Can We Call Trump a Killer?

Trump solved a problem inherited from Obama, the healthcare genius. Before Trump, there was no capability to test on the scale that Trump delivered. That's why Obama infected 60.8 million Americans single handedly with swine flu. If H1N1 had been a virus like SARS, MERS or COVID-19, Obama would have wiped out the whole population of the US.

 

Looks like it's time to pay the looney left to be quite and remain indoors again Personally I think the $1200 was money well spent, it bought us less leftist social interaction and covering their mugs and muffling their pie holes with a mask was priceless in my book

 

Unequivocally, yes. Coming up with an exact number is virtually impossible but it definitely exceeds 20K.

 

So it is okay that he continuously attacks the first amendment, so long as he fails? Cool, lower you standards that much if you want to. I won't.

 

I see historical revisionism is now in high-gear among the fringe right. Back here in reality, we had much more widespread testing capabilities for H1N1 much more quickly. But don't let a silly thing like truth get in the way.

 

And yet you don't even see the irony in your own statement.

 

What irony?

 

Accusing others of wearing out the term with nonsensical comparisons while engaging in the same activity: wearing out the term with nonsensical comparisons. I agree that the left goes way too far when they compare Trump to Hitler, it is just that you are guilty of the exact same thing. Would it kill either of you to just treat this part of history with a modicum of respect?

 

Call Trump a "Killer"?

Sure you can.

It is well within the Established Rules at PF:

"Attacks against public officials, political figures, celebrities, etc, are allowed. .."

And, of course, I agree with your premise.

Trump's FAILURE to act earlier COST Lives...

^That is Universally Accepted and Utterly Inarguable...

 

I am treating it with respect because unlike the masses in the left I have a good understanding of it.

When the left stops condoning groups like antifa And others from acting like the Brownshirts did in the 1930s I’ll stop using the term Nazi. But as they are currently acting the part they will get the name attached.

How far from lawlessly pulling down statues is public book burning? Not far....

 

You really need to buy a dictionary. You apparently have no ideal what those last few words mean.

Get a chance to watch the video of the protest you said never happen yet? Those people actors were they?

 

It is not I who invoked Godwins law....it is lefties.

 

No, you really, really aren't. Please do more homework and learn more about what the Nazis were actually like. Pulling down statues is bad, but it is still nonsense to call people "Nazis" for doing it. I'd ask you to show some respect for those who died under actual authoritarian monsters rather than using them as a political football to poke fun at your political rivals. You are, of course, free to refuse to do so.

 

Both sides have repeatedly done it, as this thread proves.

 

I used the term Brownshirts who is support of the Nazi party in the 1930s did things like removing public symbols they disagreed with and made public speech they disagreed with more difficult by physically showing up to stop it. Thus the term Nazi applies to them.

Both of which groups like antifa have done and continue to do today.

Calling out such behavior is what helps ensure it will not continue without resistance. It does no ill service to those who died under it previously to try and prevent that from occurring again.

Sounds like you are the one who needs to do a bit of research on the Nazi party.

 

Not seeing the drive-up testing here:
To test for swine flu, your doctor runs a swab -- a bigger version of the ones in your bathroom -- up the inside of your nose around the back of your throat. But the test isn’t as common or widespread as those for regular flu. So the only people who really need to be tested are those in the hospital or those at high risk for life-threatening problems from swine flu

https://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/flu-guide/h1n1-flu-virus-swine-flu#2-4

Seems to me, the tests with huge swab up your nose til you choke on it is where COVID-19 testing began. In 2009, they did flu tests but avoided h1n1 testing unless the strain of flu absolutely had to be known.

Today, there are drive up test sites and people being tested without leaving their cars.

 

Come on now show some imagination.

 

That's what Trump said about the respirators. And the states did take over. And then Trump tried to claim success as if it were his.

I don't think there could be any possible way in which a President* could mishandle a crisis in a worse way than this one.... even if they tried.

"Hey! But I cancelled flights from China!".... What a baboon!

 

You really really really don't understand the purpose of testing?

Huh.... Waddaya know...

Should be no surprise, though.

 

Your computer is noisy? You'd better get it fixed.

 

Where would you like to put those 43,000 elderly patients?

 

The president has a responsibility to be leader in the midst of a pandemic, and work with all federal agencies to help the states.

When the president says "less testing, please" he is not being a leader--he, in fact, is being derelict in his duty.

You're just a Trump apologist.

 

The part I did comment on rendered moot the rest of your comment, either that or the rest of your comment was unimportant, but will say this, FYI, asking the rationers of tests 'will they accept more money' you seem to be reducing the whole thing to some kind if ebay transactional mentality, and, as such, not only are you being ridiculous, you are being irrelevant, because whatever I do is anecdotal to the greater issue of Trump's dereliction of duty, the salient fact of which you are ignoring by acting as an apologist.

 

Have you ever heard of the concept, "rhetorical question"?

Apparently not. See, a rhetorical question is not really a question, it's a statement in question form. Therefore, I wasn't asking for your permission.

Now, if you want to rebut the premise, feel free to do so. After all, this IS a debate forum.

 

Interesting legal argument, but, unfortunately, it's without merit.

If you really are curious, criticism is protected speech under the first amendment.