Thursday, September 10, 2020

predisent Dotard Lied, Tens Of Thousands Died (Woodward Audio Tape Proof)

For a new book that will be released shortly Bob Woodward (with permission) taped our low-IQ predisent admitting to knowing how deadly coronavirus was back in February, yet lying about it to the public. He says so people wouldn't panic. Even though the greater threat (and what has been killing people) has been the public not taking the virus seriously.

The Sturgis motorcycle rally being a prime example of idiots not taking the treat seriously. According to The Hill this was a superspreader event that "led to an estimated $12.2 billion in public health costs" and that "266,000 cases [have been] tied to the event".

As per the video above "the only panic the president was concerned about tamping down was panic in the stock market" (Michelle Goldberg of the NYT). Dotard's inaction means thousands of people died that wouldn't have died had Dotard sounded the alarm and mobilized the country to fight the virus. Doctor Zeke Emanuel says "to lie repeatedly to the public about wearing masks and social distancing -- having a rally like he did in North Carolina... he really has got a lot of blood on his hands".

Meanwhile fools like the pro-Dotard blogger Minus FJ continue to believe that "the flu is MUCH deadlier". Even though (in the Woodward audio) Dotard says "it's also more deadly than... even your strenuous flus".

:P

Post authored by the anti-Trump Leftist Bastard Dervish Sanders. WYM-171.

20 comments:

  1. More Fake News Derv.

    Or it doesn't matter.

    Or Trump was duped or somehow tricked into sharing the truth.

    Or it really is nothing since Americans already knew this was bad.

    In any event, his followers will be working hard to minimize this and come up with clever video/You Tube links rather than deal with his actual words.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If not for the massive amount of cheating and voter stupidity I would be expecting a Biden landslide. Worst president ever!

      Delete
  2. Worse than Buchanan or Jackson 2 guys who while holding views similar to Trump, actually put more federal weight behind them than Trump?

    I mean it's still early and history will not be kind, but rarely do guys make the Numero Uno spot in their first year of eligibility.

    I have noticed a lot of right leaning blogger types simply avoiding the latest Trump kerfuffle.

    Since we have him on tape, maybe it's a little harder to deny the obvious. That's what eventually got Nixon. And that pesky 18 minutes of missing conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. -FJ... clever video link. Do you support the MAGA Boys view that you don't need guns to have power?

    Apart from that, I'm struggling to understand why you would link to a guy who believes lying and deception are sins and yet somehow supports a lying deceptive president.

    Confusing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hell, I'd link to you if you ever had anything good or funny to say.

      Delete
    2. btw - I can also tolerate people with opinions i disagree with. Ideological purity is your hang-up, not mine. As "Civil Disobedience" Thoreau's good friend RW Emerson once said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of a small mind".

      Delete
    3. btw2 - Have you ever read Plato's "The Statesman" on a "good marriage"?

      STRANGER: The rest of the citizens, out of whom, if they have education, something noble may be made, and who are capable of being united by the statesman, the kingly art blends and weaves together; taking on the one hand those whose natures tend rather to courage, which is the stronger element and may be regarded as the warp, and on the other hand those which incline to order and gentleness, and which are represented in the figure as spun thick and soft, after the manner of the woof—these, which are naturally opposed, she seeks to bind and weave together in the following manner:

      YOUNG SOCRATES: In what manner?

      STRANGER: First of all, she takes the eternal element of the soul and binds it with a divine cord, to which it is akin, and then the animal nature, and binds that with human cords.

      YOUNG SOCRATES: I do not understand what you mean.

      STRANGER: The meaning is, that the opinion about the honourable and the just and good and their opposites, which is true and confirmed by reason, is a divine principle, and when implanted in the soul, is implanted, as I maintain, in a nature of heavenly birth.

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Yes; what else should it be?

      STRANGER: Only the Statesman and the good legislator, having the inspiration of the royal muse, can implant this opinion, and he, only in the rightly educated, whom we were just now describing.

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Likely enough.

      STRANGER: But him who cannot, we will not designate by any of the names which are the subject of the present enquiry.

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Very right.

      STRANGER: The courageous soul when attaining this truth becomes civilized, and rendered more capable of partaking of justice; but when not partaking, is inclined to brutality. Is not that true?

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Certainly.

      STRANGER: And again, the peaceful and orderly nature, if sharing in these opinions, becomes temperate and wise, as far as this may be in a State, but if not, deservedly obtains the ignominious name of silliness.

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Quite true.

      STRANGER: Can we say that such a connexion as this will lastingly unite the evil with one another or with the good, or that any science would seriously think of using a bond of this kind to join such materials?

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Impossible.

      STRANGER: But in those who were originally of a noble nature, and who have been nurtured in noble ways, and in those only, may we not say that union is implanted by law, and that this is the medicine which art prescribes for them, and of all the bonds which unite the dissimilar and contrary parts of virtue is not this, as I was saying, the divinest?

      YOUNG SOCRATES: Very true.

      STRANGER: Where this divine bond exists there is no difficulty in imagining, or when you have imagined, in creating the other bonds, which are human only.

      YOUNG SOCRATES: How is that, and what bonds do you mean?

      Delete
    4. BS. To you purity is EVERYTHING. As you would expect from a White Supremacist. Purity is NOT my hangup. Explaining why I'm voting for Joe Biden even though my preferred candidate (Bernie Sanders) isn't the Democratic nominee. While you have repeatedly stated that you didn't vote for past republican nominees (because they were't racist enough).

      Delete
    5. Lol! The parenthesis gave your whole game away, Dervy. :)

      And who knew that I'd find Ralph Nader more racist than Dubya in 2000? The racist choice would have been the Gore family.

      Delete
    6. And -FJ... how do you define good?

      Delete
    7. Like father like son = Fred and Dotard. Both racists :P

      Delete
    8. btw, WTF does your video link have to do with the topic or ANYTHING being discussed? Nothing. Just wanted to remind us of your hate with your "beta" bullshit I guess.

      Delete
    9. Nope. The topic of the thread was "Trump" and your commentary display's a hatred of him is akin to a 'betas' hatred (in other words -self-reflective to the sublime object).

      Delete
    10. Your commentary also corresponds with an ideological form known as 'totalitarian laughter' of which my response holds its' mirror.

      Delete
    11. That Dotard is killing so many of us isn't anything to laugh at. Except for you. Even though (in reality) the joke is on you. Sad.

      fyi, Dotard is an "alpha male" because of his daddy and Putin's money. He's actually a loser. Bigly :P

      Delete
  4. From the Jowett summary of Plato's "Philebus". The cup is ready, waiting to be mingled, and here are two fountains, one of honey, the other of pure water, out of which to make the fairest possible mixture. There are pure and impure pleasures—pure and impure sciences. Let us consider the sections of each which have the most of purity and truth; to admit them all indiscriminately would be dangerous. First we will take the pure sciences; but shall we mingle the impure—the art which uses the false rule and the false measure? That we must, if we are any of us to find our way home; man cannot live upon pure mathematics alone. And must I include music, which is admitted to be guess-work? 'Yes, you must, if human life is to have any humanity.' Well, then, I will open the door and let them all in; they shall mingle in an Homeric 'meeting of the waters.' And now we turn to the pleasures; shall I admit them? 'Admit first of all the pure pleasures; secondly, the necessary.' And what shall we say about the rest? First, ask the pleasures—they will be too happy to dwell with wisdom. Secondly, ask the arts and sciences—they reply that the excesses of intemperance are the ruin of them; and that they would rather only have the pleasures of health and temperance, which are the handmaidens of virtue. But still we want truth? That is now added; and so the argument is complete, and may be compared to an incorporeal law, which is to hold fair rule over a living body. And now we are at the vestibule of the good, in which there are three chief elements—truth, symmetry, and beauty. These will be the criterion of the comparative claims of pleasure and wisdom.
    Which has the greater share of truth? Surely wisdom; for pleasure is the veriest impostor in the world, and the perjuries of lovers have passed into a proverb.
    Which of symmetry? Wisdom again; for nothing is more immoderate than pleasure.
    Which of beauty? Once more, wisdom; for pleasure is often unseemly, and the greatest pleasures are put out of sight.
    Not pleasure, then, ranks first in the scale of good, but measure, and eternal harmony.
    Second comes the symmetrical and beautiful and perfect.
    Third, mind and wisdom.
    Fourth, sciences and arts and true opinions.
    Fifth, painless pleasures.
    Of a sixth class, I have no more to say. Thus, pleasure and mind may both renounce the claim to the first place. But mind is ten thousand times nearer to the chief good than pleasure. Pleasure ranks fifth and not first, even though all the animals in the world assert the contrary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ...although I'd expand the definition of beauty so as to include the sublime, a distinction found in Kant's "Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and the Sublime" out of which IMO Edgar Allen Poe vastly improved the field of literature.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So like I said before, if you ever posted something "funny" or "good" (-ala, beauty, symmetry, truth) or (sublime, symmetry, truth), I'd be more than happy to link to you, Dave.

    ReplyDelete