Donald Trump

PhilipPirrip

JimboHorizontal wrote:

https://twitter.com/MattTurner4L/status/954462339125923841

Yep, that's a stable genius for you. You have to watch that a few times to believe he said something so dumb.

It's like his announcement the other day when he said he would tackle the opioid crisis by going after the dealers, ignorant of the reality that the fundamental cause of the opioid crisis is prescribed drugs.

He just blurts out whatever he thinks his audience want to hear no matter how dumb it is.

FishFish

PhilipPirrip wrote:

JimboHorizontal wrote:

https://twitter.com/MattTurner4L/status/954462339125923841

It's like his announcement the other day when he said he would tackle the opioid crisis by going after the dealers, ignorant of the reality that the fundamental cause of the opioid crisis is prescribed drugs.

Well I agree that the root cause is prescribed drugs causing addiction but are we saying that the doctors are continuing to prescribe to mitigate addiction. Well if you are then we diverge. The continuing supply is illegal. The President is right.

And what is wrong with going after the dealers?

He says a lot of stupid things - why not focus on them and make your point. Trying to make the case from every utterance is unconvincing.

PhilipPirrip

FishFish wrote:

PhilipPirrip wrote:

JimboHorizontal wrote:

https://twitter.com/MattTurner4L/status/954462339125923841

It's like his announcement the other day when he said he would tackle the opioid crisis by going after the dealers, ignorant of the reality that the fundamental cause of the opioid crisis is prescribed drugs.

Well I agree that the root cause is prescribed drugs causing addiction but are we saying that the doctors are continuing to prescribe to mitigate addiction. Well if you are then we diverge. The continuing supply is illegal. The President is right.

And what is wrong with going after the dealers?

He says a lot of stupid things - why not focus on them and make your point. Trying to make the case from every utterance is unconvincing.

Wouldn't normally quote Wikipedia but the references are reliable and it saves me typing,

What the U.S. Surgeon General dubbed "The Opioid Crisis" likely began with over-prescription of powerful opioid pain relievers in the 1990s, which led to them becoming the most prescribed class of medications in the United States. As of 2016 more than 289 million prescriptions were written for opioid drugs per year. In the late 1990s, around 100 million people or a third of the U.S. population was estimated to be affected by chronic pain. This led to a push by drug companies and the federal government to expand the use of painkilling opioids. Between 1991 and 2011, painkiller prescriptions in the U.S. tripled from 76 million to 219 million per year. The most commonly prescribed opioids have been oxycodone (OxyContin and Percocet) and hydrocodone (Vicodin). With the increase in volume, the potency of opioids also increased. By 2002, one in six drug users were being prescribed drugs more powerful than morphine; by 2012, the ratio had doubled to one-in-three.

Furthermore, the structure of the US healthcare system, in which most people are required to get their own insurance in the absence of universal healthcare, favors prescribing drugs over expensive therapies. According to Professor Judith Feinberg from the West Virginia University School of Medicine, "most insurance, especially for poor people, won't pay for anything but a pill". As a consequence, prescription rates for opioids in the US are 40 percent higher than the rate in other developed countries such as Germany or Canada.

So despite no recorded increase in pain suffered the prescribing of drugs increased dramatically, to mitigate addiction if your wont.

The question is he shouldn't alone be concerned with why shouldn't he go after the dealers but why shouldn't he also go after the prescribers and drug companies but, as Eric Trump said the other day, Trump only sees green so I suspect the drug companies are safe from Trump's ire, hence him only seeing dealers as the problem.

A raft of carrot and stick Acts were introduced under Obama so Trump's priority should be to ensure they are enforced but the only thing that appears to have come out of his commission is additional training around prescribing and nothing apparent to prevent them continuining to prescribe pain killers for non-existent pain.

orraloon

Whaddya reckon, Fishybot?

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowit ... g-shutdown

bianchimoon

orraloon wrote:

Whaddya reckon, Fishybot?

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowit ... g-shutdown

ahh you make the mistake of thinking fishbot understands irony or humour

briantrumpet

I'm trying to work out what's going on with Boris Johnson. First he suggests building a bridge to the continent he seems to be doing his best to cut existing ties with - let's just forget the farce of a bridge he tried to build over a couple of hundred yards joining two banks of a city he was in charge of. Now he's saying that Trump (not the US) is Britain's closest ally, despite all the evidence that Trump is loyal only to the pursuit of money and fawning praise for his own 'brilliance'. There's no evidence Trump is loyal to the US itself, given his disregard of the US Constitution. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/201 ... p-britain/

FishFish

No need to read the contents from the URL. If it is worth reading then I'm sure you would have explained it and with laser like focus and massive intellect explained to us the point. But you chose not to.

Mr Trump is doing a great job and frankly I could not care less about a shut down or people being without salary or public services breaking down.

And I went for a bike ride this morning.

orraloon

Ooh look, fishybot is getting wary of taking the lure. Clever Fishy.

FishFish

briantrumpet wrote:

I'm trying to work out what's going on with Boris Johnson. First he suggests building a bridge to the continent he seems to be doing his best to cut existing ties with - let's just forget the farce of a bridge he tried to build over a couple of hundred yards joining two banks of a city he was in charge of. Now he's saying that Trump (not the US) is Britain's closest ally, despite all the evidence that Trump is loyal only to the pursuit of money and fawning praise for his own 'brilliance'. There's no evidence Trump is loyal to the US itself, given his disregard of the US Constitution. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/201 ... p-britain/

So who is loyal to the UK? Maybe the US is in fact the best ally out of 185 or so countries that don't give one about the UK. The closest offshore neigbour NI can't even be rssed with the UK, nor Scotland with England. And actually who cares?

Matthewfalle

FishFish wrote:

If it is worth reading then I'm sure you would have explained it and with laser like focus and massive intellect explained to us the point. .

Sorry but that doesn't really make sense. Can you explain what it is meant to have meant.

orraloon

briantrumpet wrote:

I'm trying to work out what's going on with Boris Johnson./

Copying the Drumpf playbook, talk any old boxxox, facts don't matter, who needs expertise, manipulate the media, winner, the bigliest winner, well 2nd or more likely 3rd tier winner anyway...

PhilipPirrip

Worst. President. Ever.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/20/opin ... story.html

Pross

FishFish wrote:

The closest offshore neigbour NI can't even be rssed with the UK,

Did you actually read what you wrote there?

NI isn't a neighbour of the UK, it is part of it and the vast majority of its population want it to remain that way to the point that leaving would almost certainly result in violence and possible civil war.

sungod

FishFish wrote:

No need to read the contents from the URL. If it is worth reading then I'm sure you would have explained it and with laser like focus and massive intellect explained to us the point. But you chose not to.

Mr Trump is doing a great job and frankly I could not care less about a shut down or people being without salary or public services breaking down.

And I went for a bike ride this morning.

you are trump aicmfp

Matthewfalle

This is quite interesting.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/20/opin ... pe=article

briantrumpet

I'm veering towards the opinion that Trump actually has no policies or underlying rationale for anything, other than the noted seeking wealth by whatever means work and confirmation from all his courtiers that he's the best at everything, ever. His only predictable behaviour is to trample anything or anyone that counters those fundamental needs (I'll exclude the sexual appetite and xenophobia for now). Both the Republicans and Russia appear to be taking full advantage of those uncontrolled appetites. Quite frankly, anything that tries to analyse his thoughts beyond money, sex and adulation seems to be pointless.

It's quite amusing to read about Caligula...

Philo of Alexandria and Seneca the Younger describe Caligula as an insane emperor who was self-absorbed, angry, killed on a whim, and indulged in too much spending and sex. He is accused of sleeping with other men's wives and bragging about it, killing for mere amusement, deliberately wasting money on his bridge, causing starvation, and wanting a statue of himself erected in the Temple of Jerusalem for his worship. [...]

While repeating the earlier stories, the later sources of Suetonius and Cassius Dio provide additional tales of insanity. They accuse Caligula of incest with his sisters, Agrippina the Younger, Drusilla, and Livilla, and say he prostituted them to other men. They state he sent troops on illogical military exercises, turned the palace into a brothel, and, most famously, planned or promised to make his horse, Incitatus, a consul, and actually appointed him a priest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caligula

The amusement being that it's not such a leap of imagination from where we are with Trump to the above being true of him too (with only slight amendment). Someone give Trump a horse.

orraloon

...or give the lions a Trump.

briantrumpet

Jennifer Rubin continues to write passionately in the Washington Post in defence of American conservatism and against Trump and his enablers:

Even more than celebrating an extreme, distorted view of conservatism, Trump’s right-wing apologists would have us treat Trump’s racism, attacks on democratic norms, dishonesty and contempt for independent democratic institutions as matters of style. “Well I don’t much like his tweeting but …” “Well, we don’t really agree that there are good people on the neo-Nazi side.” “Well, we all knew he was a bit of a liar.”

Call this the “other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?” syndrome. If one puts racism so far down the list of priorities that it barely deserves a raised eyebrow — or worse, requires some fudging to cover it up — one has become an enabler of racism. If one brushes off repeated, deliberate falsehoods because they are embarrassing, one becomes an enabler of lying, a handmaiden to attacks on objective truth. These are not inconsequential matters; they are not style issues. Truth-telling and repudiation of racism are or should be top principles both for America and for conservatism.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri ... can-creed/

cooldad

Cadet Bonespurs....

Duckworth — an Iraq War veteran and Purple Heart recipient who lost both legs in a combat mission — was not having it.

"I will not be lectured about what our military needs by a five-deferment draft-dodger," Duckworth said during a speech on the Senate floor. "And I have a message for cadet bone spurs: If you cared about our military, you'd stop baiting Kim Jong Un into a war that could put 85,000 American troops and millions of innocent civilians in danger."

http://uk.businessinsider.com/tammy-duc ... ech-2018-1

lostboysaint

kingstongraham

It was because of the shutdown in 1995 that the White House had interns doing extra work in the west wing.

rick_chasey

briantrumpet wrote:

Jennifer Rubin continues to write passionately in the Washington Post in defence of American conservatism and against Trump and his enablers:

Even more than celebrating an extreme, distorted view of conservatism, Trump’s right-wing apologists would have us treat Trump’s racism, attacks on democratic norms, dishonesty and contempt for independent democratic institutions as matters of style. “Well I don’t much like his tweeting but …” “Well, we don’t really agree that there are good people on the neo-Nazi side.” “Well, we all knew he was a bit of a liar.”

Call this the “other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?” syndrome. If one puts racism so far down the list of priorities that it barely deserves a raised eyebrow — or worse, requires some fudging to cover it up — one has become an enabler of racism. If one brushes off repeated, deliberate falsehoods because they are embarrassing, one becomes an enabler of lying, a handmaiden to attacks on objective truth. These are not inconsequential matters; they are not style issues. Truth-telling and repudiation of racism are or should be top principles both for America and for conservatism.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri ... can-creed/

A lot of US voters are racist.

Even more US voters dont see racism is a big issue; if their man does their politics but is racist, they'd rather that than not doing their politics and not being racist.

It's a low priority for a lot of people.

darkhairedlord

Rick Chasey wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Jennifer Rubin continues to write passionately in the Washington Post in defence of American conservatism and against Trump and his enablers:

Even more than celebrating an extreme, distorted view of conservatism, Trump’s right-wing apologists would have us treat Trump’s racism, attacks on democratic norms, dishonesty and contempt for independent democratic institutions as matters of style. “Well I don’t much like his tweeting but …” “Well, we don’t really agree that there are good people on the neo-Nazi side.” “Well, we all knew he was a bit of a liar.”

Call this the “other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?” syndrome. If one puts racism so far down the list of priorities that it barely deserves a raised eyebrow — or worse, requires some fudging to cover it up — one has become an enabler of racism. If one brushes off repeated, deliberate falsehoods because they are embarrassing, one becomes an enabler of lying, a handmaiden to attacks on objective truth. These are not inconsequential matters; they are not style issues. Truth-telling and repudiation of racism are or should be top principles both for America and for conservatism.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri ... can-creed/

A lot of US voters are racist.

Even more US voters dont see racism is a big issue; if their man does their politics but is racist, they'd rather that than not doing their politics and not being racist.

It's a low priority for a lot of people.

There were similar arguments when Mr hilter came to power.

rick_chasey

Absolutely.

But the focus on Trump is a distraction.

You need to focus on why people want Trump. It's easy to forget but a lot of people voted for him.

Jennifer Rubin is too top down in her argument. I think she forget politicians tend to reflect their voters.

Matthewfalle

Rick Chasey wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Jennifer Rubin continues to write passionately in the Washington Post in defence of American conservatism and against Trump and his enablers:

Even more than celebrating an extreme, distorted view of conservatism, Trump’s right-wing apologists would have us treat Trump’s racism, attacks on democratic norms, dishonesty and contempt for independent democratic institutions as matters of style. “Well I don’t much like his tweeting but …” “Well, we don’t really agree that there are good people on the neo-Nazi side.” “Well, we all knew he was a bit of a liar.”

Call this the “other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?” syndrome. If one puts racism so far down the list of priorities that it barely deserves a raised eyebrow — or worse, requires some fudging to cover it up — one has become an enabler of racism. If one brushes off repeated, deliberate falsehoods because they are embarrassing, one becomes an enabler of lying, a handmaiden to attacks on objective truth. These are not inconsequential matters; they are not style issues. Truth-telling and repudiation of racism are or should be top principles both for America and for conservatism.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri ... can-creed/

A lot of US voters are racist.

Even more US voters dont see racism is a big issue; if their man does their politics but is racist, they'd rather that than not doing their politics and not being racist.

It's a low priority for a lot of people.

A lot of British voters are racist

Even more British voters don't see racism etc etc etc

It's a low priority for a lot of people

pblakeney

Can't argue with that...

dinyull

Rick Chasey wrote:

Absolutely.

But the focus on Trump is a distraction.

You need to focus on why people want Trump. It's easy to forget but a lot of people voted for him.

Jennifer Rubin is too top down in her argument. I think she forget politicians tend to reflect their voters.

Isn't the easy answer: red v blue.

Same in this country too. You could put a red rosette on a steaming shit with some added vomit and the folk up here would vote labour.

rick_chasey

Dinyull wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Absolutely.

But the focus on Trump is a distraction.

You need to focus on why people want Trump. It's easy to forget but a lot of people voted for him.

Jennifer Rubin is too top down in her argument. I think she forget politicians tend to reflect their voters.

Isn't the easy answer: red v blue.

Same in this country too. You could put a red rosette on a steaming shoot with some added vomit and the folk up here would vote labour.

Yes, FPTP does not encourage debate and compromise.

kingstongraham

He's awake.

lostboysaint

Which just proves that there isn't a god.