Jump to content

CR: COVID-19 --Political Talk

Mrs Whiggins

By Mrs Whiggins
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Anastasis

    2588

  • jimmyjazz

    1665

  • 4th&Five

    1305

  • Mrs Whiggins

    1226

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

safe sex
safe sex

I'd just like to point out that neither myself nor any of my fellow nurses, fellow advanced nurse practitioners, and other healthcare providers ever swore an oath that we would lay down our lives for

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

Welp, it finally happened. I snapped in public today. I went into work for a bit this morning because I’m trying to figure out the safest way to host physicians we are recruiting given our CV-19 sit

safe sex
safe sex

I don't really know what to say anymore tbh. What happened last night is hard to put into words for anyone who hasn't worked in a hospital healthcare setting. Just unreal. Everyone is getting fucked.

Posted Images

Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3438

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, NWBuck said:

And the way the "Religious Right"/"Moral Majority" coalesced against his reelection is just astounding.

Not really if you know their history. 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133

"This myth of origins is oft repeated by the movement’s leaders. In his 2005 book, Jerry Falwell, the firebrand fundamentalist preacher, recounts his distress upon reading about the ruling in the Jan. 23, 1973, edition of the Lynchburg News: “I sat there staring at the Roe v. Wade story,” Falwell writes, “growing more and more fearful of the consequences of the Supreme Court’s act and wondering why so few voices had been raised against it.” Evangelicals, he decided, needed to organize.

Some of these anti- Roe crusaders even went so far as to call themselves “new abolitionists,” invoking their antebellum predecessors who had fought to eradicate slavery.

But the abortion myth quickly collapses under historical scrutiny. In fact, it wasn’t until 1979—a full six years after Roe—that evangelical leaders, at the behest of conservative activist Paul Weyrich, seized on abortion not for moral reasons, but as a rallying-cry to deny President Jimmy Carter a second term. Why? Because the anti-abortion crusade was more palatable than the religious right’s real motive: protecting segregated schools. So much for the new abolitionism."

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Royalfan5

Royalfan5 2344

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Right, herds gotta be getting out of control 

We really only started to back off middle of last week, and were pulling forward ahead of that, so it’s not critical right now, and other plants are pushing chain speed where there have been less issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5102

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
27 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

That's why I'm voting this year.

Just so you are aware, the Libertarian repose to a virus like this would be even worse than Trump’s. They would’ve absolutely left it 100% up to the states. No guidance, no help, and they likely would’ve vetoed any stimulus. I used to be a libertarian too. But libertarians are only good when there is never a crisis. Sometimes you need to get everyone on the same page and lead. That is not the mission of a libertarian federal government. It would be a disaster. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
workswithseed

workswithseed 2028

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Just so you are aware, the Libertarian repose to a virus like this would be even worse than Trump’s. They would’ve absolutely left it 100% up to the states. No guidance, no help, and they likely would’ve vetoed any stimulus. I used to be a libertarian too. But libertarians are only good when there is never a crisis. Sometimes you need to get everyone on the same page and lead. That is not the mission of a libertarian federal government. It would be a disaster. 

Not too much different than now. I also don't think that government taking control of the states would do much of anything.

Edited by workswithseed
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45428

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Not too much different than now. I also don't think that government taking control of the states would do much of anything.

I feel like I say this several times a week:  the Federal government has options no state has.  Can the states print money?  Can the states operate at a budget deficit?

I think it would be great to live in a world where pork barrel politics didn't exist, and states were able to accrue sufficient supplies to weather an event like this.  That's not reality.  Never mind the fact that this is literally an external threat, an enemy if you will.  Why not respond in kind . . . with a coordinated, national approach?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11358

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Not too much different than now. I also don't think that government taking control of the states would do much of anything.

yeah, so federalism isn't necessarily the "government taking over the states." it's the idea that the federal government would help to coordinate with the states an appropriate national response by helping to briefly nationalize certain supply chains and send them to the states that need them most. this would prevent price gouging and state hoarding and bidding wars that are toxic for a pandemic type response.

we do not expect texas to handle a hurricane response all by ourselves - we do what we can, both publicly and privately, and then fema does what they can to mitigate the rest. fema hasn't responded to montana that i can recall, but montana absolutely has a vested interest in a functional fema as a member state of the fucking union.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8536

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

Not really if you know their history. 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133

"This myth of origins is oft repeated by the movement’s leaders. In his 2005 book, Jerry Falwell, the firebrand fundamentalist preacher, recounts his distress upon reading about the ruling in the Jan. 23, 1973, edition of the Lynchburg News: “I sat there staring at the Roe v. Wade story,” Falwell writes, “growing more and more fearful of the consequences of the Supreme Court’s act and wondering why so few voices had been raised against it.” Evangelicals, he decided, needed to organize.

Some of these anti- Roe crusaders even went so far as to call themselves “new abolitionists,” invoking their antebellum predecessors who had fought to eradicate slavery.

But the abortion myth quickly collapses under historical scrutiny. In fact, it wasn’t until 1979—a full six years after Roe—that evangelical leaders, at the behest of conservative activist Paul Weyrich, seized on abortion not for moral reasons, but as a rallying-cry to deny President Jimmy Carter a second term. Why? Because the anti-abortion crusade was more palatable than the religious right’s real motive: protecting segregated schools. So much for the new abolitionism."

 

Yup... I fully get that (that article is an important part of my doctoral work. :) )

What's surprising to me is how quickly a group of folks who espoused values for being "in the world but not of the world" sold their souls to be "in the world with power to rule it". It's an interesting debate over end times, in some circles: Screw the world, 'cause we're going to heaven -vs- Getting the world ready for Jesus to come back and build heaven here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jive Turkey

Jive Turkey 12546

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 4th&Five said:

He seems proud of this for some reason. 

 

Any time he does something no other president has ever done, it’s a cause for celebration. 

Abe Lincoln? Nope. They didn’t even have 50 states. So sad.

JFK? Hell no. Trump? Yes. GOAT. 

Edited by Jive Turkey
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cactusflinthead

cactusflinthead 27588

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, NWBuck said:

Yup... I fully get that (that article is an important part of my doctoral work. :) )

What's surprising to me is how quickly a group of folks who espoused values for being "in the world but not of the world" sold their souls to be "in the world with power to rule it". It's an interesting debate over end times, in some circles: Screw the world, 'cause we're going to heaven -vs- Getting the world ready for Jesus to come back and build heaven here.

I could stand to dig deeper into this, but it would be a serious derailment.

Do we have an evangelical thread already?

Edit: I have several questions lined up as well as commentary. I'll save them for later. 

Edited by cactusflinthead
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cactusflinthead

cactusflinthead 27588

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Jive Turkey said:

Any time he does something no other president has ever done, it’s a cause for celebration. 

Abe Lincoln? Nope. They didn’t even have 50 states. So sad.

JFK? Hell no. Trump? Yes. GOAT. 

If Fred Trump had said to him, "I love you. You're my son and I'm very pleased with you." He might not be such a needy, ill-informed, malignant tumor of a person. 

Instead he's never been satisfied with any amount of praise. We get Daily Dumpsterfireside Chat where he damages his numbers and inspires fear and confusion.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8536

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I could stand to dig deeper into this, but it would be a serious derailment.

Do we have an evangelical thread already?

Edit: I have several questions lined up as well as commentary. I'll save them for later. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8536

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the sad thing is, this would've been a somewhat appropriate and even helpful tweet.

9 weeks ago. 

you can't rewrite history or rearrange the timeline.  this shit is written in ink you baboon.

9 weeks ago, assuming that the feds won't spend time bidding against you for masks, only to confiscate them anyway 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29169

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, NWBuck said:

9 weeks ago, assuming that the feds won't spend time bidding against you for masks, only to confiscate them anyway 

yep.  you can already seeing him trying to reconstruct the narrative.

october - 2020:

"mr president, how would you respond to critics that said the federal govt was slow-"

--interruption--

"well, as you recall, we let the states run everything on their own, and we were there to support them if needed, but we completely got out of their way.  some states did very well, and many democrat governors were very complimentary of me, you can check the reports."

  • Like 3
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
deech

deech 2248

Posted
Posted

When Fox News doesn't toe the line turn on OAN.  When OAN offers off a single point of constructive criticism - the next iteration will be even stupider, more morally repugnant, and even more slanted than the last two.  Can't wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Upgrayedd

Upgrayedd 5798

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, deech said:

When Fox News doesn't toe the line turn on OAN.  When OAN offers off a single point of constructive criticism - the next iteration will be even stupider, more morally repugnant, and even more slanted than the last two.  Can't wait.

Trump TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
HenryJames

HenryJames 65848

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
13 minutes ago, deech said:

When Fox News doesn't toe the line turn on OAN.  When OAN offers off a single point of constructive criticism - the next iteration will be even stupider, more morally repugnant, and even more slanted than the last two.  Can't wait.

spacer.png

  • Like 15
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30023

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
17 hours ago, Wanker Bob said:

I admit it. In 2016 I thought there was a solid chance that Trump would at least turn the corrupt political establishment on it's ear in a positive way for the country. 

 

For the life of me, I honestly don't see how anyone could have thought that.  Not trying to insult you, but what exactly did you think he was going to do, besides wave a magic want?  How could a guy with a history of business failures, civil rights violations and litigation against him for fraud get the deep state to stop being all corrupt?   Did he give any indication that he was going to go after big business or lobbyists?  Had he ever displayed any empathy or interest in helping the poor?  

Not being snarky.   I just admit to not seeing how anyone could have ever voted for him in 2016.   I assume that you hated Clinton?

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31084

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Royalfan5 said:

For scale that plant can kill 22,000 a day out of 507,000 national capacity. This plant is getting the pub, but Tyson had a similar sized plant in Iowa go down last week. We also have a fuckload of pork in cold storage. It’s more of a farmer issue than a consumer issue at this point. Same with the JBS cattle plants battling the same issue. 

Smithfield is also now owned by the Chinese.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Royalfan5

Royalfan5 2344

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Smithfield is also now owned by the Chinese.

And China’s bought a record amount of pork the last month. JBS(Brazil), and Tyson(Piggy) have major issues too. Cargill has kept it together better than the others so far, but that’s typical for them. The biggest problems right now is big numbers expended a lot ahead of the trade deal/asf and theres not any slack in the system unless Seaboard can pull another shift out of their ass somewhere labor wise. 

Edited by Royalfan5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16427

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Just so you are aware, the Libertarian repose to a virus like this would be even worse than Trump’s. They would’ve absolutely left it 100% up to the states. No guidance, no help, and they likely would’ve vetoed any stimulus. I used to be a libertarian too. But libertarians are only good when there is never a crisis. Sometimes you need to get everyone on the same page and lead. That is not the mission of a libertarian federal government. It would be a disaster. 

The Trump administration's response has the worst parts of a libertarian response: denial of reality/embracing of stupid ass conspiracies; lack of federal coordination leading to disparities and even competition between states, etc. It also has the added bonus of purposefully ignoring the situation and the Trump cult following him no matter how fucking stupid or false anything he says is. If even one Desantis, Abott, etc. makes better decisions in an alternate universe where their tongues are separated from the saggy Trump choad, that's thousands of lives saved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
15 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Libertarian principles have a place in our political dialogue. But A pandemic isn’t the best place to get all dogmatic about it. 

Sure, in a perfect theoretical world where libertarianism is about protecting individual rights while also respecting the individual rights of others. Instead, real world libertarianism is about maximizing selfishness, others be damned. We have a full blown tragedy of the commons in almost every aspect of American life because of supposed libertarian principles.  Covid spread is only the latest example of it.  Once you guys decided the individual right to discriminate was more important than the individual right to be free from discrimination, libertarians have been in a steady decline.

What used to be "my right to punch ends where your face begins," is now "I have a right to punch, fuck your face or anything else that gets in the way."

Hell, you guys don't even give a fuck about clean drinking water anymore. 

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23328

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Sure, in a perfect theoretical world where libertarianism is about protecting individual rights while also respecting the individual rights of others. Instead, real world libertarianism is about maximizing selfishness, others be damned. We have a full blown tragedy of the commons in almost every aspect of American life because of supposed libertarian principles.  Covid spread is only the latest example of it.  Once you guys decided the individual right to discriminate was more important than the individual right to be free from discrimination, libertarians have been in a steady decline.

What used to be "my right to punch ends where your face begins," is now "I have a right to punch, fuck your face or anything else that gets in the way."

Hell, you guys don't even give a fuck about clean drinking water anymore. 

Oh good. Circus mirror depictions of political philosophy.  Go ahead and do the two major parties next. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...