Planet Rugby Forum

Jesus Christ you have the reading comprehension skills of a 14 year old. I've bolded the salient part for you. And without getting to hung up on the fact that it's Sean Hannity interviewing Dr Oz the article also goes on...

Quote:
On an April 1, during a Fox News interview, Dr. Oz announced that he asked Governor Cuomo to reconsider the ban on hydroxychloroquine. “I suspect there were concerns for the folks with rheumatoid arthritis and lupus who are dependent on chloroquine and couldn’t get it,” Dr. Oz told Sean Hannity.

But yeah yeah TDS

Perhaps go back for a lucky dip in the "MAGA Crimes" section of Canyon News?
https://www.canyon-news.com/category/maga

You haven't attributed the other article.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

shanky wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:
The eductation system is for the most part a sausage factory and systemic brain washing machine.

However, what I am really talking about can be best seen in the book and film 'The Big Short'. All the professionals in the investment banks and pension funds are running hither and thither all day answering emails, attending meetings, filling in diversity and inclusion surveys and anti money laundering courses etc in between trying to balance a family life and they had no chance seeing what was going on.

It was guys sitting in small offices by themselves without the constant distractions who had the time to slow down, take a deep breath, and lift the hood and have a real good look around who were able to see what was really going on. There are many such examples coming at us now thick and fast. The expert, the professionals, are all fucking hopeless. They are wrong time and time again.

And I don't believe it's because they are not intelligent - they are. It's because I think they are too busy.

Hi guys

I see the cracker savant is still holding court.

LOL

Piss off sluggy.

BillW wrote:Wugga

Jesus Christ you have the reading comprehension skills of a 14 year old. I've bolded the salient part for you. And without getting to hung up on the fact that it's Sean Hannity interviewing Dr Oz the article also goes on...

Quote:
On an April 1, during a Fox News interview, Dr. Oz announced that he asked Governor Cuomo to reconsider the ban on hydroxychloroquine. “I suspect there were concerns for the folks with rheumatoid arthritis and lupus who are dependent on chloroquine and couldn’t get it,” Dr. Oz told Sean Hannity.

But yeah yeah TDS

Perhaps go back for a lucky dip in the "MAGA Crimes" section of Canyon News?
https://www.canyon-news.com/category/maga

You haven't attributed the other article.

Comprehension skills???

Smutley wrote:I see Trump has given up blaming the Chinese and has moved onto the WHO.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/07/tru ... o-funding/

Absolutely pathetic.

BillW wrote:

Hong Kong wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

BillW wrote:
Only a bunch of retards would ban the use of one of these treatments merely because Trump was hopeful that it would work.

Care to give some examples of people saying it should be banned for this reason? Or indeed anyone saying it should be banned at all?

He really has taken over merry’s title of number liar on the bored

−NY Governor Bans Possible COVID-19 Drug
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo banned the Food and Drug Administration approved drug, hydroxychloroquine, as a potential cure for COVID-19.

According to News Day, Cuomo placed bans on the state of New York restricting doctors from prescribing chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19. The drug may only be used for patients in state-approved clinical trials and FDA-approved uses as an anti-malarial or autoimmune treatment. In addition, there is only a 14-day supply with no refills.....

https://www.canyon-news.com/ny-governor ... ure/107073

Michigan's Whitmer pivots on crackdown, asks feds for Trump-touted drugs
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has asked the federal government for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, days after her administration came under criticism for a statewide crackdown on the drugs touted by President Trump for the novel coronavirus.

The request from the Michigan Health and Human Services Department was made after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency-use authorization Monday for the drugs, which have long been approved for treating malaria, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.....

Give yourself an uppercut.

Smutley wrote:I see Trump has given up blaming the Chinese and has moved onto the WHO.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/07/tru ... o-funding/

Absolutely pathetic.

Chilli wrote:

Smutley wrote:I see Trump has given up blaming the Chinese and has moved onto the WHO.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/07/tru ... o-funding/

Absolutely pathetic.

Did you really expect any else from him?

On Tuesday evening, Trump insisted that the WHO “called it wrong” when it came to Covid-19.

“They really called every aspect wrong,” he said. “They said there’s no big deal, there’s no big problem.”

shanky wrote:Trump surely has a point about WHO though, right?

They've been absolutely shite throughout this.

If I was him, I'd stop their money and send them to their room, for sure.

DOB wrote:

shanky wrote:Trump surely has a point about WHO though, right?

They've been absolutely shite throughout this.

If I was him, I'd stop their money and send them to their room, for sure.

They haven't covered themselves in glory, no, but any comparison Trump wants to make with them (he delayed responding longer than them, he was claiming it was all under control when they were calling it an emergency, etc etc) just makes him look worse.

DOB wrote:

shanky wrote:Trump surely has a point about WHO though, right?

They've been absolutely shite throughout this.

If I was him, I'd stop their money and send them to their room, for sure.

They haven't covered themselves in glory, no, but any comparison Trump wants to make with them (he delayed responding longer than them, he was claiming it was all under control when they were calling it an emergency, etc etc) just makes him look worse.

shanky wrote:

DOB wrote:

shanky wrote:Trump surely has a point about WHO though, right?

They've been absolutely shite throughout this.

If I was him, I'd stop their money and send them to their room, for sure.

They haven't covered themselves in glory, no, but any comparison Trump wants to make with them (he delayed responding longer than them, he was claiming it was all under control when they were calling it an emergency, etc etc) just makes him look worse.

They delayed/avoided calling it a pandemic until China had it under control, and only then, did they loudly claim it as a pandemic. This alone, should damn them to eternal internet chat-room hell.

None of this serves to exonerate DJT, but there's no doubt that WHO and their patrons have given him oxygen.

It's sad, because he's been allowed to use it as a distraction from his own failings (but, you know Obama, swine flu, hillbilly-logic etc)

Seneca of the Night wrote:
Much - not all - but much of the TDS stuff exhibited on this thread is thinly masked anti-americanism. The Democratic elite is liked over Trump or anyone GOP for that matter because it too is anti-american. This is an unsustainable state of affairs for the Democratic party. Eventually the voters cotton on to it.

Anyway, good post. It's clear the actual Americans on here (and that doesn't include frothing expat residents) take a much more nuanced view to the Trump phenomenon. There's a really important power struggle going on - pretty existential really as it kind of comes down to whether America is a country, with a core population, or something else completely.

Hong Kong wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

BillW wrote:
Only a bunch of retards would ban the use of one of these treatments merely because Trump was hopeful that it would work.

Care to give some examples of people saying it should be banned for this reason? Or indeed anyone saying it should be banned at all?

He really has taken over merry’s title of number liar on the bored

zt1903 wrote:

shanky wrote:I happen to agree with Dershowitz (Fox shill though he is). The President’s judges are the Congress and the People

Oddly enough though, that didn’t stop them going after Clinton. So, he who screws the pooch, thereafter lives with said pooch.

All the handwringing ‘poisoned tree’ types can keep squealing in the bed that they made.

Dershowitz makes clear that a President can obstruct justice. Nixon destroyed evidence, paid hush money and ordered subordinates to lie, none of those things are his constitutional right. Likewise with Clinton who was accused of perjuring himself in the Paula Jones trial and obstructing justice by asking Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp to lie in the same trial.

Trump is being accused of obstructing justice for firing someone he is allowed to fire.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

puku wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:
Much - not all - but much of the TDS stuff exhibited on this thread is thinly masked anti-americanism. The Democratic elite is liked over Trump or anyone GOP for that matter because it too is anti-american. This is an unsustainable state of affairs for the Democratic party. Eventually the voters cotton on to it.

Anyway, good post. It's clear the actual Americans on here (and that doesn't include frothing expat residents) take a much more nuanced view to the Trump phenomenon. There's a really important power struggle going on - pretty existential really as it kind of comes down to whether America is a country, with a core population, or something else completely.

I wouldn't say that Mr Mike is very frothy at all and I believe Saffer 13 has now taken the Oath of Allegiance.

You talk about nuanced views and then you spout bullshit like "The Democratic elite is liked over Trump or anyone GOP for that matter because it too is anti-american". Who are these anti-American elites? I'm genuinely interested in who you think these folks are. You keep banging the same old drum. You sound like Joe McCarthy, perhaps not surprising as I recall your admiration for that creep Roy Cohn.

The Editorial Board of the NY Times.

merry! wrote:

Hong Kong wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

BillW wrote:
Only a bunch of retards would ban the use of one of these treatments merely because Trump was hopeful that it would work.

Care to give some examples of people saying it should be banned for this reason? Or indeed anyone saying it should be banned at all?

He really has taken over merry’s title of number liar on the bored

tell us how much sledging you received as a rugby ref again, mr honest cop.

BillW wrote:

merry! wrote:

Hong Kong wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

BillW wrote:
Only a bunch of retards would ban the use of one of these treatments merely because Trump was hopeful that it would work.

Care to give some examples of people saying it should be banned for this reason? Or indeed anyone saying it should be banned at all?

He really has taken over merry’s title of number liar on the bored

tell us how much sledging you received as a rugby ref again, mr honest cop.

Don't worry too much about it Merry!
Just keep telling the truth.
You'll get your title back.

uomo placed bans on the state of New York restricting doctors from prescribing chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19. The drug may only be used for patients in state-approved clinical trials and FDA-approved uses as an anti-malarial or autoimmune treatment. In addition, there is only a 14-day supply with no refills

Fat Old Git wrote:Bill, you need to read more than the headline. Even just looking at the bits you have quoted without clicking on the link show a reason that isn't supporting what you are saying.

this one for example

It suggests the concern is that if it starts getting prescribed in an uncontrolled manner as an unproven treatment for all and sundry because we're hoping it might help, then those who actually need it for treating the conditions it has been proven to help with might not be able to access it.

BillW wrote:
Shit I hate this nitpicking shit.
A ban is a ban.

BillW wrote:

Fat Old Git wrote:Bill, you need to read more than the headline. Even just looking at the bits you have quoted without clicking on the link show a reason that isn't supporting what you are saying.

this one for example

It suggests the concern is that if it starts getting prescribed in an uncontrolled manner as an unproven treatment for all and sundry because we're hoping it might help, then those who actually need it for treating the conditions it has been proven to help with might not be able to access it.

Shit I hate this nitpicking shit.
A ban is a ban.

Fat Old Git wrote:

BillW wrote:

Fat Old Git wrote:Bill, you need to read more than the headline. Even just looking at the bits you have quoted without clicking on the link show a reason that isn't supporting what you are saying.

this one for example

It suggests the concern is that if it starts getting prescribed in an uncontrolled manner as an unproven treatment for all and sundry because we're hoping it might help, then those who actually need it for treating the conditions it has been proven to help with might not be able to access it.

Shit I hate this nitpicking shit.
A ban is a ban.

A ban that would appear to be for a very good reason and not as an extension of the middle finger to Trump.

Partisan Pushback
In sharp contrast to the balanced approach these states took to respond promptly to hoarding concerns, Michigan Gov. Whitmer’s administration bungled the challenge. Rather than promulgate an emergency rule or regulation, the state dispatched a letter to “Licensed Prescribers & Dispensers.”

The letter threatened investigative and administrative action against doctors and pharmacists, implying prescribing hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients was inappropriate. “These are drugs that have not been proven scientifically or medically to treat COVID-19,” the letter intoned, before suggesting that medical professionals turn in their colleagues for prescribing the drugs to Wuhan virus patients.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/03/st ... e-changer/

BillW wrote: We can go on and on and on.
But a ban is ban irrespective of motive.
And there sure are different motives.

fonzeee wrote:

Zico wrote:

fonzeee wrote: In any case, Trump has undoubtedly, unwittingly or otherwise, smoked out some nasty players and, through the sheer repulsiveness of his nature to those who never quite got over the swirlie they got in seventh grade, exposed the limitations of many who have miraculously, unbelievably, gotten within arms reach of the levers of power. He is essentially Washington's enema (lame joke incoming), and his presidency has taught us a lot about how the establishment and especially its media compatriots operate.

Being a pragmatist, I don't care how much of this is intentional.

f**king idiot.

Can't say I expect much more from you.

Look, if you can't see the sheer mass of blood, sweat, and tears that have been expended in the past three and half years on utter nonsense from the self-styled "sane party" and its media, at the expense of literally anything productive, nothing I say will change your mind. Eight years of whining about how the big mean GOP couldn't just let St. Barry run everything the way he wanted (as if he could organize a handjob in a whorehouse...nice speeches though), only to unleash upon us a deluge of bullshit that made the reactionary Tea Party conniption look like a literal tea party in comparison. It has been utterly f**king unbearable. More importantly, it has caused American politics and political discourse to essentially grind to a halt. And this is from the party whose whole shtick is that they care about you.

Anyone who wants can look back at my post history; I actually held my nose and voted for Hillary because even though she's useless at best and fairly crooked at worst, at least the "good guy" blue-ties would control the executive and hopefully, just maybe, we could at least get the ball rolling on some domestic stuff that needs doing and at that point was still more likely to come from the left (although it's not clear why I thought a third consecutive Democratic presidential term would be different). And granted, I was only 16 when Obama got in, but I'll admit I huffed all that HOPE and CHANGE bullshit too. I ain't proud, but it is what it is.

You realize that for all of the bitching about Trump, some Chinese peasant who chucked a pangolin into his chow mein caused immeasurable magnitudes more damage to Americans' daily lives than your beloved "shitgibbon". In fact, brace yourself for this, but it turns out life under Trump is not terribly different than life under Obama. Problem is, I was told one would usher in the Age of Aquarius, and the other would lead to the apocalypse. Funny that. But at least now it's there for all to see, if you're willing and, what was the term you used to describe your Trump-hating American friends...broad-minded?

And yet, do you think we'll hear 1/10th as much ire directed towards China from the media and Democrats as we've heard directed towards our own president over the past few years? Fat f**king chance. And that should tell you something.

Anonymous. wrote:Just watched the latest from The Donald. I love it when he denies saying something minutes after he says it.
https://youtu.be/W_kIc__rbSQ?t=78

Ali's Choice wrote:BillW,

What are your thoughts on Trump's repeated boast that COVID-19 was a "democratic hoax"?

Rinkals wrote:

Flockwitt wrote:Forget the drug. Time to be 'concerned' that Trump's fired the head of oversight of the 2 trillion greenbacks about to be released into the economy.

I reckon Jared will be tasked with redistributing the $2T.

Rinkals wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:BillW,

What are your thoughts on Trump's repeated boast that COVID-19 was a "democratic hoax"?

As I understand it, Trump claims that he never said that and careful analysis of his words leave them open to the interpretation that he was not referring to the disease it'self, but merely Democrat criticism of his handling thereof.

The fact that he said it at his rallies where such subtle nuances were unlikely to be identified and where his supporters could be expected to take away the idea that the pandemic was a politically motivated hoax undermines that somewhat.

Rinkals wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

Flockwitt wrote:Forget the drug. Time to be 'concerned' that Trump's fired the head of oversight of the 2 trillion greenbacks about to be released into the economy.

I reckon Jared will be tasked with redistributing the $2T.

My bad.

It's his wife, Ivanka.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/08/poli ... index.html

Anonymous. wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:BillW,

What are your thoughts on Trump's repeated boast that COVID-19 was a "democratic hoax"?

As I understand it, Trump claims that he never said that and careful analysis of his words leave them open to the interpretation that he was not referring to the disease it'self, but merely Democrat criticism of his handling thereof.

The fact that he said it at his rallies where such subtle nuances were unlikely to be identified and where his supporters could be expected to take away the idea that the pandemic was a politically motivated hoax undermines that somewhat.

No need to carefully examine his words. This denial is just the game he plays. He can his cronies were clearly denying the severity of the threat. They were clearly saying it wasn't as deadly as the Democrats and media were making it out to be and that it was a Democrat hoax. The montage videos will be played out again and again and again when between now and the election.

Anonymous. wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

Ali's Choice wrote:BillW,

What are your thoughts on Trump's repeated boast that COVID-19 was a "democratic hoax"?

As I understand it, Trump claims that he never said that and careful analysis of his words leave them open to the interpretation that he was not referring to the disease it'self, but merely Democrat criticism of his handling thereof.

The fact that he said it at his rallies where such subtle nuances were unlikely to be identified and where his supporters could be expected to take away the idea that the pandemic was a politically motivated hoax undermines that somewhat.

No need to carefully examine his words. This denial is just the game he plays. He can his cronies were clearly denying the severity of the threat. They were clearly saying it wasn't as deadly as the Democrats and media were making it out to be and that it was a Democrat hoax. The montage videos will be played out again and again and again when between now and the election.

Anonymous. wrote:Just watched the latest from The Donald. I love it when he denies saying something minutes after he says it.
https://youtu.be/W_kIc__rbSQ?t=78