Know who your partisan guys are and know who the policy pushers are. They are two different types of animals. You can always bring well thought out policy and ideas to policy people. Partisans aren’t interested in that and they don’t specialize in the skills and tools needed to move policy. That protects us all. That may provide you with some reassurance and comfort in coming weeks. Don’t let partisans scare you - they are concerned with money and elections. Word of warning: If someone brings them a giant bag of money, they will do anything. If you gotta combat that, then you gotta make it an election issue.
Partisans are loud so you hear a lot of partisan stuff. Policy people are quiet. They try to sneak the policy thru without the partisans catching wind of it. That’s pretty easy because partisans don’t actually care about policy - they care about $ and elections.
This Carson person? OK that indicates you had no clue of his amazing accomplishments. He had enough medical skill, knowledge and ambition to perform that historic surgery. There’s no questioning that. I’ll bet the parents of the twins he separated in a 22 hour operation think quite highly of him, or did if they are not still alive.
.
He still had/has the right to run for office as do we all. An in my interfaith Judeo Christian home the Ark is not a myth. Right now they’re looking looking at something that has slid down the hill at Ararat, the Durupinar formation. My friends have gone out with Dr. Steven Collins on digs, and he’s literally unearthed a lot in other areas.
I never mentioned anything about him running for office.
As for the ark, we’ll have to agree to disagree, but even the gist of what I posted points to something that might have occurred thousands of years ago, is not literal, crosses religious boundaries, and if at all true, handed down via oral traditions over centuries from other cultures.
You have the right to believe differently.
As for Collins, the only Wikipedia entry I found to his scholarship casts doubt on his integrity and his work’s validity:
This is a more concise read to save Tu space. He’s well known, respected and a fascinating speaker. Not sure what he’s up to recently but probably still at it.
Your touting his supposed credentials, without recognizing the he has admitted to falsifying data, that his findings are not considered valid by others outside of his team, and that there are continued concerns about his integrity and that of his coauthors.
Simply because somone claims something does not make it valid.
Huh? You don’t know the guy. I know people who have studied with him and traveled with him. Can’t speak for having first hand experience myself except for one lecture but I have friends who went on digs.
I am not familar with the person, but wouldn’t pay attention to someone like him anyway. Biblical scholarship is not an interest, although I do read anthropology, that borrows heavily from archaeology, most recently work by David Graeber, the Dawn of Everything. Not so oddly, the Bible was not heavily featured.
Obviously, my world view differs from yours. It tells a history of human development, and although it includes aspects of early Middle Eastern societies, it weaves together pre-development cultures unearthed and the theorized social structures of those worlds. I don’t even think the Bible was mentioned. As for other reading, my interests are otherwise, literature, fiction, poetry, social sciences, systems theory, statistics, and philosophy.
I didn’t expect you would pay attention. That’s ok. I know Who has sustained me through diabetes for 54 years, my husband’s lymphoma and life in general.
Policy gets harvested out of the Tu forum. It’s had a lot of influence, over the years. You wanna change policy? You can do it right here. You want to do partisan politics, go on down to local precent. You’ll have plenty of opportunity. But you should also be prepared to talk about how lizards take human form in order to control the government. That’s, like, 50% of partisan politics.
Nobody wants to go down to local precinct because: 1.) Its super boring; and, 2.) Lots of the people who go down there are motivated to be there for extreme reasons. It might be helpful to our political process to dilute some of that by having normal diabetics show up…on both sides.
You guys can always schedule with your Senate or House members if you have a really big concern or problem. That’s their job - to talk to you. If they don’t do that, then they are not doing their jobs.
@DrBB I think this thread has devolved into territory that is a bit too far. I avoided mentioning any elected or appointed public figures because it would lead to attacking or defending, and so it has.
I am more concerned about the policies that may affect our health and wellbeing, not the usual suspects.
Sure, perfectly valid, some ideas from mainstream sources on potential changes. Note, this is not necessarily political, since these are expressed targets of the GOP, although the phrasing will differ, and areas that many here will need to be prepared for:
Changes to Medicare/Medicaid
Reductions in various supplemental programs
Increases in non-ACA compliant policies
Changes in eligibility for the ACA and CHIP
Reductions in government support for vaccines
Increases in drug prices
Most of this will be phrased as transparency, efficiency, and competition, but regardless of its expressed aim, it will be disruptive for many.
People have left this board because of those arguments about political “sides”. Things relevant to diabetics and health are great to know and are a great help to people, policy changes and actual moves on policies, worries about actual policy changes can all be helpful. Political debates are usually not that.
The problem is when it’s derogatory, conjecture in nature, especially scaremongering, it just causes arguments. There is a 50/50 split in this country now, we don’t really need to make the rift worse. When you condemn one side before they have even done something, when they didn’t do the things you are accusing them of before, how is that fair? Remember over 50% voted for one side.
If you want to say stock up because we never know what can happen every 4 years, to say you better stock up is always a wise decision, to even say I am worried about what the policies will be, so I am stocking up, to list things you are concerned about seems valid. But to condemn someone when they aren’t in office yet, when the world didn’t fall apart when he was in office before seems pretty sad.
One side is not right just because you are on that side. One side gets voted for because more people and/or states want that side to be the president. It happens every 4 years. It doesn’t make it right or wrong, it’s the path of what the majority wanted. Make the most if it and write to your representatives if you have concerns that you want guarded, protected or you want done. The more active you are in that regard will more likely be helpful in protecting the things you care about.
I have stayed away from this thread for a reason. And this is just my opinion on these discussions.
