The Ignorance of the Democrats and Left

hoosboot

Hall of Famer
Nov 7, 2001
13,768
3,884
113
Hmm, so all the complaints about the governor's of Florida and Georgia being COVIDiots are really just attacks on Trump?

The president has long been considered the head of the party. So yes, some of the sins of the party make their way to the president. If you do not believe the president is the head of the party, why did some states cancel Republican primaries even though he had 2 challengers?

The GOP has a vested interest in scaring people that Antifa is on their way to rural America to kill and loot. There is NO difference in an attempt to spread fear. Rioting is way down. But I will bet you that more people will die today and tomorrow from COVID than the number of homes and businesses looted in rioting.

So which one is a more legitimate fear?

Discussing the failures of President Trump's dismal response to the coronavirus pandemic is just a variation on the 3AM phone call ad. Who do you want answering the call when a huge challenge facing the country comes in? The difference here is that we've gotten our answer for how President Trump answers the call and now Democrats are highlighting the result. The implication isn't as much about coronavirus as it is about what's next? President Trump has already shown you that he's not equipped to handle a serious response to a serious situation.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
36,938
7,799
113
The moment you and Mcconnell would have gone apoplectic claiming it was all a political setup.

We do know that the Obama had clear evidence of Russian meddling. So what did Obama do? Went after Flynn with a never-used Logan Act investigation while his FBI falsified Trump material to be given to the super-secret FISA court. sigh.
 

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
29,259
12,830
113
We do know that the Obama had clear evidence of Russian meddling. So what did Obama do? Went after Flynn with a never-used Logan Act investigation while his FBI falsified Trump material to be given to the super-secret FISA court. sigh.

And given all that the Senate said there was a whole lot of communication.

If word had gotten out of an investigation before the election, you would have complained it was Obama putting his thumb on the scale. After and you complain someone someone falsified an email, which is bad but hardly Obama's fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cosmickid

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
29,259
12,830
113
So what if I would have complained? Those kinds of considerations are irrelevant to criminal investigations--or they should be.

Your complaint is just annoying, Mcconnell wielding the sledgehammer is different.

It is like the other debate in the thread where you argue Dems using fear in campaign is good, Republicans using it is nuance. I know you have posted the judicial system should not be politicized, yet here you reserve the right to polititicize it.

Both parties screw up, and we would be better off if both joined the Whigs in the dustbin of history.
 

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,555
2,204
113
We do know that the Obama had clear evidence of Russian meddling. So what did Obama do? Went after Flynn with a never-used Logan Act investigation while his FBI falsified Trump material to be given to the super-secret FISA court. sigh.

CoH, are you suggesting Obama directed the FBI to question Flynn about his conversations with Sergey Kislyak (Russian Ambassador to the U.S.), or what?

Seems to me the FBI would have been grossly negligent if it hadn't questioned Flynn about those conversations.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
36,938
7,799
113
Your complaint is just annoying, Mcconnell wielding the sledgehammer is different.

It is like the other debate in the thread where you argue Dems using fear in campaign is good, Republicans using it is nuance. I know you have posted the judicial system should not be politicized, yet here you reserve the right to polititicize it.

Both parties screw up, and we would be better off if both joined the Whigs in the dustbin of history.

Putting McConnell in the middle of a discussion about Russian election meddling is a red herring. It’s simply a dodge. Full stop.
 
Last edited:

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
36,938
7,799
113
CoH, are you suggesting Obama directed the FBI to question Flynn about his conversations with Sergey Kislyak (Russian Ambassador to the U.S.), or what?

Seems to me the FBI would have been grossly negligent if it hadn't questioned Flynn about those conversations.

Yes.

The plausible deniability around him is weak. You have to remember that only after the White House meeting with Biden and Obama, when the Logan Act was brought up, the FBI, knowing they were breaking protocol, questioned Flynn. They had his previous transcripts and did not see a reason to question him until the White House meeting.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
29,259
12,830
113
Putting McConnell in the middle of a discussion about Russian election meddling is a red herring. Its simply a dodge. Full stop.

We should be unified in wanting our elections secured from foreign interference. Investigations into foreign interference should be welcomed by anyone and everyone. When someone chooses to make it partisan, it is a problem.

But your ODS is still pretty strong. The Russians interfered because OBAMA.

Before the election you and Mitch would have screamed bloody murder if word of an investigation came out. You and Mitch loved Comey's leak on Clinton, but would have had a world class temper tantrum if an investigation had leaked making it exceedingly partisan right before an election.

After the election Flynn was on the phone telling Russia to ignore whatever Obama did as Trump would kiss their boo-boo. And you and Mitch find that perfect diplomacy. So when could Obama have investigated without it being scene as an anti-Trump hatchet job?
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
36,938
7,799
113
We should be unified in wanting our elections secured from foreign interference.

We are.
But your ODS is still pretty strong. The Russians interfered because OBAMA.

The Russians have been fooling around with our elections and politics for decades.

Before the election you and Mitch would have screamed bloody murder if word of an investigation came out.

When are you going to stop talking about what I wudda done if something happened? That's pretty useless.

After the election Flynn was on the phone telling Russia to ignore whatever Obama did as Trump would kiss their boo-boo.

No he didn't. Just stop with the B.S.

So when could Obama have investigated without it being scene as an anti-Trump hatchet job?

It was never Obama's job to conduct an investigation. Nor should he order one--especially one of a political opponent.
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
8,794
4,529
113
I obviously won't go into the detail you did. The budget stuff has been litigated often here. Most of your material was been debunked. See and See.

It's no secret that we were unprepared for a pandemic like this. I've posted about that often including reports from 10 or 15 years ago from disaster people who were on the front lines. Not only did our pandemic response suffer from years of neglect, it was also hampered by systemic issues such as the CDC testing foulups in January and February.

The argument that "Laos is closer and did better" has been a stupid red herring from the start. It shows basic ignorance about how the virus moves around the world.

True that most of our cases came from Europe, but we did not, and likely could not, know that, in late January and Early February of 2020. positioned

Nice of you to attribute arguments to me that I didn't make. Guess that makes "debunking them" pretty easy...

You've played a pretty disingenuous game in any response you've made to a post I made in this thread. For Example, I clearly referenced PANDEMIC PREPAREDNESS (Not response) in this post

"Where does pandemic preparedness rank on your list of what you expected? Are you a YUGE proponent of the wall- to the point where you agree with Trump that sacrifices in the area of pandemic preparedness (a concern of the entire populace) should be allowed in order to divert the funds to his and his supporters' pet project- the wall...?

Not only did Trump make the cuts in critical areas of preparedness from what Bush and Obama had put into place. But in order to justify his requests to make cuts in the budget, he used the argument that Obama had done such a good job preparing that the cuts were justified. Then he and lying Kayleigh both tried to shift blame to Obama and started spreading the unmitigated lie that Obama had "left the cupboard bare". The exact opposite of what Trump had previously argued...

No idea why you keep trying to gaslight for trump's actions after the COVID era began. His dereliction of duty in the preceding 3 yrs is enough to condemn him for, all on its own. The reality is that practically anyone would have followed the playbook and implemented the control measures the playbook called for from the outset. It almost sounds ridiculous to say, but the idea that Trump refused to follow the recommendations of the playbook because it came from Obama is beyond credible...It's exactly the kind of behavior you'd expect from him..."

To which you replied...

"Trump appointed the Covid-19 task force about a week after the first US case. He stopped foreign Travel from China a day or so later. Biden was among the critics of that move. All this happened during the senate impeachment trial. What playbook are you talking about?"

So my post was about US pandemic PREPAREDNESS, and your response was about Trump's "response"? No offense but that's pretty "trumpian" of you...


Then in this post, you engaged in the same sleight of hand trickery... Posting "links" to "debunk" points I did not make.

For example, your first link directs to factcheck.org and discusses this claim from 2018...

"As the COVID-19 disease caused by the new coronavirus has spread around the world, a number of politicians, news organizations and public figures have made the false claim that the Trump administration cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s anti-pandemic work in over 40 countries to just 10. The CDC told us that’s not true.

The claim appears to have been based solely on outdated news reports from early 2018 that said the CDC was preparing to dramatically reduce its work helping to prevent infectious-disease epidemics."

The first link is totally irrelevant to my point about the action plan for replenishing crucial supplies enacted by Obama in 2015-16 being abandoned by Trump. Are you going to argue that had the replenishing not continued at the rate it was in 2015-16 it would not have been completed by 2020? There was basically a 3 yr window from Trump's inauguration to the point in 2020 when we needed to have the proper amount of supplies and didn't...

And the Snopes link is beyond disingenuous. My whole point was about the fact that the SL Post Dispatch exposed Trump's duplicity. On the one hand his allies argued for a reduction in funding pandemic preparedness in both the 2019 and 2020 budgets by claiming the cutbacks were possible because Obama had completely re-stocked the arsenal.

But AFTER the pandemic hit, Trump changed his tune and tried to paint Obama as the bad guy who had left the cupboards bare. Obviously, on at least ONE occasion he was outright lying- maybe you admire that?

To "debunk" my post, you linked to a snopes discussion of the 2021 Budget, which concluded that the claim they examined was "mixed" because Congress had yet to approve the 2021 budget.

Of course, I've got to believe that you know Congressional approval had NOTHING to do with my point about the duplicity Trump engaged in. He essentially argued both ends of the spectrum on Obama's funding, to try and absolve himself of any responsibility. And then of course there is the "minor issue" of you trying to debunk a point I made about 2019 and 2020 budgets with an irrelevant discussion about 2021...


I didn't even link the stories which dealt with the budget cuts in summer 2019 that eliminated Dr Linda Quick's position in China. Again another example of Trump choosing to prioritize one funding issue over another, and then trying to weasel out of the consequences when the fact that he made the WRONG CHOICE came back to bite him in his fat ass...

"Several months before the coronavirus pandemic began, the Trump administration eliminated a key American public health position in Beijing intended to help detect disease outbreaks in China, Reuters has learned. The American disease expert, a medical epidemiologist embedded in China’s disease control agency, left her post in July, according to four sources with knowledge of the issue. "

Experts including one former official who held that position told the news service that if the Expert (Dr Linda Quick) had still been in her position, then she would have had the opportunity to receive warning and information about the coronavirus outbreak possibly sooner than U.S. and other global health experts did. “It was heartbreaking to watch,” Bao-Ping Zhu, the former CDC official who held the role between 2007-2011, told the news agency. “If someone had been there, public health officials and governments across the world could have moved much faster.”

Zhu and the other sources said the American expert, Dr. Linda Quick, was a trainer of Chinese field epidemiologists who were deployed to the epicenter of outbreaks to help track, investigate and contain diseases. Dr Quick a medical epidemiologist embedded in China’s disease control agency, left her post in July, according to four sources with knowledge of the issue. "

https://khn.org/morning-breakout/tr...isease-outbreaks-in-china-several-months-ago/

Got a link to "debunk" that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: outside shooter

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,555
2,204
113
One of the problems is giving priority to “scientists”. Even if science suggests we must shut down to control the spread there are other important considerations that could take priority. We can’t have the cure worse than the disease.

That said, treatment protocols are quickly advancing. The scary part of a positive test should diminish, but Biden and the Democrats have staked their election future on continued fear and accompanying chaos. In fact, more cases and recoveries should be seen as a good thing.

I think the October surprise will be a vaccine.

Just because Democrats in general appear to be more concerned about the pandemic than Republicans, according to some polling, doesn't mean they arrive at this outlook strictly because of politics. Nor does it mean Democrats aren't rooting for an end to the pandemic just to make Trump and Republicans look bad.

Think about the above. Is it reasonable to have a great fear about something while at the same time not wanting the reason for fear to end?

So who is playing politics here? Those who claim their political opponents don't want a successful outcome regarding the pandemic, or those who claim our president has done a poor job in dealing with the pandemic ?

Yes.

The plausible deniability around him is weak. You have to remember that only after the White House meeting with Biden and Obama, when the Logan Act was brought up, the FBI, knowing they were breaking protocol, questioned Flynn. They had his previous transcripts and did not see a reason to question him until the White House meeting.

CoH, I didn't think you held Obama and Biden in high regard, but this pair even knowing about the Logan Act puts them far above the average Prez and VP in my view.

Then again since no one has ever been convicted of violating the Logan Act, your contention that Biden and Obama dragged up this 18th century act in regard to Flynn does illustrate utter desparation if your scenario happens to be accurate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
36,938
7,799
113
Nice of you to attribute arguments to me that I didn't make. Guess that makes "debunking them" pretty easy...

You've played a pretty disingenuous game in any response you've made to a post I made in this thread. For Example, I clearly referenced PANDEMIC PREPAREDNESS (Not response) in this post

"Where does pandemic preparedness rank on your list of what you expected? Are you a YUGE proponent of the wall- to the point where you agree with Trump that sacrifices in the area of pandemic preparedness (a concern of the entire populace) should be allowed in order to divert the funds to his and his supporters' pet project- the wall...?

Not only did Trump make the cuts in critical areas of preparedness from what Bush and Obama had put into place. But in order to justify his requests to make cuts in the budget, he used the argument that Obama had done such a good job preparing that the cuts were justified. Then he and lying Kayleigh both tried to shift blame to Obama and started spreading the unmitigated lie that Obama had "left the cupboard bare". The exact opposite of what Trump had previously argued...

No idea why you keep trying to gaslight for trump's actions after the COVID era began. His dereliction of duty in the preceding 3 yrs is enough to condemn him for, all on its own. The reality is that practically anyone would have followed the playbook and implemented the control measures the playbook called for from the outset. It almost sounds ridiculous to say, but the idea that Trump refused to follow the recommendations of the playbook because it came from Obama is beyond credible...It's exactly the kind of behavior you'd expect from him..."

To which you replied...

"Trump appointed the Covid-19 task force about a week after the first US case. He stopped foreign Travel from China a day or so later. Biden was among the critics of that move. All this happened during the senate impeachment trial. What playbook are you talking about?"

So my post was about US pandemic PREPAREDNESS, and your response was about Trump's "response"? No offense but that's pretty "trumpian" of you...


Then in this post, you engaged in the same sleight of hand trickery... Posting "links" to "debunk" points I did not make.

For example, your first link directs to factcheck.org and discusses this claim from 2018...

"As the COVID-19 disease caused by the new coronavirus has spread around the world, a number of politicians, news organizations and public figures have made the false claim that the Trump administration cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s anti-pandemic work in over 40 countries to just 10. The CDC told us that’s not true.

The claim appears to have been based solely on outdated news reports from early 2018 that said the CDC was preparing to dramatically reduce its work helping to prevent infectious-disease epidemics."

The first link is totally irrelevant to my point about the action plan for replenishing crucial supplies enacted by Obama in 2015-16 being abandoned by Trump. Are you going to argue that had the replenishing not continued at the rate it was in 2015-16 it would not have been completed by 2020? There was basically a 3 yr window from Trump's inauguration to the point in 2020 when we needed to have the proper amount of supplies and didn't...

And the Snopes link is beyond disingenuous. My whole point was about the fact that the SL Post Dispatch exposed Trump's duplicity. On the one hand his allies argued for a reduction in funding pandemic preparedness in both the 2019 and 2020 budgets by claiming the cutbacks were possible because Obama had completely re-stocked the arsenal.

But AFTER the pandemic hit, Trump changed his tune and tried to paint Obama as the bad guy who had left the cupboards bare. Obviously, on at least ONE occasion he was outright lying- maybe you admire that?

To "debunk" my post, you linked to a snopes discussion of the 2021 Budget, which concluded that the claim they examined was "mixed" because Congress had yet to approve the 2021 budget.

Of course, I've got to believe that you know Congressional approval had NOTHING to do with my point about the duplicity Trump engaged in. He essentially argued both ends of the spectrum on Obama's funding, to try and absolve himself of any responsibility. And then of course there is the "minor issue" of you trying to debunk a point I made about 2019 and 2020 budgets with an irrelevant discussion about 2021...


I didn't even link the stories which dealt with the budget cuts in summer 2019 that eliminated Dr Linda Quick's position in China. Again another example of Trump choosing to prioritize one funding issue over another, and then trying to weasel out of the consequences when the fact that he made the WRONG CHOICE came back to bite him in his fat ass...

"Several months before the coronavirus pandemic began, the Trump administration eliminated a key American public health position in Beijing intended to help detect disease outbreaks in China, Reuters has learned. The American disease expert, a medical epidemiologist embedded in China’s disease control agency, left her post in July, according to four sources with knowledge of the issue. "

Experts including one former official who held that position told the news service that if the Expert (Dr Linda Quick) had still been in her position, then she would have had the opportunity to receive warning and information about the coronavirus outbreak possibly sooner than U.S. and other global health experts did. “It was heartbreaking to watch,” Bao-Ping Zhu, the former CDC official who held the role between 2007-2011, told the news agency. “If someone had been there, public health officials and governments across the world could have moved much faster.”

Zhu and the other sources said the American expert, Dr. Linda Quick, was a trainer of Chinese field epidemiologists who were deployed to the epicenter of outbreaks to help track, investigate and contain diseases. Dr Quick a medical epidemiologist embedded in China’s disease control agency, left her post in July, according to four sources with knowledge of the issue. "

https://khn.org/morning-breakout/tr...isease-outbreaks-in-china-several-months-ago/

Got a link to "debunk" that?

You didn't read the imbeds in the snopes limk.
 

zeke4ahs

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 26, 2003
35,507
11,968
113
They have been invited to talk and last I heard were going to do so via zoom from Stl. That was earlier this week. Mark furhman has a slot. They found a witness to the guy who ate that rotten bat in China as well as a witness to the lab leak - but haven’t decided who they’re going with yet. It’s fluid. David Duke has a slot. The days will vacillate between the China king kung fu flu and scary rabid blacks heading to the burbs

But so far no celebs so I’ll still prefer it to the dnc...although there’s talk of Roseanne Barr- so that too is fluid.
Scott Baio, although I’m not sure he’s considered a celebrity really?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
36,938
7,799
113
Just because Democrats in general appear to be more concerned about the pandemic than Republicans, according to some polling, doesn't mean they arrive at this outlook strictly because of politics. Nor does it mean Democrats aren't rooting for an end to the pandemic just to make Trump and Republicans look bad.

Think about the above. Is it reasonable to have a great fear about something while at the same time not wanting the reason for fear to end?

So who is playing politics here? Those who claim their political opponents don't want a successful outcome regarding the pandemic, or those who claim our president has done a poor job in dealing with the pandemic ?

The answer to this question is that many ou

Bowling knot


CoH, I didn't think you held Obama and Biden in high regard, but this pair even knowing about the Logan Act puts them far above the average Prez and VP in my view.

Then again since no one has ever been convicted of violating the Logan Act, your contention that Biden and Obama dragged up this 18th century act in regard to Flynn does illustrate utter desparation if your scenario happens to be accurate.

There isn’t much Biden can do about the pandemic. Pelosi is a different story. She knows that a vaccine before Election Day will help Trump. She also is on record in several different ways at several different times saying she won’t give Trump a victory or a strategic advantage.

Any time a criminal investigation and criminal prosecution of a specific individual is the subject of an Oval Office meeting, we should be concerned. Obama likely isn’t the first president to be involved like that, but he could be the first one when the subject is a political opponent after a surprising election defeat.
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
8,794
4,529
113
There isn’t much Biden can do about the pandemic. Pelosi is a different story. She knows that a vaccine before Election Day will help Trump. She also is on record in several different ways at several different times saying she won’t give Trump a victory or a strategic advantage.

Any time a criminal investigation and criminal prosecution of a specific individual is the subject of an Oval Office meeting, we should be concerned. Obama likely isn’t the first president to be involved like that, but he could be the first one when the subject is a political opponent after a surprising election defeat.

So the people who are anti-mask and anti-vaccine, who are they voting for again?
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
8,794
4,529
113

So an AP fact check from FEBRUARY 2020 is somehow supposed to debunk the facts I posted from the St Louis Post Dispatch article of May (3 mos later), which was an analysis of research undertaken in response to CLAIMS TRUMP made in April 2020 that Obama left the cupboard bare? My post dealt with the disinformation campaign waged by Donnie and Kayleigh (April 2020) and your link tried to "debunk" events that had not even occurred yet. Now THAT is quite a trick...

Now have you got a link to an article that debunks the Posts"s research or not?