Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’

MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’

+5
2seaoat
Wordslinger
ZVUGKTUBM
boards of FL
Markle
9 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

2seaoat



Mr. Markle needs shelter......these are tough times for those who share his beliefs.....all two hundred people...........

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Markle posts opinion as facts here every day.......  LOL!

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:Sponsored by big Robber Barons, Herr Markle's republican congressional whores only filibustered 360 pieces of legislation because they hate the black President of the United States who was elected twice over republican stooges.

As you know, but desperately have to try to deny, is that opinion is just that, ONE person's OPINION.  As you said:

See:  http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/21/opinion

Repeating the same lie does not make it true.  Soooo sorry!

What you didn't do was refute the 360 figure with fact.  Tell us again why DDT is good for everyone ... LOL

Don't have to, you already did that by simply posting an OPINION.

See:  http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/21/opinion

I already proved to you about DDT and your intentional ignorance about the FACTS.  All your shouting and screaming only proves your desperation.

Op-Ed Contributor

A New Home for DDT
By DONALD ROBERTS

Published: August 20, 2007

Bethesda, Md.

DDT, the miracle insecticide turned environmental bogeyman, is once again playing an important role in public health. In the malaria-plagued regions of Africa, where mosquitoes are becoming resistant to other chemicals, DDT is now being used as an indoor repellent. Research that I and my colleagues recently conducted shows that DDT is the most effective pesticide for spraying on walls, because it can keep mosquitoes from even entering the room.

The news may seem surprising, as some mosquitoes worldwide are already resistant to DDT. But we’ve learned that even mosquitoes that have developed an immunity to being directly poisoned by DDT are still repelled by it.

Malaria accounts for nearly 90 percent of all deaths from vector-borne disease globally. And it is surging in Africa, surpassing AIDS as the biggest killer of African children under age 5.

From the 1940s onward, DDT was used to kill agricultural pests and disease-carrying insects because it was cheap and lasted longer than other insecticides. DDT helped much of the developed world, including the United States and Europe, eradicate malaria. Then in the 1970s, after the publication of Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring,” which raised concern over DDT’s effects on wildlife and people, the chemical was banned in many countries. Birds, especially, were said to be vulnerable, and the chemical was blamed for reduced populations of bald eagles, falcons and pelicans. Scientific scrutiny has failed to find conclusive evidence that DDT causes cancer or other health problems in humans.

Today, indoor DDT spraying to control malaria in Africa is supported by the World Health Organization; the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; and the United States Agency for International Development.

From one of your beloved left wing sources, the New York Times.

Read more:  http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/20/opinion/20roberts.html?_r=4&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&

In Africa where there's major malaria problems DDT is being used despite it's awful effects on wildlife and humans. Of course, Monsanto is making money and screw all those blacks who get cancer, anyway. Right Herr Markle?

Markle has posted lies about DDT, here's some truth:

Effects on wildlife and eggshell thinning

DDT is toxic to a wide range of living organisms, including marine animals such as crayfish, daphnids, sea shrimp and many species of fish. It is less toxic to mammals, but may be moderately toxic to some amphibian species, especially in the larval stage. DDT, through its metabolite DDE (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene), caused eggshell thinning and resulted in severe population declines in multiple North American and European bird of prey species.[45] Eggshell thinning lowers the reproductive rate of certain bird species by causing egg breakage and embryo deaths. DDE related eggshell thinning is considered a major reason for the decline of the bald eagle,[8] brown pelican,[46] peregrine falcon, and osprey.[1] However, different groups of birds vary greatly in their sensitivity to these chemicals.[2] Birds of prey, waterfowl, and song birds are more susceptible to eggshell thinning than chickens and related species, and DDE appears to be more potent than DDT.[1] Even in 2010, more than forty years after the U.S. ban, California condors which feed on sea lions at Big Sur which in turn feed in the Palos Verdes Shelf area of the Montrose Chemical Superfund site seemed to be having continued thin-shell problems. Scientists with the Ventana Wildlife Society and others are intensifying studies and remediations of the condors' problems.[47]

The biological thinning mechanism is not entirely known, but there is strong evidence that p,p'-DDE inhibits calcium ATPase in the membrane of the shell gland and reduces the transport of calcium carbonate from blood into the eggshell gland. This results in a dose-dependent thickness reduction.[1][48][49][50] There is also evidence that o,p'-DDT disrupts female reproductive tract development, impairing eggshell quality later.[51] Multiple mechanisms may be at work, or different mechanisms may operate in different species.[1] Some studies show that although DDE levels have fallen dramatically, eggshell thickness remains 10–12 percent thinner than before DDT was first used.[52]
Effects on human health
A US soldier is demonstrating DDT hand-spraying equipment. DDT was used to control the spread of typhus-carrying lice.

Potential mechanisms of action on humans are genotoxicity and endocrine disruption. DDT can be directly genotoxic,[53] but may also induce enzymes to produce other genotoxic intermediates and DNA adducts.[53] It is an endocrine disruptor. The DDT metabolite DDE acts as an antiandrogen, but not as an estrogen. p,p'-DDT, DDT's main component, has little or no androgenic or estrogenic activity.[53] The minor component o,p'-DDT has weak estrogenic activity.
Acute toxicity

DDT is classified as "moderately toxic" by the United States National Toxicology Program (NTP)[54] and "moderately hazardous" by the World Health Organization (WHO), based on the rat oral LD50 of 113 mg/kg.[55] DDT has on rare occasions been administered orally as a treatment for barbiturate poisoning.[56]
Chronic toxicity
Diabetes

DDT and DDE have been linked to diabetes. A number of studies from the US, Canada, and Sweden have found that the prevalence of the disease in a population increases with serum DDT or DDE levels.[57][58][59][60][61][62]
Developmental toxicity

DDT and DDE, like other organochlorines, have been shown to have xenoestrogenic activity, meaning they are chemically similar enough to estrogens to trigger hormonal responses in animals. This endocrine disrupting activity has been observed in mice and rat toxicological studies, and available epidemiological evidence indicates that these effects may be occurring in humans as a result of DDT exposure. The US Environmental Protection Agency states that DDT exposure damages the reproductive system and reduces reproductive success. These effects may cause developmental and reproductive toxicity:

A review article in The Lancet states, "research has shown that exposure to DDT at amounts that would be needed in malaria control might cause preterm birth and early weaning ... toxicological evidence shows endocrine-disrupting properties; human data also indicate possible disruption in semen quality, menstruation, gestational length, and duration of lactation."[30]
Human epidemiological studies suggest that exposure is a risk factor for premature birth and low birth weight, and may harm a mother's ability to breast feed.[63] Some 21st-century researchers argue that these effects may increase infant deaths, offsetting any anti-malarial benefits.[64] A 2008 study, however, failed to confirm the association between exposure and difficulty breastfeeding.[65]
Several recent studies demonstrate a link between in utero exposure to DDT or DDE and developmental neurotoxicity in humans. For example, a 2006 University of California, Berkeley study suggests that children exposed while in the womb have a greater chance of development problems,[66] and other studies have found that even low levels of DDT or DDE in umbilical cord serum at birth are associated with decreased attention at infancy[67] and decreased cognitive skills at 4 years of age.[68] Similarly, Mexican researchers have linked first trimester DDE exposure to retarded psychomotor development.[69]
Other studies document decreases in semen quality among men with high exposures (generally from IRS).[70][71][72]
Studies generally find that high blood DDT or DDE levels do not increase time to pregnancy (TTP.)[73] There is some evidence that the daughters of highly exposed women may have more difficulty getting pregnant (i.e. increased TTP).[74]
DDT is associated with early pregnancy loss, a type of miscarriage. A prospective cohort study of Chinese textile workers found "a positive, monotonic, exposure-response association between preconception serum total DDT and the risk of subsequent early pregnancy losses."[75] The median serum DDE level of study group was lower than that typically observed in women living in homes sprayed with DDT.[76]
A Japanese study of congenital hypothyroidism concluded that in utero DDT exposure may affect thyroid hormone levels and "play an important role in the incidence and/or causation of cretinism."[77] Other studies have also found that DDT or DDE interfere with proper thyroid function.[78][79]

Other

Occupational exposure in agriculture and malaria control has been linked to neurological problems (for example, Parkinson's disease)[80] and asthma.[81] A 2014 study in JAMA Neurology reported that DDT levels were elevated 3.8 fold in Alzheimer's disease patients compared with healthy controls.[82]
Carcinogenicity

In 2002, the Centers for Disease Control reported that "Overall, in spite of some positive associations for some cancers within certain subgroups of people, there is no clear evidence that exposure to DDT/DDE causes cancer in humans."[1] The NTP classifies it as "reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen," the International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies it as a "possible" human carcinogen, and the EPA classifies DDT, DDE, and DDD as class B2 "probable" carcinogens. These evaluations are based mainly on the results of animal studies.[1][30]

More recent evidence from epidemiological studies indicates that DDT causes cancers of the liver,[30][42] pancreas[30][42] and breast.[42] There is mixed evidence that it contributes to leukemia,[42] lymphoma[42][83] and testicular cancer.[30][42][84] Other epidemiological studies suggest that DDT/DDE does not cause multiple myeloma,[30] or cancers of the prostate,[30] endometrium,[30][42] rectum,[30][42] lung,[42] bladder,[42] or stomach.[42]
Breast cancer

The question of whether DDT or DDE are risk factors in breast cancer has been repeatedly studied. While individual studies conflict, the most recent reviews of all the evidence conclude that pre-puberty exposure increases the risk of subsequent breast cancer.[42][85] Until recently, almost all studies measured DDT or DDE blood levels at the time of breast cancer diagnosis or after. This study design has been criticized, since the levels at diagnosis do not necessarily correspond to levels when the cancer started.[86] Taken as a whole such studies "do not support the hypothesis that exposure to DDT is an important risk factor for breast cancer."[53] The studies of this design have been extensively reviewed.[30][87][88]

In contrast, a study published in 2007 strongly associated early exposure (the p,p'- isomer) and breast cancer later in life. Unlike previous studies, this prospective cohort study collected blood samples from young mothers in the 1960s while DDT was still in use, and their breast cancer status was then monitored over the years. In addition to suggesting that the p,p'- isomer is the more significant risk factor, the study also suggests that the timing of exposure is critical. For the subset of women born more than 14 years before agricultural use, there was no association between DDT and breast cancer. However, for younger women – exposed earlier in life – the third who were exposed most to p,p'-DDT had a fivefold increase in breast cancer incidence over the least exposed third, after correcting for the protective effect of o,p'-DDT.[53][89][90] These results are supported by animal studies.[42]
Use against malaria

Malaria remains a major public health challenge in many countries. 2008 WHO estimates were 243 million cases, and 863,000 deaths. About 89% of these deaths occur in Africa, and mostly to children under the age of 5.[91] DDT is one of many tools that public health officials use to fight the disease. Its use in this context has been called everything from a "miracle weapon [that is] like Kryptonite to the mosquitoes,"[92] to "toxic colonialism."[93]

Before DDT, eliminating mosquito breeding grounds by drainage or poisoning with Paris green or pyrethrum was sometimes successful in fighting malaria. In parts of the world with rising living standards, the elimination of malaria was often a collateral benefit of the introduction of window screens and improved sanitation.[26] Today, a variety of usually simultaneous interventions is the norm. These include antimalarial drugs to prevent or treat infection; improvements in public health infrastructure to quickly diagnose, sequester, and treat infected individuals; bednets and other methods intended to keep mosquitoes from biting humans; and vector control strategies[91] such as larvaciding with insecticides, ecological controls such as draining mosquito breeding grounds or introducing fish to eat larvae, and indoor residual spraying (IRS) with insecticides, possibly including DDT. IRS involves the treatment of all interior walls and ceilings with insecticides, and is particularly effective against mosquitoes, since many species rest on an indoor wall before or after feeding. DDT is one of 12 WHO–approved IRS insecticides. How much of a role DDT should play in this mix of strategies is still controversial.[94]

WHO's anti-malaria campaign of the 1950s and 1960s relied heavily on DDT and the results were promising, though temporary. Experts tie the resurgence of malaria to multiple factors, including poor leadership, management and funding of malaria control programs; poverty; civil unrest; and increased irrigation. The evolution of resistance to first-generation drugs (e.g. chloroquine) and to insecticides exacerbated the situation.[17][95] Resistance was largely fueled by often unrestricted agricultural use. Resistance and the harm both to humans and the environment led many governments to restrict or curtail the use of DDT in vector control as well as agriculture.[28] In 2006 the WHO reversed a longstanding policy against DDT by recommending that it be used as an indoor pesticide in regions where malaria is a major problem.[96]

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:Markle posts opinion as facts here every day.......  LOL!

So true but his attempt to discredit actual facts by basically trying to show them as untrue merely by the fact that they showed up in an opinion piece must be some sort of new invention by the right wing to distort and confuse their loyal followers!

Did he get this mode of attack from Rush or is this an original thought on his part I wonder? lol

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

What a stupid article.  Fact check, my a**.  

MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’ - Page 2 6a00d8341e274553ef017ee8922fe9970d-320wi

Guest


Guest

If the policies weren't so far left ideologically... common ground would be easier to find.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

PkrBum wrote:If the policies weren't so far left ideologically... common ground would be easier to find.

That's true but I haven't seen much effort especially on the part of the tea party types to even attempt to find common ground. This anti-Obama attitude can be seen by them when they suddenly are against something he proposes even when it had previously been an idea supported by the right originally.

Take for example the personal responsibility mandate developed by the Heritage Foundation to insure no freeloaders got health care and made those of us who do have it pay for their treatment. When that same concepts gets included in Obama care it is suddenly something from the bowels of the Kremlin! LOL.

In many cases it is not the ideology but the hatred of this administration that puts the right wing folks in one position or another.

knothead

knothead

PkrBum wrote:If the policies weren't so far left ideologically... common ground would be easier to find.

In my mind I think the absolute opposite is more accurate . . . as OS pointed out the right will do a one eighty on a position simply because the administration supports it . . . and it has been that way from the get go.
Whatever it is NO . . .

Sal

Sal

othershoe1030 wrote:

Did he get this mode of attack from Rush or is this an original thought on his part I wonder? lol[/color]

When Markle wanders away from his infamous cut & pastes, he quickly gets lost in the tall grass.

He hasn't had an "original thought" in his entire life.

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
PkrBum wrote:If the policies weren't so far left ideologically... common ground would be easier to find.

That's true but I haven't seen much effort especially on the part of the tea party types to even attempt to find common ground. This anti-Obama attitude can be seen by them when they suddenly are against something he proposes even when it had previously been an idea supported by the right originally.

Take for example the personal responsibility mandate developed by the Heritage Foundation to insure no freeloaders got health care and made those of us who do have it pay for their treatment. When that same concepts gets included in Obama care it is suddenly something from the bowels of the Kremlin! LOL.

In many cases it is not the ideology but the hatred of this administration that puts the right wing folks in one position or another.

personal responsibility mandate LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Its very funny to me when the left tries to use these words like they understand them.

Personal responsibility means taking care of a issue YOURSELF. Not being forced and without help or assistance.

And you really think we are not paying for it? LOLOLOLOLOLOL again, how funny is that? very. Because you may not have noticed it but the premiums are HIGH. EXTREMLY HIGH. and they are going to get HIGHER. Not only are premiums higher, but tax payers are going to be on the hook for the bill, especially when all those obamaciade bills start flowing in. They are bailing out the ins industry and if you had paid attention would know they are looking for more money for that FROM US the tax payers. So basically working people are doing as they always have, pay TWICE for people who don't understand what personal responsibility is.

So, as much as I know you want to redefine another word from the dictionary as you leftist love to do, no go. not going to work.

And I've just been reading a few threads around here, Markle must be pushing some sensitive buttons, because the slander, humiliation tactic is in full swing.

Markle

Markle

knothead wrote:
PkrBum wrote:If the policies weren't so far left ideologically... common ground would be easier to find.

In my mind I think the absolute opposite is more accurate . . . as OS pointed out the right will do a one eighty on a position simply because the administration supports it . . . and it has been that way from the get go.
Whatever it is NO . . .  

Please show us your facts and links. Or can't you? Again....

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:

Did he get this mode of attack from Rush or is this an original thought on his part I wonder? lol[/color]

When Markle wanders away from his infamous cut & pastes, he quickly gets lost in the tall grass.

He hasn't had an "original thought" in his entire life.

You're so cute when you're frustrated and yet have nothing to say!

MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’ - Page 2 Animatedlaughter

Keep up the good work!

2seaoat



Would Ronald Reagan get elected for a second term if his second term was 2012 and he cut and ran from the middle east, he pushed for immigration reform and passed amnesty, and he raised the Social security tax, one of the largest tax increases.......truthfully do you need more links to help you with the obvious, or are you so disconnected with how far the Republican Party has changed as the haters and Dixiecrats stole the same.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Would Ronald Reagan get elected for a second term if his second term was 2012 and he cut and ran from the middle east, he pushed for immigration reform and passed amnesty, and he raised the Social security tax, one of the largest tax increases.......truthfully do you need more links to help you with the obvious, or are you so disconnected with how far the Republican Party has changed as the haters and Dixiecrats stole the same.

#1. Here is the thread. If you want one on President Reagan, start one.

MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:Would Ronald Reagan get elected for a second term if his second term was 2012 and he cut and ran from the middle east, he pushed for immigration reform and passed amnesty, and he raised the Social security tax, one of the largest tax increases.......truthfully do you need more links to help you with the obvious, or are you so disconnected with how far the Republican Party has changed as the haters and Dixiecrats stole the same.

Your analysis is spot-on. Most of them worship the ground Ronald Reagan walked on, yet Reagan grew the government in ways that none of them would tolerate today. He got legislation passed and signed into law would not even make to committees in the 113th Congress. There is a big disconnect between today's so-called conservatives and reality.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Would Ronald Reagan get elected for a second term if his second term was 2012 and he cut and ran from the middle east, he pushed for immigration reform and passed amnesty, and he raised the Social security tax, one of the largest tax increases.......truthfully do you need more links to help you with the obvious, or are you so disconnected with how far the Republican Party has changed as the haters and Dixiecrats stole the same.

#1.  Here is the thread.  If you want one on President Reagan, start one.

MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’


Seems to me that you are the one who is desperate......  Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Would Ronald Reagan get elected for a second term if his second term was 2012 and he cut and ran from the middle east, he pushed for immigration reform and passed amnesty, and he raised the Social security tax, one of the largest tax increases.......truthfully do you need more links to help you with the obvious, or are you so disconnected with how far the Republican Party has changed as the haters and Dixiecrats stole the same.

#1.  Here is the thread.  If you want one on President Reagan, start one.

MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’


Seems to me that you are the one who is desperate......  Razz

Not me, I didn't feel the DESPERATE need to hijack the thread. If you want a thread for your hero, President Ronald Reagan, please start one. Freedom of speech.
MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’ - Page 2 Reagan-1

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » MORE SHEER DESPERATION FROM PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! Four Pinocchios for Obama’s claim that Republicans have ‘filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation’

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum