wonder if reddit broke them...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0b0e5a7a5ffb5
wonder if reddit broke them...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0b0e5a7a5ffb5
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Eh? Pence instituted needle exchanges roughly a month after the outbreak came to light based on the the counsel of then Indiana State Health Commissioner Dr. Jerome Adams, (and a Pence appointee). Dr. Adams is now the Surgeon General of the United States, in no small part thanks to Mike Pence.Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Your logic does not follow.
Last edited by Enoch the Red; 12-29-2017 at 08:51 PM.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/u...s-indiana.html
In recent interviews, local, state and federal health officials said Mr. Pence initially held firm. So as they struggled to contain the spread of H.I.V., the officials embarked on a behind-the-scenes effort over several weeks to persuade him to change his mind, using political pressure, research and pleas for help from this remote, poor community.
On March 23, more than two months after the outbreak was detected, Mr. Pence said he was going to go home and pray on it. He spoke to the sheriff the next night.
[...]
“There are people who have real moral and ethical concerns about passing out needles to people with substance abuse problems,” Dr. Adams said. “To be honest, I shared that sentiment.”
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
So you had someone who worked to allow an exception to the law, despite his convictions, in order to help stem the outbreak, and somehow this is evidence of his inaction contributing to an HIV outbreak? Trust me, two months is almost break neck speed for this kind of move.But Indiana law made it illegal to possess a syringe without a prescription. And Mr. Pence, a steadfast conservative, was morally opposed to needle exchanges on the grounds that they supported drug abuse.
Are you really that rabid?
Action after admitting that AIDS isn't some god given curse against the wicked doesn't some how make it so that the outbreak didn't occur. It did occur, it didn't need to get as bad as it did, and it could have been prevented.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
How is the governor responsible for an outbreak of HIV among heroin/opioid users who were sharing needles? Look, the number of infected more than doubled even after needle exchanges were approved. To some, making sure they have a clean needle isn't the highest priority, and it never will be.
Instead of lauding him for his flexibility you are going out of your way to arm chair quarterback. You are a partisan hack.
Apparently convictions are the new facts. If your warped convictions lead to unnecessary suffering, that's on you.
Hope is the denial of reality
I agree. This is why I hate seeing people who can't get a concealed carry permit become rape, assault, and murder victims in California, Illinois, New York, and Washington DC. So many politicians with blood on their hands.
Can't take credit for prevention. Gotta be part of the problem first.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
That would be amusing if not for the countless studies showing that weakening gun control leads to more gun-related deaths.
Hope is the denial of reality
That is little consolation to the rape victim who was denied her permit, no?
I forgot that the right decided to copy the annoying left-wing tendency to privilege individual experiences over aggregate facts.
Hope is the denial of reality
Of course the blood of people who die due to people being allowed to carry guns would be on your hands.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Whether or not a decision is made in time can only be assessed by looking at how swiftly it needs to be made and can be made.
Most govt. decisions don't concern rapidly developing emergencies and it's okay or even good if they take several months. The outbreak of HIV among addicts in Scott County, in contrast, was a rapidly developing emergency, and demanded a swifter response. A swift response was possible. There was sufficient high-quality evidence available to support a particular intervention that could be implemented very quickly. In light of this, Pence did fail, even though he eventually came around. He waited much longer than he should have or needed to. He resisted the idea strongly. He made its implementation more difficult than it needed to be. He had the authority, the responsibility, the knowledge, the means and the support of both politicians and scientists to help stop this emergency from getting much worse. In light of that, his obstinate failure to act does make him culpable.
His belated change of heart, welcome though it was, does not absolve him or responsibility. There are medical emergencies where I can be formally sanctioned for failing to make the right decision at the right time, especially if it's clear that all the necessary information, equipment and support was available to me at the time. The principle is similar with other emergencies, eg. public health crises, disasters etc.
You mention that the number of cases doubled even after the exchange scheme was approved, but this is not a good defense. It can just as easily be seen as an indication that the intervention came far too late. If they'd started sooner, the rate of spread may have been slower and total number of victims much smaller. Because it took a while for the exchange to get started and become effective, even after the decision was made, one might argue that it was very important to make the decision as early as possible. I'm sorry Enoch but your defense of Pence isn't very compelling.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Naw, that's not a new development.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Aggregate facts never entered into your equation. Your metric was strictly and inanely about convictions and unnecessary suffering. You are changing the goal posts to now be more about the greater good.
Perhaps the statistic you should concern yourself with would be the violent crime rate among CCW holders. I'll wait.
No, the blood is solely on the hands of the individual who is holding the gun.
Terms like responsibility and absolution are being tossed around pretty freely. You surely don't believe that a medical professional has the same responsibility that a politician would have as to the outcomes of his or her patients, do you? Nor is a medical professional responsible for the decisions made by their patients. Make no mistake about it, Pence was under no obligation, besides the obligation he swore to uphold the state and federal constitutions, neither of which require needle exchanges. In fact, Indiana law specifically discourages it by outlawing syringe ownership by those without medical necessity. Now, was it politically expedient to do so? Perhaps. And if we are looking cynically at the situation, it's entirely possible that played into his motivations. I wouldn't put that past any politician. Regardless, he would have had ample public and political support in Indiana if he had decided to stick with his convictions and do nothing.
Look, if you want to say Pence could have acted faster, I would agree. I would have urged him to, if I was in any position to do so. However, if you are trying to paint him as some kind of monster that did nothing while an HIV outbreak went on and on unchecked, because of his "morals" then you are not acting in good faith. He not only acted, he did so with some political risk, and in relatively quick order, despite his moral convictions.You mention that the number of cases doubled even after the exchange scheme was approved, but this is not a good defense. It can just as easily be seen as an indication that the intervention came far too late. If they'd started sooner, the rate of spread may have been slower and total number of victims much smaller. Because it took a while for the exchange to get started and become effective, even after the decision was made, one might argue that it was very important to make the decision as early as possible. I'm sorry Enoch but your defense of Pence isn't very compelling.
Last edited by Enoch the Red; 12-30-2017 at 02:19 AM.
You took this line:
of which you have not denied, his inaction did contribute to the outbreak. Cleaning up and changing his mind months afterwards is irrelevant to the initial claim.
and some how twisted it into:
and yet you want to whine about acting in good faith?
the fuck is wrong with you?
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
I thought it was blatantly obvious. Your premise is wrong. Pence did nothing to contribute to an HIV outbreak. He shared no dirty needles. He sold no heroin. In fact, he actively worked to stop an HIV outbreak. Could it have been done sooner? Sure. That's a fair criticism. That's not the criticism you made. Your criticism is akin to me blaming President Clinton for failing to lift the ban, (despite saying he would and having the opportunity to do so) on federal money for needle exchanges, or president Obama for removing funding for the needle exchange from his budget and the months of delay between that and his lifting of the federal ban, for any cases of HIV caused by shared needles during their time in office. Clinton's inaction on funding needle exchanges under the guise of sending a message on drugs has caused a whole lot more deaths than Pence's action to implement them.
Either way, the argument is nonsensical partisan quackery.
Last edited by Enoch the Red; 12-30-2017 at 02:00 AM.
Twitter Link
The US is turning into a Lewkowskian dystopia. Remember: this is the fault of liberal news and the liberal bias of reality.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Never even heard of Gorka. Sounds like an extreme lunatic from Wiki.
He was Trump's top terrorism advisor.
Hope is the denial of reality
What?
How did you manage that feat?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Busy IRL and don't pay as much attention to the ins and outs of Trump's team. Especially when there's such a revolving door for that omnishambles.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/3...adopoulos.html
BUT HER EMAILS!!
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Twitter Link
what
fucking what
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Twitter Link
US airlines haven't had a commercial aviation death in 8 years. Thanks Obama?
Trump is trying to take credit for improvements outside of the US.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Concealed carry permits is a strange way to look at preventing violent crimes. Even open carry states can skew crime statistics, after a mass shooting like Las Vegas. But since "gun rights" is obviously your main agenda, that puts you in the same category as the "other" rabid political hacks you often criticize.
The point I was making was not to use concealed carry permits as a method of preventing violent crime, (though I hardly think that would hurt) instead the point was to show how banal and superficial an argument Loki was making.
Concealed carry permits is a strange way to look at preventing violent crimes. Even open carry states can skew crime statistics, after a mass shooting like Las Vegas. But since "gun rights" is obviously your main agenda, that puts you in the same category as the "other" rabid political hacks you often criticize.
That weaker gun controls lead to more gun-related deaths? Or that cops shouldn't be shooting people when they answer their door and reach for their waist?
Neither is banal nor superficial. Did I miss something?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote