Also, interesting use of the word 'legendary'.

Where Biden's lies might be 'Legendary', Trump's lies must be the opposite: real, actual, proven, true, existent, existing, factual, genuine, known, substantial, ordinary, physical, practical, tangible, material, concrete, legit, palpable, irrefutable, certifiable, dinkum, perceptible, indubitable, corporal, certified, sensible, substantive, evident, unimagined, legitimate

That image they claim is 7 weeks is of a fetus well beyond 11 weeks at a minimum…at 7 weeks there are not individual fingers. Always more dishonesty from bob, who always believes his ends justify any means, any lies, and any violence or crimes necessary to achieve them.

There’s a barely perceptible nerve pulse at week 7 but not any heart at all… no functioning heart until week 20 you liars. No heart=no heart beat.

Typical

It totally agree, @eric3579. Who can be trusted? It's harder to know every day.

My take....
Jones is right about the science, false negatives imply you've never been exposed when you have been, so people believe they cannot transmit the virus when they may in fact be infectious, which can lead to reckless nondistancing behavior and infections because they assume they're "safe"... also even a good (not false) positive antibody test does not mean they have meaningful immunity nor does it mean they aren't infectious as this woman claims. It only means you've developed some detectable antibodies to the virus. Period. Both misconceptions are big concerns. "Which is bigger?" seems like a silly fight.

The problem is, no matter what the test says, people think it means they're safe to be around. A negative test...."I never had it so I can't spread it, gimme a kiss"...a positive test..."I had it but beat it so I'm now immune and can't spread it, gimme a kiss". Neither is correct.

I had the chicken pox twice. If a chicken pox antibody test existed, I would have tested positive after the first round and assumed I couldn't get it or transmit it afterwards, but that would have been wrong even though the results weren't a false positive. Instead, because people suck, my parents and teachers just assumed I was "safe" and sent me to school sick and may have caused an outbreak.

Both of her claims here rely on most people completely misunderstanding what the results really mean, and people completely ignoring the possibility of false results. Sadly that's proper to assume.

Interesting how she puts it, she says Jones wasn't asked to fudge any data, just maybe present it in a way that made Florida's public covid numbers look better in the run up to the election....or another way to say that is she was asked to fudge the data....if I recall she claimed she was instructed to hide large numbers of cases in categories not included in the public presentations with the intent to create a false perception of a major downturn in cases under the "open up and unmask" plan.

Wasn't the "private data" she's accused of handing to the press the unadulterated anonymous covid numbers....not really private as it's public data collected by the government for public health reasons... and not personal data as she implied. That's what I recall the charge being....maybe there's more.

The rest is unverifiable and /or personal tabloid stuff....like did they point the gun at her kids or just menace them with the guns, did she get pregnant with her student, etc. Not germane to her claims about Florida's verified misrepresentations, and inappropriate attacks against the messenger instead of the message, imo. Distasteful to me, but besides the point.

Neither supports racial supremacy like your ilk, so the leading question is a red herring non sequitur.
I am not an anarchist, not since I turned 16, so I don't support Antifa, but I enjoy watching them make your head spin immensely.
I have always supported equality under the law, so yes, I absolutely support BLM....I would if they murdered a cop every time an unarmed black person was killed by police.

You are delusional.
Do, at some time, most cops act appropriately? Yes. Are you so brain damaged you take much accusations and hear "all cops are all bad all the time"? I've never said that. Pablo Escobar, by all reports, was a quite generous man who helped the poor on many occasions....he was not a good person.
Same for cops.
If you murder one person but do your job well otherwise, you are a murderous thug. If you allow fellow officers to get away with murder but don't participate, you are a murderous thug. If you spend every waking hour tending to the invalid and elderly on your own dime and you only kidnap and rape one child, you are a disgusting child rapist. If you cover for another motherfucker who's a kiddie fucker, you're no fucking better than the motherfucking rapist. That's the norm for American police, cover for the bad ones under any circumstances.

Cops can do good at times, usually when they know they're on multiple cameras, it doesn't ever erase their crimes.

Most, I would say statistically all cops are at best accomplices if not the bad actors. Good policing includes stopping other cops from committing crimes....until BLM pushed the issue, that was absolutely not the case...It might have happen once a decade nation wide, always ending with the whistleblower fired and under threat from police. Now, thanks 100% to BLM, that's slowly changing. Maybe up to .01% of the time...and that's an improvement.

Trump said to hit them harder and more often, cops listened and cheered.

Cops wear cameras. If they followed the law, they could put out ten thousand videos of themselves doing the right thing every day, not one a month, deescalation, not shooting until threatened, stopping other cops from beating handcuffed suspects to death and arresting them, defending the accused shoplifters from the racist store owner's false accusations instead of what we do see, smashing their window and pulling them through it because a racist said they think they stole something, they just don't know what or when. Have you EVER seen one of those? No, but you can see 10 disgusting abuses recorded daily with never another cop intervening, always the entire department forming a blue wall, destroying evidence, publicly pushing lies, testifying to lies, etc. They're a gang, they only protect and serve themselves when the chips are down. This is not a media perception, it's cold hard fact buddy.

Cops went to the supreme court to guarantee their right to lie. They are all professional liars. Liars cannot be trusted. I know, you can't grasp that concept because it would mean questioning daddy Trump, but it's true. When you give people authority, the power of life and death, and the legal right to lie at all times you set up a disastrous situation....it's what we have. Racist liars who kill. No good deed erases that.

Yes, Bob. Cops admit they shoot three citizens to death daily on average, already an abject failure, but hide likely > 95% of the deaths they cause by blaming the victim, claiming suicide by somehow beating themselves to death or claiming they died in a minor wreck that caused no injury after beating them to death. Claiming a cell phone clearly visible that they are talking to 911 on looks like a gun and shooting 47 times, running them over intentionally then stopping 10 ft away but claiming they had to because they feared for their lives, kneeling on their neck for 9 minutes and later saying the people telling them they just killed the man distracted them from knowing they killed the man. Strangling boys for 17 minutes straight while beating their heads with a giant maglight.......Daily. Multiple times daily.

You are such a delusional idiot.

either t.t. is an everyday troll or unstable. i vote unstable.

here's the pitch...

- warps the women's death for some perceived 'victory' or points in some cracked-pot game of 'rubber and glue'
- .gov is an odd slur. as if it's an unnatural beast that roams halls looking to slay citizens. [f'n' weird.]
- the shooting was legit. any court, or reasonable person, can see the justification of the action. it's distorted in his eyes. to label it 'murder', shows any inability to gauge actuality
- twisted perception that others didn't care or 'democrats' as a group celebrated the shooting?

...it's a detachment from reality.

no. not murder. not cheered. not ignored.

personality, rather she'd lived to examine the verisimilitude of hair hitler's words.

like this other misled american did...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfS19YcO0Os

I've seen / read some stuff around the "great replacement" concept lately. It's apparently a significant, if not THE significant commonality amongst people who both 1) believe the election was fraudulent and 2) would consider violence in response. The root causes of the worldview seems to stem from personal hardships, and from the perception of others getting advantages they didn't receive themselves. Makes some degree of sense to me, as over the course of one's life it could feel like you were treated unfairly while others were given a leg up.

It doesn't strike me as the sort of thing that can be productively fought against on an individual level. That such a worldview requires far more than just a motivating incident, but more like a life of personal experience, I don't personally see how to successfully shift someone away from it. Too damned ingrained. Our best bet, in my view, is actually having a proper social safety net that lifts everyone up to a viable baseline from which to pursue their life / liberty / happiness.

They aren't afraid, they're sick of indulging idiotic morons at great cost to the state and more degradation to faith in elections here over bullshit accusations that have all been retracted by every person who made them besides Trump, and that have been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked by multiple actual forensic audits....looking for bamboo on ballots to prove the entire election was rigged, this time by China, because we all know bamboo=China and nothing else, now they just need to find it and boom, Trump’s president. So idiotic and delusional.


What's happening in Arizona now is not a forensic audit, it's a purely partisan witch hunt by stop the steal creators with zero election or auditing credentials using uneducated rabid Trumpsters who aren't auditing, they're searching everywhere for anything they can exaggerate into another baseless accusation that the election was stolen by Chavez.

You're spouting more nonsense. Trump was never up 8-1, and because in person votes were counted first they gave a false impression that Trump led at one point, this was purely by design and you know it.
There was never any question that in person voting would favor Trump, Biden's followers knew the virus wasn't a hoax and voted by mail. Again, you know this.
There was also no question that mail in voting would favor Biden, that's why so many republican led states changed their rules to force the mail in count to wait until in person votes were counted in full to start counting mail in ballots....to create that false perception for one point in time early in the count to give dishonest morons like you a false reason to ask these bullshit questions.
No counts happened without witnesses or off camera. It's another lie, Bob.
No counts happened in secret.
No votes were dumped.
No witnesses were removed besides those that ignored the law and became disruptive and those that weren't actual official witnesses but just people who wanted in. Windows were covered for that reason, republicans were taking photos of poll workers faces to attack them, the legitimate republican observers who weren't removed for cause were inside those windows, not blocked by them. You know this.

More long debunked and admitted bullshit lies Bob. What little of these accusations that weren't pure misrepresentations or lies all went to court and was all tossed by usually Republican judges because it wasn't true, there's zero evidence of these made up claims. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Nunca. Absolutely squat.
You know all of this, you dishonest liar, you made the same arguments at the time and every single accusation was debunked thoroughly...You just chose to ignore every explanation and exposure of the pure lies you were fed, and now pretend they weren't answered. You're a gullible moron who bought a con man's con....and you're so ridiculous you continue to believe it long after the perpetrators have admitted it was never true or an honest accusation, and only a gullible moron could have believed them when they said it was true.

Since we're asking questions....How come Trump won’t agree to stop raping little girls? How come he’s still is terrified of his taxes, or foreign business dealings, or foreign holdings and secret bank accounts being investigated?
I think we both know why.

Since we’re indulging questions about recounts, why aren’t democratic observers allowed to closely observe this recount? Why are only Trump cultists allowed to participate? Why are ballots being counted multiple times using different criteria using no discernible rules or safeguards, actually destroying or removing some ballots in the process? Why is this happening at all after multiple Republican led recounts in this county came to the exact same results already? Why in the fuck are taxpayers paying for the umpteenth recount, this time by partisan frauds with zero election experience besides creating the big lie in the first place?
Why has it taken three weeks to get through well under 300000 votes when they knew they had three weeks to finish? Why do they now say it will take them until September to do what takes every other recount under three weeks? Why do they plan to take this circus on a national tour, heading to Georgia next to try this nonsense again, planning to keep the big lie alive through 2022?
Answers please, unlike you I want to hear answers. Sadly, I know you don't have a single one.

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

*promote this technique and one of the best podcast i've discovered in the last few months.

"The Huberman Lab Podcast discusses Neuroscience: how our brain and its connections with the organs of our body controls our perceptions, our behaviors, and our health."
Also the tools to modify things you had no idea could be modified.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2D2CMWXMOVWx7giW1n3LIg

The effort to analyze the growing influence of the media maximizes the possibilities because of all functional resources involved. The certification methodologies that help us deal with the commitment between the teams, entails a process of reform and modernization information flow. Regardless of, perception of the difficulties can lead us to consider restructuring return expected long term. I would like to emphasize that the clear definition of objectives adds value to the establishment the desired indexes.

Above all, it is essential to point out that the growing influence of the media plays an essential role in shaping the desired indexes. We realized increasingly that an increased dialogue between the different productive sectors provides a better overview technique in the recycling investment.

We realized increasingly that the fair trial of eventualities provides a better overview return expected long term.

Above all, it is essential to point out that the challenging global scenario, ensures the contribution of an important group in determining postures of the governing bodies with regard to its responsibilities. We realized increasingly that an increased dialogue between the different productive sectors provides a better overview the preferred directions towards progress.

However, we must not forget that the consensus on the need for qualification promotes leverage postures of the governing bodies with regard to its responsibilities. All these questions, properly considered, raises doubts about whether an increased dialogue between the different productive sectors hinders the appreciation of the importance of all functional resources involved. The accumulated experience shows that the fair trial of eventualities encourages standardization normative rules of conduct. We can already glimpse the way the growing influence of the media adds value to the establishment the financial and administrative requirements.

It is thought provoking and actually inspired me to look into some of the legitimate points and accurate perceptions, revisit Marx and chuckle at some of the later wild jumps and extrapolations.

Gamers would rule the world if they ever could be bothered to get up off the couch.

Also I was totally mesmerised by the story combined with the images, while it does get repetitive, would be an excellent 45 minute video if the crap could be cut out.

unfortunately it's a mix of legitimate points, paranoid points, and a lot of pretty bad advice. a muddled and dangerous blend of fairly accurate perceptions, conspiratorial thinking, and delusions of grandeur.

"Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism"

Snide and factually wrong, it's his televised support for Nazis and their secret meeting gallery and the public perception that he is a Nazi himself because he supports them and doesn't denounce them that's considered support for nazis, not his sign, not free speech.

"Shows a man holding a sign saying ""the right to openly discuss ideas must be defended", in Hackney, England. Apparently this is not an acceptable sentiment these days; I guess classical liberalism had a pretty good run, but it may be over now."

Also snide and factually wrong. It's a blatant lie that the sentiment on his sign is what they find unacceptable, it's his support for what's seen as a secret nazi/white power meeting hall camouflaged as an art gallery in a neighborhood that doesn't want it, not an open discussion but a secret meeting hall for secret alt-right meetings without openness or discussion.

Clear enough?
I'm guessing not, because you would be forced to admit your mistake, something you seem incapable of doing, but I'll surely get over it.

Edit: seems I've been capable of an excess of civil disagreement...I'm incapable of civility with liars....and funny enough you didn't argue that you didn't lie, only that you didn't know you were snide, which title and description clearly are.

Second edit: I wonder if he supported the same gallery nay secret meeting place for secret invite only meetings for terrorist jihadists, would you still bend over backwards to say all speech matters and his support doesn't equate to support for terrorists? What's the difference?

Your guy and his cronies literally quote Nazi propaganda, openly support Nazis, openly support and laud dictators while denigrating democracies and democratic process both within the US and in other countries. At the same time a concerted effort has been in effect the past years to stack the courts and public service so heavily with blindly subservient ideologues to the point where laws and the constitution often have no bearing on judicial decisions any more if they impact the president or his allies.

In short, Trump has been engaging in one of the most transparently dictatorial power grabs of the twentieth and twenty-first century.

And you're worried about a report from a news agency known for inaccurate and biased reporting that maybe his opponent might have been involved in something shady (but without any actual evidence to back up their claims)? I mean it's not like Biden personally sees that money. China gives a shitload of money to US universities in general. If you want to connect the dots there, go look at Harvard, they receive a billion dollars a year from China, and yet you'd rather trace a few million because they happened to go to a school with Biden's name on it. Great detective work, Mr. Magoo!

If Trump came out in public tomorrow with a toothbrush mustache and a Nazi armband you'd still support him, wouldn't you?

If it walks like a Nazi, quacks like a Nazi, and supports Nazis, it is a Nazi.

I hope you can fill in the blanks, @bobknight33

I hope it's just that you just don't realize what you've become and you still somehow believe you're doing "the right thing", but honestly your lack of any semblance of integrity strains that perception. The alternatives, that you're intelligent and fully aware of what you're doing, or you're a propagandist for a foreign power who is merely acting in support of his own nation's goals are the less kind (but sadly more likely) interpretations.

1) Definitely - but without a market improvements fall flat and dont stick. Ancient people had a lot of good ideas but overall progress was really slow and retrograded often until.. well until capitalism became a thing. Abolishing serfdom, general civil rights, separation of church from state and the fall of absolutism made the Iphone possible.

2) No, that is my point. People "discover" things all the time, some of these things are deemed useful by the general public and capitalism provides the tools to finance production and distribution (the profit part is optional - it is entirely legal to sell your invention for any price or indeed give it away for free).

So to get to the original point capitalism did not discover or design the Iphone but it certainly MADE the Iphone.

3) Not impossible but incredibly slow. Generations lived out their entire lives without perceptible changes in their environments prior to the onslaught of capitalism and the industrial revolution. The advent of science from the renaissance onwards was OK, but only once factories and transport infrastructure became a thing did living conditions start to change for everyone.

A big problem with free markets is that they are never really "free". A theoretical free market implies too many things that dont ever happen in real life, like everyone having all relevant information and being able to make a good decision. People just dont do that IRL.

Also not everything can be solved by free markets because you cant just let your neighbors die poor because the market says they deserve it. However the Iphone is really not something the state should subsidize. I understand that it paid for some of the technology that went into designing it. But true socialism would have to make sure everyone could afford one, and would design a cheap bad phone to fit the need.