11 hours ago, DBW said:

What are the consequences for trumps actions when he does this 26x a day on his twitbook and truth scumbag platforms?

Sorry you don’t like strong leadership!

3 minutes ago, paco said:

Sorry you don’t like strong leadership!

he told americans that they need to take their medicine.

stop being weak.

24 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Reviewing the safety of food, vaccines or any other widespread consumable is always a good idea. Especially in a country where Autism and Obesity significantly outpace the world's averages. Other countries do this all the time and have banned many of the chemicals we use in these things.

Your argument is basically to put your head in the sand and never question anything while our population declines rapidly in both physical and mental health. Sounds an awful lot like the left's strategies on inner city crime, education, foreign policy, global trade....I could go on and on.

And again, Kennedy is a Democrat. It wasn't very long ago that the far left was anti-vaccine.

Your implicit argument is that reviews of the safety of food/vaccines/etc. wasn't already being done.

It was.

Now we have an idiot whose brain is eaten by worms buying in to readily disproven conspiracy theories about vaccines making policy decisions.

This is indefensible. The only reason it's defended is partisan politics.

If the left had nominated someone as completely disreputable as RFK Jr the right would be apoplectic. But that wouldn't happen because Democratic voters would also be up in arms about it.

2 hours ago, The Norseman said:

Ask the people in the crime ridden slums of DC whether they'd prefer National Guard troops or gang violence in their streets.

If only the Guard was actually in those areas of DC. I did read they were in Anacostia for one day of trash cleanup so I guess they liked that in any case.

11 hours ago, Nice Work Pal said:

Half the country? 😂

Trump got 77 million votes

There are roughly 350 million people in the US

Roughly 240 million are of voting age

Please explain how that’s half by any metric?

2 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Your implicit argument is that reviews of the safety of food/vaccines/etc. wasn't already being done.

His same silly attempt to argue in favor of DOGE implying there was no cost oversight before DOGE.

2 hours ago, Procus said:

When a comic becomes enamored with his own views and foists them off on the public in a polemic way, he loses not only his sense of humor but his value as a humorist. ~ Johnny Carson~

30 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

And again, Kennedy is a Democrat. It wasn't very long ago that the far left was anti-vaccine.

"Ha, we took the dumbest and most reviled candidate from your party after his campaign spectacularly failed and brought him over to our side!"

That's quite the flex bud, you're really scoring points with that one.

8 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

The only reason it's defended is partisan politics.

It's not even that, they're literally too stupid to understand anything related to science. DEagle already hit the nail on the head, these idiots failed their way through school, now all have sheety jobs, but they still want a participation trophy and a seat at the table so they can feel like their worthless degree holds the same value as a PhD.

You’ve unleashed the real Jimmy Kimmel and only made him stronger! We are all Jimmy Kimmel!!!

not to worry, surely the greatest president in his own mind will see this as an opportunity to try and bridge the gap between parties and stop the hateful rhetoric by preaching unity as americans regardless of our political differences.

right? that's what the greatest potus ever would do, no?

If around 300 million more comedians are fired, Gutfield will finally be the funniest comedian on tv!

30 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

You’ve unleashed the real Jimmy Kimmel and only made him stronger! We are all Jimmy Kimmel!!!

Even stronger than Karl Malone Kimmel???

58 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Reviewing the safety of food, vaccines or any other widespread consumable is always a good idea. Especially in a country where Autism and Obesity significantly outpace the world's averages. Other countries do this all the time and have banned many of the chemicals we use in these things.

Your argument is basically to put your head in the sand and never question anything while our population declines rapidly in both physical and mental health. Sounds an awful lot like the left's strategies on inner city crime, education, foreign policy, global trade....I could go on and on.

And again, Kennedy is a Democrat. It wasn't very long ago that the far left was anti-vaccine.

What vaccine ingredients do we used that other westernized nations have banned? Or are you confounding the dye used in Flaming Hot Takis with vaccine components in order to make your argument sound less retarded?

There is a massive difference between "putting your head in the sand" and saying enough is enough and moving on. The whole "just asking questions" argument is only valid when you're actually willing to accept an answer. It's not an exaggeration to call vaccines the most thoroughly researched thing in modern medicine and there is overwhelming evidence to support efficacy and safety. Like Toast pointed out there was a recent Danish study with over a million kids. That's bananas when it comes to study power. Meanwhile RFK has been going on podcasts and literally making up conclusions from MUCH smaller studies (see Joe Rogan interview where he straight up lied about a study saying Tuna sandwiches were causing autism or something like that).

The CDC director appointed by Trump testified that studies needed political approval by RFK before they were released. He and his anti vaccine group went to Samoa to advocate against the MMR vaccine and within a year over 100 kids were from measles. HE DOESN'T THINK HIV CAUSES AIDS. There is no justification for what he's done period. He's a Fing idiot and frankly anyone who supports him is too.

50 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Your implicit argument is that reviews of the safety of food/vaccines/etc. wasn't already being done.

It was.

Now we have an idiot whose brain is eaten by worms buying in to readily disproven conspiracy theories about vaccines making policy decisions.

This is indefensible. The only reason it's defended is partisan politics.

If the left had nominated someone as completely disreputable as RFK Jr the right would be apoplectic. But that wouldn't happen because Democratic voters would also be up in arms about it.

By "implicit argument" I can only assume you mean one that I did not make. However, there is ample, historical evidence of the drug and food companies influencing the regulatory bodies to serve their interests. I don't have any idea whether I will support or contest his policy decisions. That will depend on the data driven arguments that he presents....of which I have seen none. So far, what I see is him re-arranging advisory panels, replacing department heads, etc....while a bunch of overly emotional leftists have an entirely predictable meltdowns over it.

2 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

By "implicit argument" I can only assume you mean one that I did not make. However, there is ample, historical evidence of the drug and food companies influencing the regulatory bodies to serve their interests. I don't have any idea whether I will support or contest his policy decisions. That will depend on the data driven arguments that he presents....of which I have seen none. So far, what I see is him re-arranging advisory panels, replacing department heads, etc....while a bunch of overly emotional leftists have an entirely predictable meltdowns over it.

No, you're saying that what RFK is doing is ok because "Reviewing the safety of food, vaccines or any other widespread consumable is always a good idea".

That is a strawman you're creating then arguing against, implying that reviews aren't a standard part of what they were doing.

What RFK Jr is doing re: vaccines is actually evil. Your side seems to be throwing that term around a lot, yet in this case it's actually correct because his actions are 100% deliberate and will result in deaths.

3 hours ago, The Norseman said:

Ask the people in the crime ridden slums of DC whether they'd prefer National Guard troops or gang violence in their streets. The fact that Democrats expect the urban poor to just deal with failed states that they have enabled is literally the most criminal thing I've ever seen. Your policies have failed so miserably in our inner cities that the federal government now has to come in to protect its citizenry. Sadly, it can only legally do so in our nation's capital.

Nobody has eliminated vaccines, what's in question is the mandates and the specific compounds within them that may be harmful. Although, I find it a bit ironic that you take major issue with the agenda of one of the few Democrats that the administration brought in. Remember a year ago when Kennedy ran for President in YOUR party?

And as for the criminal stuff....show me the case for Trump with underage Epstein girls and I'll be the first to shout lock him up. Until then, this man has been the most investigated human in the history of our planet...and still, despite their most desperate attempts, your party can't nail him down. And when they do, it is overturned on appeal.

Again. It was largely the failed policies of your party that created the space for Trump. Blaming everyone else for what he's doing is utterly laughable.

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

No, you're saying that what RFK is doing is ok because "Reviewing the safety of food, vaccines or any other widespread consumable is always a good idea".

That is a strawman you're creating then arguing against, implying that reviews aren't a standard part of what they were doing.

What RFK Jr is doing re: vaccines is actually evil. Your side seems to be throwing that term around a lot, yet in this case it's actually correct because his actions are 100% deliberate and will result in deaths.

I have no idea what you're talking about...nowhere did I say that we didn't study or analyze these things prior to RFK.

My point is that sometimes, taking a second look at things, especially when there has been public mistrust created by the COVID vaccines isn't a bad thing. I assume that you would support a study produced by RFK that re-affirms the safety of these vaccines, would you not?

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

Where were you with these memes during the covid lockdowns?

1 minute ago, The Norseman said:

Where were you with these meme's during the covid lockdowns?

Who was president during the start of those?

12 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

no double standard here.

3 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

I have no idea what you're talking about...nowhere did I say that we didn't study or analyze these things prior to RFK.

My point is that sometimes, taking a second look at things, especially when there has been public mistrust created by the COVID vaccines isn't a bad thing. I assume that you would support a study produced by RFK that re-affirms the safety of these vaccines, would you not?

Public mistrust in vaccines is a manufactured wedge issue.

We all should have known that COVID vaccines were developed on a speed-run and as such did come with some higher risks. Risks that when compared against those presented by the COVID virus itself in 2021 were acceptable.

Now vaccine skeptics and COVID deniers are using that issue to try and roll back all vaccine development, vaccines that have undeniably saved millions of life here at home and worldwide.

Did COVID vaccines potentially increase risk of myocarditis? It seems that it may well have. By the numbers did it still save more lives than it risked? That's the real question, and there's nothing out there that suggests the exceedingly rare but non-zero cases of myocarditis presented a larger public health threat than the Delta variant that was most prevalent and dangerous around the time vaccines first became available.