Texas (again)

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

I see.  So running from their responsibilities, not fighting for what they believe in is what their constituents want?  Well now ain’t that a shame.  How would your clients feel if you said “I don’t agree with this so instead of fight for you I’ll cut and run”?   You’d be out of business real quick.  I want leadership that will fight for what they believe in.  You can have children. 
 

Why does this not surprise me coming from you. 

 

If only he could run away from his 3rd chair during verdicts so they can't charge his clients...

[SectionC3]

10 hours ago, Doc said:

 

If only he could run away from his 3rd chair during verdicts so they can't charge his clients...

 

Speaking of court, maybe you should get going on those right to try cases for HCQ.  They could bring you in as an expert, and you can tell the world how you munch on HCQ as a prophylactic.  Maybe some of the unvaccinated dying in the south right now can share a gnaw with you before they expire.  It would be pretty cool.  You could lead from the front on the HCQ hoax, and they could have a somewhat tasty treat before they free up an ICU bed for someone more deserving.  It's a win-win. 

[Westside]

14 hours ago, BillStime said:

Dereliction of duty

 

 

Does that make you feel happy inside?

[Chef Jim]

14 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Or they might be acting in accordance with the will of their constituents.  Either one.  In the meantime, this is why you're Chef Jim Crow.  Enjoy your day.  Or not.  Either way is fine with me, 

So seeing you did such a poor job of pointing out what made the GA Bill Jim Crow on steroids we will give you the chance to redeem yourself. Please point out what parts of THIS Bill makes it Jim Crow?  To be fair I’ll drop the “on steroids” part for this Bill…..for now. 

[SectionC3]

34 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

So seeing you did such a poor job of pointing out what made the GA Bill Jim Crow on steroids we will give you the chance to redeem yourself. Please point out what parts of THIS Bill makes it Jim Crow?  To be fair I’ll drop the “on steroids” part for this Bill…..for now. 

 

Good to see you're coming around.  Now, though we differ as to the quality of the response, you acknowledge--despite your hoaxy protestations to the contrary--that I provided indicia of the crowy nature of the Georgia bill that previously was the subject of frequent discussion on this medium.  Thank you for acknowledging that fact.  Have a nice day, Chef Jim Crow. 

[Doc]

2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Speaking of court, maybe you should get going on those right to try cases for HCQ.  They could bring you in as an expert, and you can tell the world how you munch on HCQ as a prophylactic.  Maybe some of the unvaccinated dying in the south right now can share a gnaw with you before they expire.  It would be pretty cool.  You could lead from the front on the HCQ hoax, and they could have a somewhat tasty treat before they free up an ICU bed for someone more deserving.  It's a win-win. 

 

The best part about responding to your drivel is knowing you'll bring up HCQ, like it bothers me/is a win for you.  It only serves to remind everyone what the true hoax was and the complicity of the Dems in the deaths of thousands.  Not to mention their skepticism over the vaccine when they thought Trump would remain President.  Meanwhile Joey's proving a Dem wouldn't have handled the pandemic any better, if not worse considering last year we had no treatments, much less a vaccine.  But keep bringing up HCQ.  Please.

 

Edited August 23, 2021 by Doc

[SectionC3]

9 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

The best part about responding to your drivel is knowing you'll bring up HCQ, like it bothers/is a win for you.  It only serves to remind everyone what the true hoax was and the complicity of the Dems in the deaths of thousands.  Meanwhile Joey's proving a Dem wouldn't have handled the pandemic any better, if not worse considering last year we had no treatments, much less a vaccine.  But keep bringing up HCQ.  Please.

 

And yet you respond with indignation every time.  Why?  Because you got snookered.  Hook, line, and sinker.  And those stupid views contributed to the loss of life.  Have a nice day, “Doc.”

[Doc]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

And yet you respond with indignation every time.  Why?  Because you got snookered.  Hook, line, and sinker.  And those stupid views contributed to the loss of life.  Have a nice day, “Doc.”

 

The only indignation is over you and your ilk lying about a safe and effective medicine that could have prevented hundreds of thousands of people from getting seriously ill or dying.  All because you wanted someone out of office who triggered you (and obviously still does).  Compounded by installing a couple idiots, one of whom is going senile and the other unfit to even lead a Brownie troop.

[Doc]

And as I said before, if I had been "duped" (and again, I wasn't), it was in the interest of saving lives.  You OTOH were (actually) duped into "saving" people from a safe drug.

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

 

The only indignation is over you and your ilk lying about a safe and effective medicine that could have prevented hundreds of thousands of people from getting seriously ill or dying.  All because you wanted someone out of office who triggered you (and obviously still does).  Compounded by installing a couple idiots, one of whom is going senile and the other unfit to even lead a Brownie troop.

Hoax.  There's a difference between the drug being safe, and the drug being used as a primary course of treatment for COVID.  It is safe.  It's also ineffective with respect to COVID.  You, intentionally or otherwise, keep on confusing safety with utility in this context. Then again, I shouldn't be surprised, because you, "Doc," were duped in the first place on a question of medicine by a real estate developer.  So that's where we're at.  

[Tenhigh]

7 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Speaking of court, maybe you should get going on those right to try cases for HCQ.  They could bring you in as an expert, and you can tell the world how you munch on HCQ as a prophylactic.  Maybe some of the unvaccinated dying in the south right now can share a gnaw with you before they expire.  It would be pretty cool.  You could lead from the front on the HCQ hoax, and they could have a somewhat tasty treat before they free up an ICU bed for someone more deserving.  It's a win-win. 

 

5 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

And yet you respond with indignation every time.  Why?  Because you got snookered.  Hook, line, and sinker.  And those stupid views contributed to the loss of life.  Have a nice day, “Doc.”

 

2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Hoax.  There's a difference between the drug being safe, and the drug being used as a primary course of treatment for COVID.  It is safe.  It's also ineffective with respect to COVID.  You, intentionally or otherwise, keep on confusing safety with utility in this context. Then again, I shouldn't be surprised, because you, "Doc," were duped in the first place on a question of medicine by a real estate developer.  So that's where we're at.  

I'm confused as to what your point is here.  Are you upset that some folks hoped that HCQ could help alleviate COVID symptoms?    

[SoCal Deek]

13 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

 

 

I'm confused as to what your point is here.  Are you upset that some folks hoped that HCQ could help alleviate COVID symptoms?    

He has no point. Just likes bashing people. Classic 

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Hoax.  There's a difference between the drug being safe, and the drug being used as a primary course of treatment for COVID.  It is safe.  It's also ineffective with respect to COVID.  You, intentionally or otherwise, keep on confusing safety with utility in this context. Then again, I shouldn't be surprised, because you, "Doc," were duped in the first place on a question of medicine by a real estate developer.  So that's where we're at.  

 

OK, great.  Now we're getting somewhere (although it appears I have to repeat my lecture every few months, so here goes...)

 

So then you have no choice but to agree that your masters lied, and went out of their way to lie, about it being unsafe, right?  Why do you think that was?  You know the answer, so you move onto...

 

How did your masters know it wouldn't/didn't work when Trump first mentioned it?  There were no (and we couldn't wait for) formal studies at the time, and people from all over the world and even Dems right here at home (i.e. non-Trump supporters) were saying that it worked.  Again, you know the answer, but you still parrot the "it came from a real estate developer" line (as if he first came up with it), which is the same lame excuse used to dismiss the now-widely accepted lab leak theory .

 

So then you'll point to the "studies" that were done, which I told you were garbage because they didn't at least study it with zinc, the real star of the show, and say "see it doesn't work."  Again, ask yourself why they did that?  And again, you know the answer.  But you deflect and say "well we need to then add bleach, and pixy dust..."

 

Then when presented with a study that was done properly (over a year too late to help anything), you conveniently ignore it.  This time I'll ask why?  But like you with the above questions, I know the answer.

 

Like I said, keep bringing it up if you wish, because it's only a win for me.  Unfortunately, it was a loss for a lot of other people.

 

[Chef Jim]

8 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Good to see you're coming around.  Now, though we differ as to the quality of the response, you acknowledge--despite your hoaxy protestations to the contrary--that I provided indicia of the crowy nature of the Georgia bill that previously was the subject of frequent discussion on this medium.  Thank you for acknowledging that fact.  Have a nice day, Chef Jim Crow. 

 

That's cool.  You relish in your participation trophy while you went 0-4 with 4 strikeouts on 12 pitches.  You must be a Bills fan. 

 

And crowy nature?   Crowy NATURE??  You called it Jim Crow on Steroids!!   Are you now walking that back now?  Hmmmm why might that be?  

 

Alright!  Now that we have that ***** out of the way now please point out what parts of the TX Bill is Jim Crow.  

 

[SectionC3]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

 

OK, great.  Now we're getting somewhere (although it appears I have to repeat my lecture every few months, so here goes...)

 

So then you have no choice but to agree that your masters lied, and went out of their way to lie, about it being unsafe, right?  Why do you think that was?  You know the answer, so you move onto...

 

How did your masters know it wouldn't/didn't work when Trump first mentioned it?  There were no (and we couldn't wait for) formal studies at the time, and people from all over the world and even Dems right here at home (i.e. non-Trump supporters) were saying that it worked.  Again, you know the answer, but you still parrot the "it came from a real estate developer" line (as if he first came up with it), which is the same lame excuse used to dismiss the now-widely accepted lab leak theory .

 

So then you'll point to the "studies" that were done, which I told you were garbage because they didn't at least study it with zinc, the real star of the show, and say "see it doesn't work."  Again, ask yourself why they did that?  And again, you know the answer.  But you deflect and say "well we need to then add bleach, and pixy dust..."

 

Then when presented with a study that was done properly (over a year too late to help anything), you conveniently ignore it.  This time I'll ask why?  But like you with the above questions, I know the answer.

 

Like I said, keep bringing it up if you wish, because it's only a win for me.  Unfortunately, it was a loss for a lot of other people.

 

Hoax.  As usual.  Trump got way out in front of his skis in HCQ, and the dopes who followed him decided, among other things, it was high time to buy 30 million doses of it.  (Call your friends in Oklahoma.). People like you clung to the story that it was an effective treatment for COVID.  Yet, to date, it hasn’t been approved for that use by the FDA.  

Bottom line: HCQ is trash as a treatment for COVID.  If it’s not, then you’re derelict in not educating the world about your magic bullet.  But you won’t go out on that limb, because you will be laughed at.  And you know it.  Hopkins knocked your nonsense about zinc and a Zpac and magic loogies down months ago.  Enjoy, hoax man. 
 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/newsroom/news-releases/covid-19-story-tip-hydroxychloroquine-not-recommended-for-treatment-of-covid-19

 

 

Edited August 24, 2021 by SectionC3

[Doc]

52 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Hoax.  As usual.  Trump got way out in front of his skis in HCQ, and the dopes who followed him decided, among other things, it was high time to buy 30 million doses of it.  (Call your friends in Oklahoma.). People like you clung to the story that it was an effective treatment for COVID.  Yet, to date, it hasn’t been approved for that use by the FDA.  

Bottom line: HCQ is trash as a treatment for COVID.  If it’s not, then you’re derelict in not educating the world about your magic bullet.  But you won’t go out on that limb, because you will be laughed at.  And you know it.  Hopkins knocked your nonsense about zinc and a Zpac and magic loogies down months ago.  Enjoy, hoax man. 
 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/newsroom/news-releases/covid-19-story-tip-hydroxychloroquine-not-recommended-for-treatment-of-covid-19

 

Stellar research, Gibbons.  One question: what year are we in presently?  I guess 2nd chair isn't coming anytime soon. 

 

As for Hopkins, I was ready to bag on them and put them in The Lancet category, but they were just going off of the poorly-done studies that were available a year ago (it's 2021 now; you're welcome).

 

And no one ever claimed it was a magic bullet.  Nice feint.  Not that we have anything close to a magic bullet still, over a year-and-a-half later.

[SectionC3]

On 8/23/2021 at 10:32 PM, Doc said:

 

Stellar research, Gibbons.  One question: what year are we in presently?  I guess 2nd chair isn't coming anytime soon. 

 

As for Hopkins, I was ready to bag on them and put them in The Lancet category, but they were just going off of the poorly-done studies that were available a year ago (it's 2021 now; you're welcome).

 

And no one ever claimed it was a magic bullet.  Nice feint.  Not that we have anything close to a magic bullet still, over a year-and-a-half later.

Says the guy who takes “just enough” HCQ “to keep [himself] safe.”    You’re the one who calls yourself “Doc.”  So get out there and attempt to prove your garbage point about this garbage treatment for COVID.  The unvaccinated in the South deserve no less. Maybe you can save a life! 

[Chef Jim]

3 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Says the guy who takes “just enough” HCQ “to keep [himself] safe.”    You’re the one who calls yourself “Doc.”  So get out there and attempt to prove your garbage point about this garbage treatment for COVID.  The unvaccinated in the South deserve no less. Maybe you can save a life! 

Man you’re a one trick pony aren’t you. 

[Doc]

9 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Man you’re a one trick pony aren’t you. 

 

Yup.  He thinks it bothers me.  Meanwhile his "research" says all that needs to be said.

[BillStime]

Compassion and leadership just oozes out of the lone star state