@tarheelbybirth . . . Welcome back, its nice to see you poasting again.
Who did better in the Debate?
- Thread starter prlyles
- Start date
I just do my damage on HROT these days.
Might start spending more time back here, though.
Let me start off by saying that I couldn't care less about the Trump Foundation. I also couldn't care less about the Clinton Foundation either, but if you think Trump's foundation is shady you should learn a little more about the Clinton foundation. They are both shady people. How they are shady really doesn't matter. It's like trying to say that a bank robber who kills the teller with a gun is worse than the one who kills the teller with a knife. Bottom line, they both killed and robbed someone.
You mean those donations that bought substandard HIV medications from a company that donated heavily to the Clintons? Those same meds that actually were more harmful to the patients?
http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/19/e...-watered-down-drugs-to-third-world-countries/
Wonderful people, those Clintons. May they rot on the 7th plane of Hell.
And from Politifact:
The World Health Organization had been keeping tabs on Ranbaxy since 2004, including testing Ranbaxy’s finished products. That year, inspectors found problems with Ranbaxy’s drugs and decertified three of its HIV/AIDS medicines. The company then withdrew all of its HIV/AIDS drugs from the WHO’s approved drug list. There was a drug recall in South Africa. (At the time, the Clinton initiative did little work there.) In 2005, the WHO restored seven Ranbaxy medications to its list of prequalified HIV/AIDS drugs.
In a 2013 summary report, WHO said, "Since 2004, international cooperation between stringent regulators and WHO-Prequalification Program has been enhanced to allow early sharing of regulatory intelligence and to facilitate coordinated action, when necessary. At present, there is no evidence that any of the Ranbaxy products currently included on the WHO List of Prequalified Medicinal Products are of unacceptable quality."
Put simply, since 2005, no regulator has found its HIV/AIDS drugs defective or issued a recall of its products. That list includes agencies in the United Kingdom and South Africa, where HIV/AIDS is an enormous problem. South Africa has the largest number of people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide.
But, in your world, I'm sure The Daily Caller is more credible than WHO.
Ellen 't Hoen, the former point person at the charity group Doctors Without Borders for HIV/AIDS drugs, told us this allegation is not new.
"It is a nonsense story circulated by right-wing groups," 't Hoen said.
And I'm sure the Daily Caller has more credibility than Doctors Without Borders...in your world.
Billy was right- your smarmy, self righteous, hypocritical bullshit has really been missed around here.
Since we are discussing biases, here are 3 links on Politifact:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans
http://townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/2016/06/29/the-liberal-tilt-at-politifact-n2185076
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8215/politifact-denies-its-own-left-wing-bias-robert-kraychik#
Politifact is about as unbiased as CNN.But I know in your special world, you are always right, so these links won't make a difference to you.
Let's continue- Here's a line from your own source:
But Ranbaxy has faced serious problems with American regulators.
So Ranbaxy does what all corporations do with money to spend- pay the Clintons to find a distribution source overseas. Pretty easy to do when one of the 2 the primary founders of the Clinton Foundation is Secretary of State. But because you are smarter than everyone else, especially people who disagree with your gibberish, these details make no difference because you prefer the Clintons. Too bad your vote won't make a difference this year- maybe you should move to Pennsylvania or Colorado.
Not sure if I should put this here or in the Random/Weird News Stories thread, but a candidate for President of the United States publicly encouraged the nation to check out a sex tape. This campaign really is the gift that keeps on giving.
Awwww...you remember me...I'm gonna cry.
You DO realize the info comes not from Politifact but from the World Health Organization, Doctors Without Borders, South Africa’s Medicines Control Council, and the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. The latter two agencies have tested the Ranbaxy's HIV/AIDS drugs since at least 2005 and found them to be safe. Are they all biased, as well?
As for their issues with American regulators, those have absolutely nothing to do with HIV/Aids drugs. So we are left with the fact that the claim from The Daily Caller is disputed by:
- The World Health Organization
- Doctors Without Borders
- South Africa’s Medicines Control Council
- British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency
I want to know what he linked to. The porn stuff turns out NOT to be Machado but a porn actress named Angel Dark (I think) and the supposed "sex tape" is one of those grainy shots from a reality show (think something like Big Brother) that purportedly shows Machado and another contestant having sex while covered by a blanket.
I don't think he linked anything, but he actually posted the words "check out sex tape" in one of his 5 a.m. tweets defaming her character.
P.S. @tarheelbybirth Welcome back. We'll be needing a picture for the Roast Me thread before you get your name badge and security code.
Awwww...you remember me...I'm gonna cry.
You DO realize the info comes not from Politifact but from the World Health Organization, Doctors Without Borders, South Africa’s Medicines Control Council, and the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. The latter two agencies have tested the Ranbaxy's HIV/AIDS drugs since at least 2005 and found them to be safe. Are they all biased, as well?
As for their issues with American regulators, those have absolutely nothing to do with HIV/Aids drugs. So we are left with the fact that the claim from The Daily Caller is disputed by:
Who has more credibility? Can you answer that question without devolving into personal attacks?
- The World Health Organization
- Doctors Without Borders
- South Africa’s Medicines Control Council
- British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency
I read the article you linked. Here is a relevant quote:
Serious allegations that Ranbaxy sells shoddy drugs have come from several quarters. The American government said that when it filed charges against the drugmaker in 2010. So did several former Ranbaxy executives, according to aFortune magazine article. They told Fortune, "Ranbaxy had used ingredients that failed purity tests and blended them with good ingredients until the resulting mix met requirements. Such a mélange could degrade or become toxic far more quickly than drugs made from the high-quality materials required."
I would poast more quotes but my computer keeps identifying a virus on the Politifact site, ironically enough.
And if you wish to avoid devolving into personal attacks, then don't start making personal attacks. But as usual, you took a smarmy little swipe and now you whine like Chick.
Kind of simple really- "don't start nuthin and there won't be nuthin"
The man just can't let anything go without making it a priority to respond . .
I haven't a clue as to what he is trying to prove here.
He's just proving he's an idiot. I'd say he is doing a great job, wouldn't you? lol
Your expertise in proving oneself an idiot notwithstanding, he is actually showing that the character of the person trying to disparage him is lacking and therefore not worthy of notice.
Seems to be working well.
So the answer is, "No, I can't...on either score". Really, you could have just posted that.
Once again, you DO understand that the drugs the US agency had issues with were for acne and epilepsy and are in no way related to the HIV/AIDS drugs which have been subject to intense scrutiny by multiple international agencies for over a decade. Right?
Machado really has nothing to do with this other than being the person at the point of The Donald's ire after winning the Miss Universe pageant. You guys miss the point...a lot. Trump could have simply replaced her quietly when she gained weight. Instead, he called her Miss Piggy and Miss Housekeeper - because, you know, she's Hispanic. Funny guy, huh?
This is about the character of The Donald and has absolutely nothing to do with anything Machado's done since that time...which Trump wouldn't have known about, obviously.
It's Trump. He never makes a mistake and he never loses. Don't believe it? Just ask him.
He's spending and wasting a lot of time being completely off-message when he fights these petty little wars that will not benefit him in any way. Stay on message and do not deviate would be the wise choice . . instead he wants to win every little argument or unimportant battle
He is violating the old political adage 'never get into a fight with someone that isn't on the ballot' . . .
jmho
He is violating the old political adage 'never get into a fight with someone that isn't on the ballot' . . .
jmho
I could watch Trump shoot someone dead in the streets and I'd still find him to be of higher character than the bitch running.
I actually believe that you would. She's bad, indeed but comparing them??? they suck, both are bad. I honestly do not see how you guys see there is a win here at all. Even if the ones reading this that think she is the lesser crazy evil person.... it's all bad, evil, crazy, crooked.... no winning here
Which says far more about your character than his or hers.
Last edited:
Because she's smarter than he is. He is typical bully... when feeling outdone or cornered start calling names and being an ass. He's the best in the universe at that, I'll give him that one!
What I understand is that a foreign corporation which paid millions of dollars to the Clintons to increase distribution was found to have distributed watered down drugs.
If you are comfortable taking ANY drugs produced by that company, then knock yourself out.
And if you believe that the UN intensely scrutinizes the Clintons and their friends, then you will believe anything.
Or it says that a candidate who shot someone would still be far ahead the Clintons from an ethical perspective
I think Trump needs to put Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick, Jennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey in the front row of the next debate, just in front of the cast of thousands of other women Bubba has abused sexually over the previous four decades... Emphasize $hillary's role in bullying, intimidating, threatening, and attempting to otherwise discredit any woman who would threaten $hillary and Bubba's political career... And, point out how she tried to destroy Monica Lewinsky... All of these were women who $hillary said should be believed until proven otherwise... They were actually women $hillary tried to destroy before their stories were proven true...
Or he could put Billy Dale there, or Assange or the Benghazi families. Come to think of it, the debate would have to be held at an SEC football stadium in order to find enough seating for everyone who has been fukked over by The Clintons.
But hey, at least she doesn't sometimes say mean things at her sporadic rallies. Of course, that may be because she is too busy coughing up a lung.
Ahhh...so the UN is in the tank for the Clintons now. Does Clinton Derangement Syndrome ring a bell. Might have heard it mumbled at your last psych eval.
His comment had nothing to do with the Clintons. Seriously, not everything in the world is connected to them. Seek help.
Right. Remember when you were whining about personal attacks? Such a little pussy you are.
His comment has everything to do with the Clintons. Seriously, you are wrong most of the time. Seek help- I suggest talking shit to someone in person so you will get punched in that arrogant, smarmy face of yours. A good ass kicking is good for the soul, especially for a twerp like you.
