Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Is that so?What you call "visceral, inordinately irrational hatred" is nothing more than a very real concern for the health and well being of both the nation and the president.
Oh, I imagine there are a few around here or there.Are there any far left types around here?
Yet you bypass the opening post with quotes from the psychiatrists, bypass the actual content of my last reference and what that reporter was focusing on, and just ad hom the despair in the writing?Is that so?
Um.... curious - you took what I said personally. Why? I mean, it wasn't directed at you - or even at the poster whose post I quoted to state what I did.
It was a general observation concerning something I tend to see in many places, not just here.Yet you bypass the opening post with quotes from the psychiatrists, bypass the actual content of my last reference and what that reporter was focusing on, and just ad hom the despair in the writing?
You're from Australia. I question your concern for our nation.Yes, this is just an ad hom. We are concerned for the nation, and then the Denier in Chief gets up and says there's nothing to worry about.
That's about it. There is strong feeling, but characterizing as hatred is a mistake on the part of his supporters, who can think of no other reason to disapprove of a man they can find no fault with.It was a general observation concerning something I tend to see in many places, not just here.
Not sure what you mean about "ad hom[ing] the despair in the writing." Anyway, it wasn't an ad hominem. It was, as I said, merely an observation.
Are you asserting there ISN'T a visceral hatred for President Trump?
Is that so?
Um.... curious - you took what I said personally. Why? I mean, it wasn't directed at you - or even at the poster whose post I quoted to state what I did.
Aren't you doing the same thing by presuming to judge his supporters as incapable of finding any fault in him?That's about it. There is strong feeling, but characterizing as hatred is a mistake on the part of his supporters, who can think of no other reason to disapprove of a man they can find no fault with.
Ok, fair enough.Because I felt it to be incorrect.
I didn't say they are incapable of it. It appears to me that they have chosen not to. I suppose out of approval of his policies and his manner of carrying them out.Aren't you doing the same thing by presuming to judge his supporters as incapable of finding any fault in him?
I'm also a geek interested in super-power tech.You're from Australia. I question your concern for our nation.
It's rational, but it's not unemotional. I'm quite happy to admit he makes me angry, and denies climate science and denied the pandemic."Denier-in-Chief" - that's hardly a rational label.
That's unforgivable in an exponential explosion of viral vectors sweeping through your land.Early on he did say there's nothing to worry about. He since changed that position.
1. Quote?Early on Pelosi said there's nothing to worry about as well - encouraging her minions to Chinatown. Does your opinion of Trump extend to Pelosi et. al. as well?
Bernie has his “Norman, coordinate!” moments too, but no, not the stutter.Correct - that's what I meant, and if my context or typo's said Bernie, then it must have been a tired thing.
Well “the lie” is supposed to be BIG!Yes, this is just an ad hom. We are concerned for the nation, and then the Denier in Chief gets up and says there's nothing to worry about.
That picture sure could use some “golf-days” up in ‘nere.I'm Ordo-Liberal / Social-Liberal, which I define as ...
"Civil Rights, Social Justice and State funded welfare in a Market Economy."
So please take your 'far left' and hurl it far left of me. There is a place for the market, but it is not at the expense of public health during a pandemic as President Trump has made apparent in his many nonsensical mutterings. How anyone can defend his missing 6 weeks is beyond me.
View attachment 276697
The Right thinks that Single-payer health coverage is a step towards “Government Controls Everything!!1!”Are there any far left types around here?
Although the mainstream media have largely refused to name Trump’s disordered mind, a cohort of mental health professionals have been consistently sounding the alarm.
The American Psychiatric Association states that it is unethical for psychiatrists to give a professional opinion about public figures whom they have not examined in person, and from whom they have not obtained consent to discuss their mental health in public statements. The AMA has a similar rule.
So the fact that this "cohort" has breached medical ethics is one reason to ignore them. Their obvious political bias is another. The fact that several psychiatrists have debunked the accusations is a third.
So the 25th Amendment is purely hypothetical?I agree. Scientists and Medical Professions should ought not to call into question the competency of the President, ANY President, if they have not been invited to do so by a court, or, say, the Vice-President, to do “due diligence” with possible 25th Amendment Protocols.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?