So DOJ has no way to investigate? The various agencies IGs? Or hear me out here, he could let the various law enforcement and oversight arms of these agencies do their jobs.
This seems to be a flaw in our system... maybe there is some international group that could do our investigations for us when our partisanship makes it impossible for us to do these things for ourselves?
That’s cute and all but if a democrat wins the presidency the shouldn’t turn a blind eye to the shit this administration did at the border in the hopes of moving forward.
The subset of Bros, vapesters, and other assorted characters that think electing Biden and putting the Exec branch in Democratic control are wins for Republicans are just embarrassing themselves. But I would agree there are better options than Biden.
That is an amazing story. The question I have is what law does this violate...extortion, campaign finance?
I’m not a millennial, vaper, bros or whatever right wing moniker you want to throw out. Your finger wagging bullshit is old and tired.
Because they have in the past, the democrats failed everyone that voted for them in 2008 and Biden was at the forefront of all of that, he’s been at the forefront of all the bullshit going back to Reagan.
This podcast episode is fucking infuriating. Cliffs - Pelosi is putting politics over what's best for the country. Sound familiar to anyone? Also she's absolutely not changing her mind and Dems are too spineless to challenge her. https://www.google.com/podcasts?fee...hYzhmNjItYzhkYS0xMWU4LWFhZGYtMTMzNWM4NzFhNGQx
This is not the same as the Missouri law. It's medical malpractice for a doctor to start any number of treatments/tests on a woman of reproductive age without first ordering a pregnancy test. That's for the benefit of the potential child and the mother. It's also for the legal protection of the Doctor. It's not just that your daughter may be raped. It's that she's a teenager and teenagers (spoiler alert) have been known to make some bad choices without thinking things through. You have the right to accept the treatment or reject it. The treatment isn't accutane - it's accutane + birth control.
Also, if you're using "bae" in the "before anyone else" sense, you are probably using it correctly when talking about your preferred primary candidate.
You are just repeating yourself and not explaining why my position is not valid as it relates to a womans control over decisions for her body. Really simple...accutane is a drug given to clear up acne that otherwise can't be treated. Birth control has nothing to do with that treatment outcome. In the abortion situation we discuss the idea that a woman shouldn't be mandated to do something to her body that is external to her choice of the abortion. She has a right to decide to have an abortion. Unless you were telling me that the birth control is part of the treatment to help with the outcome of why the treatment is being given, it is clear to me that it is being given for one reason. We can't trust that she won't get pregnant, and we can't trust that she won't have an abortion or be OK with the outcome if she doesn't. All things that I don't think the government/medical professionals should have a say over. We also need to stop with the 14 year old's have sex, blah blah blah. Sure they do, but most don't and most people know their children and can certainly have conversations with them about why it is important that if they do they can't in this situation. Again, this is close to home for me, because birth control is not 100% safe. There are side effects, so giving a kid side effects that they don't need in the very unlikely event that they get raped or have sex is silly and unnecessary to me, especially when you have a right to abort in the unlikely event that it happened. This is a control issue, period. Women can't be trusted.
It is a control issue. You want to control how the doctor cares for his patient. You don't have that right.
that article is good because it cites in the body all the relevant research on the issue. so if they won't read it and click on the studies you can pull the direct studies. can't make them read though. heres other examples https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/how-finland-solved-homelessness/ (study cites a savings of ~9600euros for doing this vs the cost of on the street homelessness to the community) here's an interesting model of using tiny homes (it also cites the broad studies in the body) https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/4/9/doing-the-math-on-housing-the-homeless here's the reverse, Utah was a model of solving it when they started doing this, but then they stopped funding it and you can imagine what happened next https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...tah-struggles-with-homelessness-idUSKCN1P41EQ
LOL, "his" patient. Thanks! By today's rules I get it. I'm saying today's rules need to be looked at, because women should have a choice to decline something medically unnecessary for their treatment.
The assholes are wrong, I volunteered at the Charlotte apartments that were built for the chronically homeless. UNCC did a study that showed how much money it would actually save, and a non-profit raised a bunch of money to actually build the housing and prove out the study. So many of the people there needed just basic services, like learning how to fill out forms to get an ID, help applying for jobs, getting veteran services. https://www.urbanministrycenter.org/helping-the-homeless/ways-we-help/housing-for-homeless/
not many things irritate me more than people who think doctors should be like a contractor for your house, just give me what I want. I'm chalking most this up to an emotional response to the thought of your daughter having sex though.
Which of you is better trained to determine the medical necessity of literally anything? You or the doctor?
my endless curiosity has its benefits but I also understand most people reject the best solution because they don't like it, largely due to austerity and boot straps brain washing. they'd rather punish poor people than actually help them even if the latter costs less.
Many doctors don't support giving their patients medically unecessary drugs to treat other ailments. There is a lot of literature on dermatologists who are very much opposed to this protocol. Your comments are ridiculous and presumptuous because that wouldn't bother me. I'm comfortable enough as a man to accept that girls can have sex and there is nothing wrong with it. No doubt emotion plays into this but it is because of what my wife just went through with breast cancer and not because of the chance that my daughter may have sex. That is inevitable and silly. Read up a bit on the evolution of informed consent on this issue below. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/accutane-and-evolution-warning/2006-08
Many doctors don't believe this is medically necessary, including the doctor that is treating my daughter. I'm pretty certain it's not open for debate whether birth control, albeit having to take two forms of it at a time is medically necessary to use accutane. People were taking it for years that way. Birth defects and lawsuits are what predicated the change.
Counterpoint: they should be and the doctors who wouldn't give me testosterone are jealous of my gains.
Apparently the deal stalled over where the money from taxes was being spent. Ideally it should go to communities of color who have been hurt by previous laws, IMO. They are still working on expunging convictions, which is obviously good on one hand, but so silly considering they could have a bill that could do both and bring in tax revenues to help these communities.
A lot of this argument stemmed from the fact that these people think "charities and non-profits" are the solution (which they can certainly help) but we really need to raise taxes to properly allocate money to build these kinds of housing solutions (which is ultimately cheaper than the police picking them up every month and throwing them in a cell for 24 hours). Awesome, again charities and non-profits are unfortunately the ones often tasked with trying to tackle this problem the correct way. I'm losing my mind too because I'm seeing a bunch of arguments where "this is a local Issue" instead of just a basic fucking national issue of housing being unaffordable, scarce, and addiction being addiction anywhere you live. We really need a national and federal solution to really make a dent in our growing homeless problem.
Ridiculous, but as an aside I am potentially more afraid of the damage that Trump Jr can do once he decides to run.
No one is requiring your daughter to take Accutane. It’s just a scientifically proven protocol to avoid adverse outcomes. Not taking Accutane is a legitimate option. Physicians can lose licenses for practicing sub standard and irresponsible medicine, which prescribing Accutane and not following protocol would be an example of. If your daughter is going to get a CT scan and there is any chance she could be pregnant, she will be asked to take a pregnancy test as well as patients have absolutely sued and won cases of radiation exposure in unborn children. Hospitals and clinicians won’t take unnecessary risks, and peeing in a cup in a bathroom privately is absolutely not the same level of injustice as being forced to undergo a pelvic exam, which adds no medical benefit. Correct. However, I use again the case of narcotics. Millions of people use narcotics without issue, however some abuse prescription medications and mix with other substances and increase risk for overdoses, hospitalizations and death. The physician gives a pain contract that says, you can only take this medication and not any other controlled substance since I don’t want you having unnecessary risks/side effects/complications. That patient then doesn’t follow the protocol/plan and uses Xanax from a different provider, or using another opioid either recreationally or prescribed from another provider. If the provider doesn’t screen for other drugs of abuse or continues to willfully prescribe medications while knowing the risks this patient is putting themselves in they can and have been sued/held responsible for their practice behavior when that patient ends up in the ICU/dead. [/quote] I think even the staunchest pro-choice person has the goal of reducing the number of abortions needed in this country. I don’t think there’s many “pro-abortion” posters. People would rather see free universal contraception available pre-pregnancy and options for emergency contraception afterward. Having “choice” doesn’t mean we should encourage unwanted /unintended pregnancies, ESPECIALLY when on medications that would deform fetuses, regardless of whether abortion would be the next choice or not. Again, this isn’t so much about abortion/choice/women’s reproductive rights as it is about taking a dangerous medication with significant health implications and mandating a protocol to eliminate adverse patient outcomes, promote patient safety, and obviously prevent litigation.
office of any type, but especially President. One thing we know is the electorate is capable of making very poor decisions.
from Huffpost GOP Strategist Urges Democrats To Tackle Trump’s ‘Tidal Wave Of BS’ Immediately Rick Wilson warned how Trump “can lie with a speed and faculty that no one else has ever had.” Veteran GOP strategist Rick Wilson on Tuesday pointed out one of the biggest problems Democrats must face up to “very quickly” during the 2020 election — President Donald Trump’s ability to lie, and lie rapidly. Spoiler Wilson warned on MSNBC’s “The 11th Hour with Brian Williams” that Trump will “spout a torrance, a tidal wave of BS in this campaign and they’re gonna try to play catch up with it every day and they’re not going to be able to because he can lie with a speed and faculty that no one else has ever had.” The Florida based political consultant had earlier explained how Trump could “say anything and do anything and there’s no boundary he can cross” that loses the votes of his hard-core supporters, such as the members of his base who attended his reelection campaign launch Tuesday in Orlando. “The ones that were committed enough to go and show up in that room tonight, they live in a completely separate political sphere now,” said Wilson, who previously worked on political campaigns for former President George H.W. Bush and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. “It is hermetic,” he added. “They live inside Donald Trump’s definitions of reality. He can tell them ‘the wall is 3,000 feet long and made of solid gold and has alligator moats’ and they’ll say ‘Of course it does.’” “They believe what he tells them, and it doesn’t matter.” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker column reported last week that, as of June 7, Trump had made 10,796 false or misleading claims in office since his inauguration in January 2017. two reddit comments that say it better than I concerning the issue Spoiler FookYu315 New York Score hidden · 2 hours ago · edited 2 hours ago He's wrong. The reason Trump tells so many lies is because it's simply not possible to respond to them all. In the time it takes you to counter one of his lies he's already thrown out twenty others. He'll bait you with a lie he doesn't even care about defending and just drop the argument after you've been distracted long enough. Jim: "No, Bob, my dog didn't shit on your lawn. I didn't even walk him today!" Bob fucking explodes and Jim goes to make a sandwich, grab one of Bob's beers, bang his wife, steal his lawnmower.... Bob: ".....and that's how I know it was your dog!" Jim: "You know what, maybe it was. Whatever. Let's stop arguing." Bob: "That's my beer!" Jim: "What? I bought this yesterday....." level 2 Yeeaaaarrrgh Tennessee Score hidden · 1 hour ago Bingo. The Florida based political consultant had earlier explained how Trump could “say anything and do anything and there’s no boundary he can cross” that loses the votes of his hard-core supporters, such as the members of his base who attended his reelection campaign launch Tuesday in Orlando. “The ones that were committed enough to go and show up in that room tonight, they live in a completely separate political sphere now,” said Wilson, who previously worked on political campaigns for former President George H.W. Bush and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. And therein lies the dilemma. Do you waste time, money and resources fighting disinformation, or stick to the facts? If you fight idiocy, you're playing Trumps game on his field. If you don't fight idiocy, you seem as though the idiocy has legitimacy. Since, to me, it appears to be an intellectual exercise of stalemating, I'd stick to my guns and not worry about what Trump says.