly what you agree with, just like those who listen to Rush. Fox and MSNBC have the same formula. Get a political nutjob to spew their commentary on exactly what topic they choose to discuss and then get 2 or 3 others to elaborate on it that strangely enough happen to agree with them. There are some exceptions to that but that is the bread and butter for both networks.

More FAIL.

 

[MongGrel]

Is your position that no one on the Right can ever voice on an opinion on government handling of a potential pandemic because of how Reagan handled AIDS 30 years ago?

IMO the Congressman made a good point about why the (acting) Surgeon General isn't handing this rather than a Czar with no apparently relevant experience. The fact that he made himself look ignorant of the confirmation fight doesn't make his point any less valid.

Yes it does, it shows a large amount of ignorance, so any opinion he has to begin with would be invalid.

 

[MongGrel]

You do realize the conflict between these two quotes from the same post, right? Which media outlet was it that formed your belief that the NRA has bloodlust desiring more deaths by guns? Was it MSNBC? Was it a guest analyst on the Maddow show?


To a larger point, the formula for Rachel Maddow is this:

Base Facts + Inherent Bias (Belief of how the world works & how groups interact with each other) = Conclusion

Where: Inherent Bias >> Base Facts

People who watch her show love to point out her use of facts in her arguments. But the only people who frequently watch her show are those who share the same bias, believe she is a genius for being the only person to see that conclusion, completely oblivious that much of what she uses to form her conclusions are not facts but opinions.

Fox News injects a lot of bias into their equation. Their larger failing is that they are often wrong about their base facts. But the failing of the partisans is believing that Fox's problems equates to their correctness.

Using facts to come to a logical conclusion is a problem, vs fabricating BS off the cuff?

 

[Matt1970]

More FAIL.

Care to elaborate on what I got wrong?

 

[Matt1970]

For the record, while I tend to not ideologically agree with you on much, I consider you one of the most reasonable on this board whom I would disagree with. Moonbeam is like the left's michal1980 on here, we're kinda ashamed of him.

Thank You. I always appreciate a good debate but wishing harm on people is stepping over the line.

 

[MongGrel]

If you don't know by now it's not worth the effort.