RLLD

The natural result of dehumanizing people as the left does is that it becomes easy to not treat them like humans

She is quickly overtaking Barney Frank as the most despicable human in our lifetime

They had to come up with a way to let mothers murder the unborn in their body, no easy task. So they turned it into a womens health debate....so if you challenge them you are evil and hate women.....crafty but really, unimaginative......

Interesting question.... I think there were some positive things I would point to..... 1) I liked the concurrent development process, I felt as though this approach compressed the timeline without sacrificing quality..... 2) I was less happy with the funding arrangement, but I do get why the government threw all that money at it. 3) I think the public/private collaboration helped shorten the time line, leaving too much to government would have risked high failure. But I am less happy with the intrusion of the private into the government hallways. 4) Outreach was sufficient I, setting aside the initial rhetoric to damage Trump, eventually politics was set aside and Democrats instead leaned in to the benefit to the public over politics. 5) I think the logistics was rather well done, and this includes overcoming apprehension about trusting the government when it comes to these medical actions....there is after all history there 6) The FDA fast tracked it, but then again the FDA is not really an agency with much credibility anymore, so that might fall into the "who cares" realm Trump did a decent job in leveraging the likes of Azar, Perna and others......not sure how much of that collaboration is really "Trump" and how much was just medical minds doing what they do.... Does this answer your question?

Oh, well I am talking about rhetoric now, if you want to go back to a prior conversation I can do so. What is it you want me to know?

Oops....you appear to have accidentally missed this... hope this helps, I am sure you didnt mean to not include it No, I think you are on to something here.....rhetoric, as with Harris saying she would not trust the vaccine.....would never compel people to not take the vaccine, right? Because rhetoric does not do that.....or.....does it?

Hmmmmm, you are taking this pretty hard....

Oh, well, just to be clear rhetoric was the topic....between the other member and myself, perhaps that was not clear.

Are you sure......you are posting in this manner....because <ahem> "Just trying to make sure I don't make the error again." I would not want anyone to happen upon this thread.....and perhaps....misunderstand your reason, so if you think clarification is warranted, by all means....

And, that is honestly.....why you were posting that way? For real?

Polls are awesome, they do not answer the rhetoric question, but as we can see from this past election....man....polls are just....fantastic....

Geez, I feel like I broke you, now its not fun

I think there will be fewer. There are means of influence that do not include violence.

Awwww, see, not you just come across as butthurt......i almost feel bad now.

Of course, once Trump could no longer be given credit for the vaccine....well hey howdy hey.....THEN....it was a good thing, like magic.....

Her words....I would not trust donald trump.....that rhetoric, it would....influence people...right? Or, do we instead suggest that words do not compel people into action?

And, its easier than we really appreciate....put things in place that dissuade it from even starting thankfully....we will get that back soon

Just decided to play out the normal drama, since you were apparently not going to do it today..... Better luck next time with it.

A solution that results in people not killing each other, perhaps more complex than what you suggested, works for me. I am not going to insist any one die for my opinion on global politics..... I assure you, the people who are dying....dont really care....about geopolitical garbage

“I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump” on the reliability of a vaccine, Harris said. Well, then, if she doesn't trust it....I guess I should not trust it....then she trusted it so much she was part of the cadre that wanted to take people down for NOT....taking it. SO, rhetoric......we worried about that.....ever? Asking for friend.....

Missed opportunity..... too early to attempt to denigrate me.....your next proper move was Trump.... You were supposed to say, "but, Trump liiiiesssss"...... and then I reply, yes he sure does....and then you reply, well why do you not hold HIM accountable, and then I reply that I do.....you make up a bunch if irrelevant sh!t.....we go back and forth for a few pages with your menial attempts to pretend my holding people accountable for lying is somehow hypocritical.....on and on Always avoiding the actual problem....and the eventually you pluck up some lie Trump said....then I tell you I dont care because all of them lie, and the only lies that matter are the ones that hurt us... You make up some other drivel to deflect....meanwhile, the people in power who lie......continue doing so, and you just eat it up as truth instead of doing what i do, and rank the lies in terms of relevance Lather rinse repeat.....you focus in the irrelevant so you do not have to admit you align with really bad people, and pretend your ideological opponents do....

No, I think you are on to something here.....rhetoric, as with Harris saying she would not trust the vaccine.....would never compel people to not take the vaccine, right? Because rhetoric does not do that.....or.....does it?

Thinking in simple terms when it comes to complex issues is not a winning strategy.

It might be difficult to accept your assertions on things given your propensity to defend liars..... so, if I seem unimpressed its only because of your behaviors when it comes to "truth"

I did not keep a list. Oh wait, we have established that rhetoric is not something that might ever compel people to action, right?