Duck07 Thread

Anything that wont fit in any of the other forums

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

Post Reply
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by Phalanx »

StevensTechU wrote:
It gets what it deserves.

If my kids do what I want them to do 75% of the time, then you must be of the mind that I have no influence on them since they don't do what I want 100% of the time.

Here's your relevant information. Save for less than a handful, it's routinely 90%+ for Republican senators, not 75% used for illustration. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/co ... ump-score/ Further evidence that this is a power entrenched in the presidency, https://www.rollcall.com/2014/02/03/sen ... dies-show/

What facts did you give? The above are facts. What you shared is what you remember from Civics class with some 'ad' thrown in for Latin flavor. Credit for memory but zero credit for explanation for current events. So I'm sorry that your Civics course didn't teach you that the President is also a head of a party and, in being so, has an outsized influence on members of his party regardless of their branch of government.
You have no experience with party politics, and so you can perhaps be forgiven for misinterpreting the data you are citing (or rather, it's more likely that you googled data that you thought would undergird your argument). Yes, the party ends up voting with the President, but not because he is exerting all of this influence on them. In fact, Trump has been battling the leaders of his own party since before his election. The party overwhelmingly supported Cruz, and Trump only won because a massive amount of new voters registered as Republicans in order to support him. Most party members follow the Senate and House leadership because if they don't, they won't get the juicy committee assignments. Then, with the legislators all in the pocket of leadership, they go to the President and haggle until there is some kind of compromise that they can all agree on. If the President is strong, he will get more of his stuff passed. If he is weak, he caves to Congress more. The pressure is always to appear unified and pass a budget, so crazy spending items from various special interests are almost always in there, whether the President wanted it or not. I do blame Presidents for signing the final legislation, but it doesn't mean it was their idea, or even that they influenced any of it.

One interesting data point in your link was that Rand Paul, a libertarian-leaning deficit hawk, votes with the President less than 70% of the time, one of the lowest percentages among Republicans. As a comparison, Mitt Romney can't stand Trump and even voted to impeach him, but still votes with the President 81.6% of the time. Yet Paul and Trump have a pretty strong relationship and Trump picked him to be one of his RNC endorsement speakers (Romney didn't make the list for some reason). I think that gives us a hint about Trump's personal politics vs. how he ends up voting on spending bills.

Another example was the appointment of John Ratcliffe as Director of National Intelligence. Ratcliffe has been a huge advocate for Trump during the FISA-gate stuff, as well as the impeachment hearings, etc. So Trump was quick to reward him with the appointment, but the Senate Republicans, particularly Committee leaders like Richard Burr (Senate Intelligence) refused to confirm him because his pro-Trump agenda conflicted with theirs. They knew, for instance, that Ratcliffe would begin de-classifying a bunch of FISA documents showing the anti-Trump bias in the intelligence community. So, Ratcliffe was forced to withdraw from consideration. Trump's response was to make Ric Grenell the interim DNI, and Grenell proceeded to de-classify en masse until Burr and others concluded that they could work with Ratcliffe after all. Grenell also gave a nice speech at the RNC. If you looked at your data, all you would see is that everyone voted for Ratcliffe and gave the President what he wanted. That wasn't how it happened though.
huckthefuskies
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 292
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:55 pm

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by huckthefuskies »

wlduck wrote:
huckthefuskies wrote:Funny thing is I agree with both. Also why I roll my eyes each election when voters of the defeated party cry the world is ending and they need to move to Canada or wherever. I swear our system is based on not allowing much to change one way or the other. Probably the biggest long term change in the last 4 years has been the shear steam rolling of placing judges at almost every level. If Biden wins he will just reverse Trumps reversal of Obama policies and the next president will reverse those. I have never understood how people get so emotional for presidential elections.... when does football start?
Because they have a way larger effect on peoples lives than you are acknowledging. Example #1: Had 9/11 happened exactly the same way, it is almost inconceivable that had Gore been president he would have attacked Iraq. That strategy was the result of the "Neo-Cons" seeing an opportunity to enact their long held belief that it would be easy to create a Democracy in the middle east that would spread to other countries.

Gore would have attacked Afghanistan, and who knows how that would have played out differently without the distraction Iraq- probably better but not allot. But certainly history would be different and many humans who were killed would be alive today.


It seems impossible for us to pretend to know what gore would or would not have done. If a person is going to guess then it is only fair to say there may be 10s of thousands of Kurds alive today that Suddam may have genocided if he was left in office.
User avatar
pezsez1
All Pac-12
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:30 pm
Location: RIP CITY

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by pezsez1 »

Because they have a way larger effect on peoples lives than you are acknowledging.
Just to be clear... I'm not going to follow this thread. I just can't. People are locked into their feelings about everything and, with that in mind, nothing I say is with the intent on changing anyone's minds.

And yes, I'm about to say bad things about Donald Trump. Gasp! No, I'm not trying to change anyone's minds re: the election. We all know that Trump could drop a nuke on NYC and his base would still vote for him. I'm aware I can't compete with such cult-like beliefs which is why I'm not even trying.

What I do, however, is I tell it like it is. So... if you have a problem with that, then I guess that's your problem. ;)

That said... why are we talking about the Iraq War to illustrate the importance of presidential elections when we could be talking about COVID-19? Seriously, we're in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic that has killed roughly 180,000 Americans and our country is among the world's worst in dealing with it.

I'm not going to say "what if this happened during Obama's term" because the GOP would have still battled against everything he said because "omg black man." And I'm not sure the response would have been any better had Hillary Clinton won because "omg Killary."

But let's say Joe Biden had ran and won in 2016 (and I'm only using him because he's the least-controversial candidate from either side in recent elections)... we'd probably have rolled into 2020 without much of the inflammatory tension that's gripped the country as a result of Trump's rampant pettiness and retaliation. Perhaps the political atmosphere in D.C would have been slightly more conducive to "both sides" coming together to overcome a crisis. And Biden would have been far more willing than Trump to toss the keys to scientists and truly let them call the shots -- even Trump fans can't deny this. The federal government would have worked much harder (and faster) to secure the supplies and infrastructure for states to ramp up widespread rapid testing; states would not have had to spin their wheels and blow their budgets in bidding wars against each other. The federal government would have worked much more closely with states to emphasize testing and contact tracing while building trust, not division, with the public. And many GOP congressmen/women who feel compelled to follow Trump (even though they hate him) would have been free to lead with their hearts and encourage their voters to trust in the science and make hard sacrifices.

COVID still would have hit, and thousands still would have died when that first wave crashed upon us, but beyond that I firmly believe we'd have crushed the curve EVERYWHERE and not just in a couple of cities. Tens of thousands of people who've died since May or June would probably still be alive today. Kids would probably be going back to school right now. We'd all be preparring to watch Oregon kick off it's football season in a week or two.

None of this is a stretch, btw. We'd simply have handled COVID as most of the rest of the world did.

So yeah... elections have consequences. HUGE consequences. On one hand, it's virtually impossible to predict something like COVID... on the other hand, we seem to face some kind of massive crisis at least once every 10 years, and during those times the person "in charge" absolutely affects the wellbeing of our country. I'd love to believe the past few years has been a master class in why, at a certain point, people should value competence over party loyalty, but I know that's wishful thinking.

Anyway, carry on.
Willie Taggart is a dick.
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by Phalanx »

It's too bad Pez won't be following this thread, because I really feel like if he repeated his talking points a few more times, everyone would finally agree with him that the President should bypass the Constitution and implement federal mandates on issues that are currently handled by the states. Maybe he could even convince Biden, who yesterday backpedaled on his promise to implement a Federal mandate on mask-wearing on Constitutional grounds.
buckmarkduck
All-American
Posts: 10565
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:22 am
Contact:

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by buckmarkduck »

Seems as if Pez is living in dream land. Biden would have kept travel going long after Trump shut it down. He opened criticized Trump.over it for 2 months after he stopped allowing international travel.. Which in turn, would have allowed even more spread of the disease.

Oh, and the tired lie that people disliked Obama because he was black. Lets be clear, if Colin Powell had been president, people on the right would have loved him and people on the left would have hated him. Race had very little to do with it. Although there is always that fringe hillbilly that still live like its 1870.
rentdodger
One Star Recruit
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:38 pm
Location: Paradise Valley, Az

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by rentdodger »

buckmarkduck wrote:Seems as if Pez is living in dream land. Biden would have kept travel going long after Trump shut it down. He opened criticized Trump.over it for 2 months after he stopped allowing international travel.. Which in turn, would have allowed even more spread of the disease.

Oh, and the tired lie that people disliked Obama because he was black. Lets be clear, if Colin Powell had been president, people on the right would have loved him and people on the left would have hated him. Race had very little to do with it. Although there is always that fringe hillbilly that still live like its 1870.
You have no clue what Biden would have done, so if you want to state an opinion, back it up. Trump did not shut down travel from Europe and covid variant D ran rampant through the northeast. Put the blame wherever, but travel was not shut down in time coming East to west.

Hydrocloroquine, Solvents, My pillow guy deadly quackery, lights up the ass, all Trump suggested solutions. Trump listened and bought all that Bullshit, probably just like you. As I recall you were one of the posters crowing it was just the flu, >300k probably dead by Thanksgiving......Bravo.

Trump was the one pushing the Birther stuff remember? That is some fringe hillbilly horseshit and it was peddled in the 21st century by the guy in the Whitehouse.

Dude, I nominate you as the board representative to take the first series of covid vaccines the Trump administration says will be ready Nov. 1. What could go wrong? I’ll speculate like you did and say Biden
wouldn’t put you at that risk like Trump would.
User avatar
ncduck
Senior
Posts: 2198
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by ncduck »

rentdodger wrote:
buckmarkduck wrote:Seems as if Pez is living in dream land. Biden would have kept travel going long after Trump shut it down. He opened criticized Trump.over it for 2 months after he stopped allowing international travel.. Which in turn, would have allowed even more spread of the disease.

Oh, and the tired lie that people disliked Obama because he was black. Lets be clear, if Colin Powell had been president, people on the right would have loved him and people on the left would have hated him. Race had very little to do with it. Although there is always that fringe hillbilly that still live like its 1870.
You have no clue what Biden would have done, so if you want to state an opinion, back it up. Trump did not shut down travel from Europe and covid variant D ran rampant through the northeast. Put the blame wherever, but travel was not shut down in time coming East to west.

Hydrocloroquine, Solvents, My pillow guy deadly quackery, lights up the ass, all Trump suggested solutions. Trump listened and bought all that Bullshit, probably just like you. As I recall you were one of the posters crowing it was just the flu, >300k probably dead by Thanksgiving......Bravo.

Trump was the one pushing the Birther stuff remember? That is some fringe hillbilly horseshit and it was peddled in the 21st century by the guy in the Whitehouse.

Dude, I nominate you as the board representative to take the first series of covid vaccines the Trump administration says will be ready Nov. 1. What could go wrong? I’ll speculate like you did and say Biden
wouldn’t put you at that risk like Trump would.
Hydroxychloroquine. CNN reported it’s not a fraud. That was two months ago, so old news. Also, the first anti-Trump study was debunked, according to NBC news.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/health/h ... index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-n ... e-n1225091
rentdodger
One Star Recruit
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:38 pm
Location: Paradise Valley, Az

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by rentdodger »

ncduck wrote:
rentdodger wrote:
buckmarkduck wrote:Seems as if Pez is living in dream land. Biden would have kept travel going long after Trump shut it down. He opened criticized Trump.over it for 2 months after he stopped allowing international travel.. Which in turn, would have allowed even more spread of the disease.

Oh, and the tired lie that people disliked Obama because he was black. Lets be clear, if Colin Powell had been president, people on the right would have loved him and people on the left would have hated him. Race had very little to do with it. Although there is always that fringe hillbilly that still live like its 1870.
You have no clue what Biden would have done, so if you want to state an opinion, back it up. Trump did not shut down travel from Europe and covid variant D ran rampant through the northeast. Put the blame wherever, but travel was not shut down in time coming East to west.

Hydrocloroquine, Solvents, My pillow guy deadly quackery, lights up the ass, all Trump suggested solutions. Trump listened and bought all that Bullshit, probably just like you. As I recall you were one of the posters crowing it was just the flu, >300k probably dead by Thanksgiving......Bravo.

Trump was the one pushing the Birther stuff remember? That is some fringe hillbilly horseshit and it was peddled in the 21st century by the guy in the Whitehouse.

Dude, I nominate you as the board representative to take the first series of covid vaccines the Trump administration says will be ready Nov. 1. What could go wrong? I’ll speculate like you did and say Biden
wouldn’t put you at that risk like Trump would.
Hydroxychloroquine. CNN reported it’s not a fraud. That was two months ago, so old news. Also, the first anti-Trump study was debunked, according to NBC news.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/health/h ... index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-n ... e-n1225091


So you link 2 articles that state inconclusive on treatment. If you want to go a little deeper and link a hydrocloroquine study as an overall prophylactic benefit to prevent covid please do. Dosage for Malaria is 1 per week. If you think it’s safe to titrate to a BID dose over an extended period you might want take a look at the contraindications and warnings. Those will tell you more what you are risking. Your free to follow at the direction of Trump, and by all means take the needle when that vaccine is released Nov. 1.
User avatar
ncduck
Senior
Posts: 2198
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by ncduck »

You included 0 articles that prove my two articles incorrect. Those articles don’t say it’s inconclusive. One says the study oft quoted in the news saying it was ‘proven ineffective’ was bullshit. The other showed DOUBLE the efficacy of the debunked study. My point was to show it’s not straight political bs as you attempted state. I don’t have to prove it works, only show that your take was proven false, which I did.

The drug is safe and has been on the market for a very long time. Further testing shows that when combined with antibiotics and zinc it’s a useful tool.

Also, there’s no titration in the fda guidlines for using this drug against Covid. Not sure where that comment comes from. It’s actually the opposite, you start with a loading dose in day 1 then take a lower dose for 4-7 days. When my oldest was a newborn, he had to use phenobarbital, which to get to the right dosage took 6 weeks of slow dosage increases, which is titration. When coming off of it, it took another 6 weeks to bring him down.
rentdodger
One Star Recruit
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:38 pm
Location: Paradise Valley, Az

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by rentdodger »

ncduck wrote:You included 0 articles that prove my two articles incorrect. Those articles don’t say it’s inconclusive. One says the study oft quoted in the news saying it was ‘proven ineffective’ was bullshit. The other showed DOUBLE the efficacy of the debunked study. My point was to show it’s not straight political bs as you attempted state. I don’t have to prove it works, only show that your take was proven false, which I did.

The drug is safe and has been on the market for a very long time. Further testing shows that when combined with antibiotics and zinc it’s a useful tool.

Also, there’s no titration in the fda guidlines for using this drug against Covid. Not sure where that comment comes from. It’s actually the opposite, you start with a loading dose in day 1 then take a lower dose for 4-7 days. When my oldest was a newborn, he had to use phenobarbital, which to get to the right dosage took 6 weeks of slow dosage increases, which is titration. When coming off of it, it took another 6 weeks to bring him down.
The difference between you and me is that I actually sold the generic version of plaquenil(hydrocloroquine) 30+ years ago. Along with vaccines, antibiotics etc. Any institution can quote/manipulate any study Including Lancet. The dosage I quoted was the one your guy Trump was spewing, I wasn’t advocating it as accepted dosage. Off label dosage therapy is not really defined for a drug. Again read the contraindications and warnings and make a personal choice. Go take Hydrocloroquine, take the needle, your choice.

The fact that Hydrocloroquine is not an accepted primary therapy in treatment for covid speaks more than your google skills. If you want to look at solution that I has becoming more acceptable in hospital treatment google dexamethasone.

By the way you kind of cherry picked Hydrocloroquine, no comment on, Solvents, UV light and my pillow guy (oleander plant). Buy his bullshit you might pay a price.

Google on.

Ps: I hope your kid is healthy, fetal seizures(I’m assuming that was the problem)are something that would be traumatizing to new parents.
User avatar
Duck07
All-American
Posts: 15952
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:36 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by Duck07 »

Baron Harkonnen is the bad guy we need and deserve as a movie villain! Saw the teaser trailer and the first image of the Baron is rising up out of a pool of slime/mud. Anyone else excited for Dune to eventually come out? Seems like we're about to get a bunch of good Sci-Fi with some of the various series getting ready to be released too.
Image
User avatar
ncduck
Senior
Posts: 2198
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by ncduck »

rentdodger wrote:
ncduck wrote:You included 0 articles that prove my two articles incorrect. Those articles don’t say it’s inconclusive. One says the study oft quoted in the news saying it was ‘proven ineffective’ was bullshit. The other showed DOUBLE the efficacy of the debunked study. My point was to show it’s not straight political bs as you attempted state. I don’t have to prove it works, only show that your take was proven false, which I did.

The drug is safe and has been on the market for a very long time. Further testing shows that when combined with antibiotics and zinc it’s a useful tool.

Also, there’s no titration in the fda guidlines for using this drug against Covid. Not sure where that comment comes from. It’s actually the opposite, you start with a loading dose in day 1 then take a lower dose for 4-7 days. When my oldest was a newborn, he had to use phenobarbital, which to get to the right dosage took 6 weeks of slow dosage increases, which is titration. When coming off of it, it took another 6 weeks to bring him down.
The difference between you and me is that I actually sold the generic version of plaquenil(hydrocloroquine) 30+ years ago. Along with vaccines, antibiotics etc. Any institution can quote/manipulate any study Including Lancet. The dosage I quoted was the one your guy Trump was spewing, I wasn’t advocating it as accepted dosage. Off label dosage therapy is not really defined for a drug. Again read the contraindications and warnings and make a personal choice. Go take Hydrocloroquine, take the needle, your choice.

The fact that Hydrocloroquine is not an accepted primary therapy in treatment for covid speaks more than your google skills. If you want to look at solution that I has becoming more acceptable in hospital treatment google dexamethasone.

By the way you kind of cherry picked Hydrocloroquine, no comment on, Solvents, UV light and my pillow guy (oleander plant). Buy his bullshit you might pay a price.

Google on.

Ps: I hope your kid is healthy, fetal seizures(I’m assuming that was the problem)are something that would be traumatizing to new parents.
Turned out to be benign neonatal sleep myoclonus. Thankfully, it stopped as soon as the mature electrical pathways in his brain came on line, but was pretty freaky when it first happened.

My 'google skills' were only used to find the links. I read the articles when they were released. Also, I'm younger than 60 and in good shape, so I'm more at risk of paying a price from the flu than covid. At least according to the latest mortality rates broken out by age. Not saying I want it or am out there without precautions, just that there's a bit of hyperbole in your warning. I'm assuming it's anti-Trump hyperbole based on your jump to assume he's 'my guy'. Is that incorrect? A lot of folks assume my pushing back on a false claim means I back Trump, but never have. Why are you assuming Trump is my guy? I didn't vote for him. I even donated to a rival campaign.
User avatar
Duck07
All-American
Posts: 15952
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:36 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by Duck07 »

Image
User avatar
greenyellow
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35683
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:54 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by greenyellow »

Weinstein and Heying are some really interesting listening. Another video that people should listen to of them is their interview with Joe Rogan.
Image
User avatar
lukeyrid13
All-American
Posts: 10484
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:58 am
GM: Portland TrailBlazers

Re: Duck07 Thread

Post by lukeyrid13 »

I consider myself conservative, but I really like Bret Weinstein. Frankly, everyone should. He is pragmatic in his thoughts and rationale
Post Reply