NurseJackie
NurseJackie's JournalWhatever criticism that comes her way is fair and deserved...
Whatever criticism that comes her way is fair and deserved, from what I've seen and offered. But I also think that by their very nature, critical remarks naturally fall short of swooning praise that so many are accustomed to. As a result, and in comparison, her fans often perceive mild and ordinary criticism to be "bashing". But I think that fair-minded people understand that's simply not the case. It serves no good purpose for anyone to engage in a hyper-defensive position that ends up being completely unfair to those who have valid opinions that deserve to be expressed. I think that there can be very little doubt that eventually, when members are not allowed to scrutinize and/or criticize our elected representatives... and when Democratic critics are being silenced or bullied, then what that means is that certain politicians are effectively receiving special treatment (by popular demand.)
Look, all I'm saying is that Democrats should be able to speak honestly about all of our Democratic elected officials. You know... "holding their feet to the fire" and all that. --- That's fair, right? I think every reasonable minded adult can agree on that, right?
You are correct in your observations and I completely understand your diffidence in expressing perfectly reasonable critiques or pointing out other inconsistencies.
I'm reminded of a simple classroom science experiment from middle school where the student submerges both hands in a bucket of water. Left-hand bucket is filled with ice water and the right-hand bucket is filled with very hot tap water. After one minute, both hands are then submerged into a third bucket filled with room temperature water. As a result of being "acclimated" the the extreme conditions of very cold and very hot... each hand now perceives the room temperature water as being very hot and very cold... simultaneously! But how can that be? In reality, the bucket in the middle is only room temperature... neither hot nor cold... but the subject of the experiments perceives it as being two different temperatures at the same time.
Even if it were an open seat... she'd have a very difficult time being competitive statewide.
Additionally, there's a good chance that her very safe and very blue district will be redrawn (or that it may disappear entirely) the next time that these things are done. Her career may be short-lived in that case because it will be much more difficult for her to appeal to voters in a more diverse district. The same thing applies to the predictions that she may be considering a run for the mayor of NYC.
Of course all these things do not square with her recent comments that indicated she would like to leave politics entirely and live on a farm somewhere. I think that will pretty much doom any chance she has of finding an experienced party member who is willing to spend their time mentoring her and grooming her for continued work within the party. Such acts of kindness would most likely be reserved for up-and-coming individuals who showed great promise, who demonstrated loyalty to the party, and who had a clear desire to excel and continue down a political path that benefited the Democratic party.
It will be interesting to see how all of this unfolds. But it's my expectation that she won't be around by the time the next presidential election rolls around. We'll just have to wait and see.
"MacArthur Park" -- Richard Harris 🆚 Donna Summer
In 1967, producer Bones Howe had asked Webb to create a pop song with different movements and changing time signatures. Webb delivered "MacArthur Park" to Howe with "everything he wanted", but Howe did not care for the ambitious arrangement and unorthodox lyrics and the song was rejected by the group the Association, for whom it was originally intended.[2]
Which version do you like the best?
I have no more tears to cry. My heart has turned into stone.
So... if someone is SO selfish that they can't care enough about themselves or their loved ones... then I don't care either. She knew the risks, and decided to roll-the-dice anyway. She's getting EXACTLY what she bargained for. In exchange for her "freedom" and "liberty" and a good-time-on-the-town... she receives sickness and grief. Feh! Too fucking bad. Hard lessons learned, eh?
I hope they are able to tell their sad sad stories... maybe someone else will learn from the mistakes of others.
I don't even feel sympathy for his family or loved ones...
... who may have contracted it FROM him, or who may grieve after he's DEAD. It's all on him. HE made the decisions, he knew the risks (yes, of course he knew, he just didn't care about anything other than the party-line). So... if someone can't care enough about themselves or their loved ones... then I don't care either.
My eyes will remain dry and my heart will remain cold. They're getting EXACTLY what he wanted for them. Sickness and grief.
Feh! Too fucking bad.
When you describe it THAT way... it makes the anti-vaxxers look even more FOOLISH...
When you describe it THAT way... it makes the anti-vaxxers look even more FOOLISH and RECKLESS than before. It's really not a difficult concept to comprehend. Thanks for your very concise and eloquent post!
Quoting your post in full so that I can add it to my DU journal.
View profile
It contains the spike protein associated with the virus. That protein can't cause the disease. It is a foreign chemical that stimulates your immune system to make antibodies to that protein. The immune system responds to what enters the body as a way to protect you from foreign viruses, bacteria, fungi, and other disease-causing things.
The vaccine stimulates your immune system by challenging it with protein that is in the spikes of the virus. Until the immune system encounters the foreign protein, it has no reason to create antibodies to it.
It takes the immune system days or weeks to learn to make the right antibodies. If you catch the coronavirus, the immune system will respond to it, but the response may be too late to prevent a severe illness. Vaccines give the immune system time to learn about the foreign protein and make antibodies without the risk of the disease.
That's how vaccines work and why they protect us.
Yawn.
So, the message is: "You have no right to complain about her if you watch her." Why does it bother you so much when anyone complains about anyone in the media (whether TV, radio, or print)? I occasionally get a whiff of Rush Limbaugh, and I'll comment how awful he is. Am I not entitled to complain simply because I listened to how awful he is? Same with Andrea... she's dreadful, one doesn't have to continually watch her to know this. One doesn't need to DVR her every television appearance to also be able to make critical comments about her.
It's just so sleazy and underhanded. It really reveals much about the politicians or organizations...
It's just so sleazy and underhanded. It really reveals much about the politicians or organizations that would stoop to such tricks. As I said before, I'm sure it's all perfectly "legal" in the strictest sense of the word, but something that's technically legal isn't always necessarily ethical.
Caveat Emptor ... let the buyer beware.
Other than for reasons of vanity or ego, I don't understand why so many cling to the word socialism.
Other than for reasons of vanity or ego, I don't understand why so many cling to the word socialism. Regardless if it's being "misunderstood" or "incorrectly defined"... the fact of the matter is this: in the United States, that battle has already been LOST. The word has such negative connotations that it can never be retrieved. Any efforts to do so are wasted. (As the saying goes: If you're explaining, you're losing --or-- If you're defining and clarifying, you're losing.)
The only reason I can think of that anyone would want to hold on to that word is based on pride, rather than any real desire to accomplish anything meaningful or to make progress. I think that kind of stubbornness and short-sighted philosophy is one that goes hand-in-hand with the popular "all or nothing" and "no compromise" philosophies. Sadly, there are too many individuals who seem all to content to walk away with nothing because they can boast and puff-out their chests and proclaim that they "stood their ground".
All I'm trying to point out is that it's time to take a different approach. Attacking and smearing the Democratic party doesn't work. Preserving the status quo (literally) but refusing to compromise and find common ground and areas of mutual benefit... that just makes no sense. I've always said that PROGRESS (no matter how small) is always better than doing nothing, and always better than wasted effort.
In fact "progress" is the root word of "progressive"... I'll bet many people haven't even though of that when they reject incremental progress as being something "bad" or shameful... or something to be avoided at all costs.
Great OP. Thanks for starting the discussion. (Sadly, I think it will mostly fall on deaf ears.)
And they're all made out of ticky-tacky and they all look just the same...
... and the all sound just the same.
... and they all think just the same.
... and they all bleet just the same.
Even when they're silent and not wearing MAGA hats or t-shirts, I can still spot a MAGAT at 20 paces. I'm probably on-target about 90-95% of the time in my "first impression" of these idiots... just based on looks alone.
And it's not always the "People of Walmart" crowd that stand out to me. My super-powers exist into all economic strata.
You probably have the hidden ability to spot them too. There's just something about their look and attitude that reveals their putrid souls, even when they're silent.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayMember since: Mon Oct 19, 2015, 02:14 PM
Number of posts: 42,862
