I wish he'd drop out next even before trump.
I gave up watching about half way through. I thought this debate was going to be twice as good as the first, but it seems everyone was too afraid to stick their necks out over the chopping block. Even Trump was disappointing to a degree. Maybe the pre-show work-up on the networks promised too much.
Be that as it may, the same old Repub talking points that were being bandied about circa 2000-2008 are still being hammered into the airwaves as THE way to "make America great again."
Like the old broken LP record that keeps skipping back and repeating itself, the trickle down, free-the-banksters-and-wall-street-crooks to scam the nation into financial ruin (again) mantra is still alive and well at the RNC.
New faces, same ideology.
Questioning does not mean anti
If we don't ask "Whats this shot for?" "Is this safe?" "Should this be done differently?" that doesn't make you an anti-vaccine moron
I ask those questions and make educated decisions on what is safe and what isn't. If you blindly trust Pfizer
Kind of like going to the mechanic. It's your car, you should have a say about what gets put into it. If you blindly go in and say, "Just do whatever you think is right" you would sound like a moron. Also, if you say "No, nothing you do is safe" you would also sound like a moron
Trump clearly said he wasn't anti vaccine. Carson clearly was not anti vaccine.
Most pediatricians are suggesting it now. Why? Because it doesn't hurt and it reduces concerns.Saying we should spread out the vaccine schedule because of autism is based on exactly as much science as saying vaccines cause autism: zero. Trump is a dangerous moron for suggesting it.
His debate performance was hilarious though. Every time he was called out for being clueless his answer was "don't worry, I'll figure it out as I go because I'm the best". Lol.
Most pediatricians are suggesting it now. Why? Because it doesn't hurt and it reduces concerns.
I do agree it is silly to think there is a correlation.
Most pediatricians are suggesting it now. Why? Because it doesn't hurt and it reduces concerns.
I do agree it is silly to think there is a correlation.
From what I have read most pediatricians are not suggesting it, but will do it at the parents' request because the overall risk is minor. I get that.
It certainly has far less harm than never vaccinating your child, but it still opens them up to risk based on unscientific nonsense.
I have had 3 kids all over the country. In all cases the docs spread them out. Why? Because at this point the doctors are tired of it. That's my suspicion. Just like thimerosal, they know the difference between ethyl and methyl mercury and dosage, but it's no use fighting.Patently false. Nobody at the ACIP, AAP, PIDS, AAFP, IDSA, CDC or any other major medical community involved with vaccination would ever suggest such a thing. There is absolutely zero evidence that the number of vaccines are problematic, let alone any theoretical scientific hypothesis supporting that assertion.
Don't believe me? No problem. Here's the AAP's statement on "Too Many Shots Too Soon"
http://www2.aap.org/immunization/pediatricians/pdf/vaccine-hesitant parent_final.pdf
I have had 3 kids all over the country. In all cases the docs spread them out. Why? Because at this point the doctors are tired of it. That's my suspicion. Just like thimerosal, they know the difference between ethyl and methyl mercury and dosage, but it's no use fighting.
Perhaps I should have said "many". I know many friends who have had the same thing happen at their pediatricians.So 3 physicians means that "Most pediatricians are suggesting it now?" No they aren't. Most doctors are tired of pseudoscience and giving into non-scientific sentiments. In fact, many see the thimerosal decision to be a major mistake to given into those sentiments, and one they would want to take back, hence why there's much greater push back against pseudoscience today.
Nope, he's an American Citizen Born Abroad and legally eligible to run for/hold the office of President of the US of A.
He'll get way less grief then the negro born in an actual state.
I'm holding my breath waiting for the Fox News outrage questioning his citizenship.
I gave up watching about half way through. I thought this debate was going to be twice as good as the first, but it seems everyone was too afraid to stick their necks out over the chopping block. Even Trump was disappointing to a degree. Maybe the pre-show work-up on the networks promised too much.
Be that as it may, the same old Repub talking points that were being bandied about circa 2000-2008 are still being hammered into the airwaves as THE way to "make America great again."
Like the old broken LP record that keeps skipping back and repeating itself, the trickle down, free-the-banksters-and-wall-street-crooks to scam the nation into financial ruin (again) mantra is still alive and well at the RNC.
New faces, same ideology.
I was half listening at this point. But did Bush really say Margaret Thatcher would be a person to put on one of our bills?
He did. I wonder what conservatives would say if Obama suggested we put a foreign leader (any foreign leader) on our money?
Somebody at work brought it up and what a moron he was for saying it. I started laughing immediately at the thought he suggested a former British Prime Minister be on one of our bills.
I had to confirm it. At that point I pretty much stopped listening. What a gem for the gaffe reel.
I was half listening at this point. But did Bush really say Margaret Thatcher would be a person to put on one of our bills?
Saying we should spread out the vaccine schedule because of autism is based on exactly as much science as saying vaccines cause autism: zero. Trump is a dangerous moron for suggesting it.
His debate performance was hilarious though. Every time he was called out for being clueless his answer was "don't worry, I'll figure it out as I go because I'm the best". Lol.
Most of the responses to that question were schmaltzy or cringe worthy. Mother Theresa ..really Kasich? Fiorina couldn't say herself so she just blabbered on about women in general.
The only time I agreed with Cruz the whole debate is when he said Hamilton should stay on the $10 and Jackson should come off the $20.
Bad part about Trump is that he lives so much within his ego-sphere, that his personal anecdotes far outweigh even scientific evidence, as shown by his extreme ignorance of autism. That is a dangerous man.
Trump and Ben both deferred to "crack teams" for their policy decisions. I'm for collaborative work, but they need to, at the very least, be able to answer general debate questions.
Just to set the record straight, the reason people associate autism and vaccines is because autism typically begins to show itself during the same time period when vaccines are administered. So, a parent looking for something to blame will look to the vaccine.
I feel like the only people who didn't come out of that debate looking dumb were Rubio and Kasich. Maybe Rubio has a chance to win, but it's very hard for me to see a Kasich win.
How do you know who is a good lawyer for any field (docs, litigation, defense, banektuocy, m and a)? What about accountants? Hr managers? Bankers?Having good advisers is probably one of the most consequential decisions someone can make, but how do you know what advisers constitute a 'crack team' if you have literally no understanding of the topic to begin with?