Search results

I don't think they are presidential in the least.

Historians are not presidents, either, so your logic tells me they should not be pontificating about what they know little--or that they are biased about. They're like you in that regard. Oops. I see that @ok doser beat me to the punch on this one. But since you think repetition solidifies...

That's because the opposite is to Leave America Crummy, Kommies (LACK).

They didn't even know who he was--how much less would they know where to find him.

You willfully don't understand "whole".

I always respond to what was said, when it makes any sense to do so. But if there’s nothing substantive…(I was debating whether to respond to yours this time, but I’ll lower my standards this once.) Not scared of the vaccine. I am not looking for scientific basis for fear, but the same...

Trump rates today’s historians as worst in US history. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

But what is the reason for God’s wrath? Isn’t it because they have rejected the Son of God, and His sacrifice, not just of His life, but He BECAME human forever. If I did that for someone, and they rejected it, I’d be pretty angry, too. So His wrath is not just for disobedience, which warrants...

From loss of fine motor control, or loss of fine moral control?

I thought it was LUser Name.

Are you talking about the fact check that had all of 2, count them—2, references? And one of those (50%!) hadn’t been peer reviewed yet???? And here’s what the peer-reviewed article said: “Depending on resources, prioritization may be considered for those at high risk for post-acute COVID-19...

Even with the caveat of “almost”, the comparison to infinite is grossly overstated, especially for younger folks, where the vaccine risk appears to be greater than COVID.

If there’s any health risk with the vaccine, @marke is being wise to exercise caution and loving to warn others. Why is that a problem? There is some risk, according to numerous doctors, according to the nature of the new technology, and according to reports of adverse reactions and death from...

E4e is? Or someone is doing it to the database?

So now you’re saying that because you can imagine a case where correlation does not mean causation, we should believe that there is never an instance of such? I’d have to say your example means jack-squat.

So you don’t believe the account, right? Is it possible someone might try to sabotage the database by reporting the ridiculous? By inserting obviously false reports to raise doubts about the others? Are all the COVID-19 vaccine reports ridiculous?

If you can’t make it up, then you are affirming it is true.

And you believe that report is a sincere one, or not?

And yet you are replying to a post where I pointed out that you had done just that. I thought about being an English major, but I opted for rocket science instead. Despite correlation not being causation, correlation is the first evidence that would lead to suspicion of a vaccine. More...

Prepare to berate thyself, as your post below says exactly that: For just one moment, if you can, consider what must happen for suspicion to fall upon a vaccine. The vaccine would have to be followed by a health problem, and some twit would have to believe, no matter how hesitantly, that the...