How Biden can unite the country

[4651feeder]

A simple way for Biden to unite the country: organize a BI-PARTISAN investigative group.....

Ohhhhh, you mean like the Warren Commission? That sure put to rest any conspiracies surrounding Kennedy's assassination.

 

[JettaKnight]

Yes, after all the things that have been said about Trump and his supporters, They need to be very careful now and be sensitive to others.

"We can show we're better than them." - JettaKnight


We can only monitor and police INGO, what they (e.g. BLM/Liberals) do is on them. Defining ethics and morals based on your opponents action is a poor idea.

 

[Phase2]

this is why you didn't see the cdc be used for anti gun stuff during the previous administration.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dic...key Amendment is a,to advocate or promote gun

Using wikipedia as a reference for controversial topics is an automatic red flag. You will note that it does not indicate why it was introduced and was able to get enough support to pass. Instead, the article blames the NRA (a common boogieman for the left).

Here is a short article explaining why it was introduced and passed: Why the Dickey Amendment Was Passed

 

[singlestacksig]

Using wikipedia as a reference for controversial topics is an automatic red flag. You will note that it does not indicate why it was introduced and was able to get enough support to pass. Instead, the article blames the NRA (a common boogieman for the left).

Here is a short article explaining why it was introduced and passed: Why the Dickey Amendment Was Passed

yes, there's a much bigger factor on why it was created but the truth is it was a law for a while. and it did curtail the CDC from doing research on gun information.
and that has changed.

 

[BigRed]

You might consider toning back posts that seem to make such insinuations regarding elected officials.

Alright.

Harris and Bidden then. He can sniff her hair easier that way.

 

[Bennettjh]

By not taxing us to death and taking our guns would be a good start.

 

[printcraft]

By not taxing us to death and taking our guns would be a good start.

Looks like we found one of them fascists boys!! ^^^^^^^

 

[BugI02]

If they didn't work every country wouldn't be advocating for people to wear them. Do you think this is just a democratic party political scheme?

My god we'll really show these people. We'll make them wear surgical masks. Seems like a very traumatizing punishment. Get real man.

They originally didn't think masks would help because the particle size of the virus is smaller than what a mask could filter out. This makes sense and thus why they said that. Once they were able to study transmission of this virus more they found that the virus was mostly being transmitted via coughing/sneezing and using water droplets as a vehicle for transportation.

Essentially the virus was "riding the wave" coming out of your mouth/nose. Once they identified this they found that masks could stop the water droplets and prevent the "wave" so to speak from shooting out many feet from the person who is infected.

So it isn't so much as wearing a mask makes you immune to the virus, it's rather more like a fence to prevent the virus from traveling long distances from your body.

If you can't spit the virus from your mouth then the chances of you transmitting it that way significantly drops.

I genuinely do not understand what people do not understand about this and have come to the conclusion that it isn't a matter of not understanding but rather a matter of refusing to believe the science.

I genuinely don't understand why you consider a 'protection', that apparently only works if you can force everybody to comply, is a protection at all

 

[JettaKnight]

I genuinely don't understand why you consider a 'protection', that apparently only works if you can force everybody to comply, is a protection at all

I genuinely believe that you won't understand it.

 

[ajeandy]

Apparently you missed it but it's not surprising, a lot of people did. When the big report obama authorized came out in 2013 that didn't end up supporting the narrative it was quietly shelved. If it had supported all their anti-gun narratives it would have been released with big fan fare, in this case not saying something was saying something. When things like suicide or unintentional injury are all lumped together under 'violent death' with firearms that's an agenda. When the CDC got its hand smacked for supporting spurious anti-gun research in the 90's it shows they are definitely political. It was a bit surprising during 2008-2016 that we didn't hear more. Obama said the right things as a good progressive when he had to but I don't think guns were really a big priority for him, that and I think he was a political realist and just didn't want to poke that bear. It wouldn't do anything for him politically to gin up a big anti-gun fight that in the end wouldn't go anywhere but make him look like a failure. Don't make the mistake of confusing a biden/harris administration though with 2008-2016.

So you're saying during 8 years of controlling the white house that the administration didn't influence what the CDC published, but now they will...?

So there's no president for it ever but it will happen now?

I said I never heard of an anti-gun publication from the cdc during the Obama administration and you said it's not surprising you missed it. Apparently I didn't miss anything because it never happened.

Look I don't think the CDC is a lever of the president no matter who is controlling the office.

Did the administration in 2008-2016 refute what the CDC advised or posted? I don't recall them doing that, but we have Trump who has decided he knows more than the CDC.

Think about that for a while.

 

[ajeandy]

I genuinely believe that you won't understand it.

I second this.

Hey we known a way to reduce the spread of an infectious disease.

Aww but I don't wanna. I'd be right there with you if it was a mandatory vaccine, but this isn't the case. Apparently wearing a surgical mask is asking a lot. I hate to see what kind of a fit some people throw over doing the dishes or taking out the trash.

 

[BugI02]

'Wear the mask' is just the new 'Bake the cake'

 

[JettaKnight]

I second this.

Hey we known a way to reduce the spread of an infectious disease.

Aww but I don't wanna. I'd be right there with you if it was a mandatory vaccine, but this isn't the case. Apparently wearing a surgical mask is asking a lot. I hate to see what kind of a fit some people throw over doing the dishes or taking out the trash.

The new battle cry: "Don't inconvenience me."

 

[ajeandy]

'Wear the mask' is just the new 'Bake the cake'

Yeah I can see how those two things are exactly alike.

One has to due with curbing the spread of an infectious disease during a global pandemic and the other one has to do with someone not wanting to provide services to another because they don't agree with their sexuality.

They are very very very much the same.

 

[TangoFoxtrot]

A simple way for Biden to unite the country: organize a BI-PARTISAN investigative group, with Democrat and Republican leaders, to investigate vote fraud and provide evidence and recommendations for prosecution to appropriate state and/or federal prosecutors.
The group would need to be transparent and speak as one; any and all "leaks" would need to be immediately denounced.
Obviously, everyone wants vote fraud to be punished. This would allow Biden to demonstrate his commitment to unifying the country.

If that was his goal but unfortunately it is NOT his goal. His and all the top rank liberal agenda is to dissolve this country's sovereignty and make us a sub nation of a one world governance. That is why they hated trump so badly, because trump is a nationalist (and nationalism in America is a unique thing because we are a melting pot so by nature American nationalism or as they used to , civic nationalism is not a racist institution, it encompasses American CITIZENS regardless of color etc) Biden nor anyone in the socialist marxist party want voter fraud exposed because the would be shining the light on their own party.
I won't sit here and defend every republican either , because alot of them are on board with the "new world order" , just listen to many of the Bush and Reagan speeches where the actually use the terminology of "NEW WORLD ORDER" , Soros and a couple others said Trump is single handedly going to destroy the new world order.

A majority of this country does NOT want America's sovereignty pissed away but they have no clue of the what the grand scam of this small , extremely wealthy and powerful cults agenda is and most will not even be aware enough to know that its real and does exist so they vote for socialists and marxists like biden, Obama, Harris, Hillary and as I said many so called republicans.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[BugI02]

Yeah I can see how those two things are exactly alike.

One has to due with curbing the spread of an infectious disease during a global pandemic and the other one has to do with someone not wanting to provide services to another because they don't agree with their sexuality.

They are very very very much the same.

They are both attempts by government to force the individual to comply with a mandate they have no authority to make. Try using a wide angle lens instread of a microscope

 

[ajeandy]

They are both attempts by government to force the individual to comply with a mandate they have no authority to make. Try using a wide angle lens instread of a microscope

It's completely different. Extremely straw-man of you.

 

[Alpo]

More chestnutty than straw.

He's a buckeye and they jaundice easily.

 

[Bennettjh]

Looks like we found one of them fascists boys!! ^^^^^^^

Don't tell antifa!

 

[drillsgt]

So you're saying during 8 years of controlling the white house that the administration didn't influence what the CDC published, but now they will...?

So there's no president for it ever but it will happen now?

I said I never heard of an anti-gun publication from the cdc during the Obama administration and you said it's not surprising you missed it. Apparently I didn't miss anything because it never happened.

Look I don't think the CDC is a lever of the president no matter who is controlling the office.

Did the administration in 2008-2016 refute what the CDC advised or posted? I don't recall them doing that, but we have Trump who has decided he knows more than the CDC.

Think about that for a while.

In your rush to battle every post in sight you're not making any sense. The WH can certainly influence what the CDC prioritizes just as we saw with obama. With obama however the results were not what they wanted hence they buried it, so the WH was very much trying to drive the narrative, remember fast and furious, another failed attempt to drive the narrative? The CDC is anti-gun, the biden administration is anti-gun there's no reason to believe the CDC will put guns aside. The CDC is a driver and funder of research they want to support, they don't conduct a lot of their own research per se but they decide what does get funded. Since the 90's beat down and with the Dickey Amendment they've behaved pretty well but opened up 10M in funding this year alone. Here's what a past head of the injury control division had to say: [FONT=&quot]Dr. Mark Rosenberg was quoted in the [/FONT]Washington Post[FONT=&quot] as wanting his agency to create a public perception of firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.”

[/FONT]Think about that for awhile.