Obama opens White House to gay Reagan haters.

[Socrtease]

Not when you're expected to be on your best behavior.

Vetted, my ass. These people acted like radical activists. It's safe to say that there's history of this kind of behavior.

Granule, must describe your brain size.

 

[Granule]

No. There's definitive evidence (excluding your original post) that you are "blatantly ignorant about homosexuals".

No, there's definitive evidence that pc zealots don't like what I said. That amounts to shit in the real world.

 

[Howey]

No, there's definitive evidence that pc zealots don't like what I said. That amounts to shit in the real world.

The only other definitive evidence is the fact that you have proven yourself to be a homophobic christian bigot through your ignorance. You must have missed my post a while back:

God does not teach hatred and bigotry. To hate in God's name is blasphemy.

So quit hiding your homophobic bigotry behind the Bible. You are going to Hell.

 

[Granule]

You are going to Hell.

Judge not, pervert. At least I understand that even heathens like you still have a chance.

 

[Howey]

Judge not, pervert. At least I understand that even heathens like you still have a chance.

Hah! What the fuck were you doing?

Dude...I'm Jewish. I don't go by the silly notion you Christians have that you can sin, go to church and ask forgiveness and all's right with the world. Newsflash! It's not! You're still a gutter-dwelling sinner. That's just another made-up change to the rules. The New Testament is full of them.

The Bible is a guide, not a rule book that allows you to change the rules whenever you want.

btw...not to name names, but isn't it proven that most homophobes have latent homosexual tendencies? Prolly were a little tooooooooo close to single, elderly Uncle Bruce, IYKWIM.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

No Mutt... not 5,6, or 7 years. You cannot even read. If he first addressed it in 1985 publicly... that is four years. The funding started in 1982 and continued escalating as more information became known. Again, he could have done more once it was known how it was transferred. But you want to pretend that people knew what it was or how to respond. You keep saying he didn't act... when what you mean is 'he didn't run around like a chicken with his head cut off proclaiming the sky is falling!'.

Walk us through what the world knew and when it knew it Dung... then tell us what he should have done at the different intervals.

No. He mentioned it a press conference in 1985. He mentioned one more time in a document he sent to congress in 1986. He didn't mention it at all from a substantive policy standpoint till June 24, 1987 when he created the Watkins commision. You're assumption that he could have done more had known how it was transfered is completely ignorant. CDC was aware this was a public health issue in 1981. By 1982 the disease had been characterized into the collective syndrome called Aquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). Your claiming that nothing could be done is rediculous. There was a hell of a lot that could have been done from a public policy stand point that would have limited the spread of this disease that Reagan and conservatives fought because they viewed those actions as condoning homosexuality. Probably the greatest act of moral courage was when Surgeon General C. Everet Koop authored his Surgeon Generals report on AIDS which emphasized comprehensive AIDS education including safe sex practices in 1986 which specifucly defied Reagan era policy. Prior to that Reagan has specifically prohbited Koops from speaking out on AIDS. Get it? THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA PROHIBITED THE NATIONS LEADING PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIAL FROM EVEN SPEAKING ABOUT AIDS FROM 1981 TO 1986!

So if anyone is trying to revise or white wash history it's you. The facts are that Reagan bowed under pressure from Religious conservatives who viewed AIDS as a "Gay Disease" and viewed comprehensive education, including safe sex practices as condoning the gay life style.

The facts are clear. Reagan and his administration did very little to combat AIDS for 7 years and their silence and inaction had tragic consequences for thousands of people.

As for AIDS Spending under Reagan, AIDS was first identified by CDC in 1981. From 1981 though 1986 combined spending on AIDS was $438 million over 6 years. That's a combined average of $73 million per year. To put that in perspective over $6 billion were spent on AIDS research in 2009 alone. That number right there indicates just how much more the Reagan administration could have done. $73 million per year is a paltry and pathetic sum to spend on a communicable disease that had killed over 40,000 people and growing at that time (1986). The real effort to figh AIDS by the Reagan administration didn't even begin till 1987 when $500 million was spent. Again to put into perspective how inadequate Reagans response to the AIDS epidemic was George H. W. Bush spent more on federal AIDS funding in his first year then Reagan did in his entire two terms!

The facts are irrefutable. For 7 years Reagan response and the resources he commited to AIDS were inadequte by orders of magnitudes and because of this a lot of good people died.

 

[Granule]

Hah! What the fuck were you doing?

Telling you like it is, pervert. I've never told you how it will be. You're trying to assume that responsibility for yourself.

Go repent.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

No. He mentioned it a press conference in 1985. He mentioned one more time in a document he sent to congress in 1986. He didn't mention it at all from a substantive policy standpoint till June 24, 1987 when he created the Watkins commision.

LMAO... so now you are going to move the goal posts. You stated he had not mentioned it. Now you change it to he did not mention it in a substantive policy? Keep on revising.

You're assumption that he could have done more had known how it was transfered is completely ignorant. CDC was aware this was a public health issue in 1981. By 1982 the disease had been characterized into the collective syndrome called Aquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).

1) The CDC had no idea what it was in 1981, they just knew that about 5 people in San Francisco and they thought it was a new type of pneumonia.
2) It wasn't until late 1982 that the CDC called it AIDS for the first time

Your claiming that nothing could be done is rediculous.

I didn't claim nothing could be done Mutt. I asked you... what should they have done? They didn't know what it was, they were researching it at the CDC, as more cases broke out, funding kept increasing to figure it out. What else would you have done?

There was a hell of a lot that could have been done from a public policy stand point that would have limited the spread of this disease that Reagan and conservatives fought because they viewed those actions as condoning homosexuality.

Please, link us up to your evidence of such and describe the 'hell of a lot that could have been done'. Because again, they had no idea what was causing it in 1982 or 1983. It wasn't until 1984 that the virus that caused AIDS was identified.

Probably the greatest act of moral courage was when Surgeon General C. Everet Koop authored his Surgeon Generals report on AIDS which emphasized comprehensive AIDS education including safe sex practices in 1986 which specifucly defied Reagan era policy. Prior to that Reagan has specifically prohbited Koops from speaking out on AIDS. Get it? THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA PROHIBITED THE NATIONS LEADING PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIAL FROM EVEN SPEAKING ABOUT AIDS FROM 1981 TO 1986!

You are such a hack... how could Koops speak about AIDS in 1981 or 1982? In 1981 they thought it was pneumonia, in 1982 they still weren't sure what caused it, in late 1982 they coined the name AIDS. Do link us up to the prohibition issued by Reagan.

So if anyone is trying to revise or white wash history it's you. The facts are that Reagan bowed under pressure from Religious conservatives who viewed AIDS as a "Gay Disease" and viewed comprehensive education, including safe sex practices as condoning the gay life style.

Again... funding escalated the more we found out about it. He could have done more, I do not question that. It is your revisionist history of him doing nothing that is being corrected. You want to pretend that there was a lot he could do. Other than coming out and saying 'practice safe sex as AIDS is transmitted through bodily fluids' what else do you propose he could have done?

The facts are clear. Reagan and his administration did very little to combat AIDS for 7 years and their silence and inaction had tragic consequences for thousands of people.

Again, a bogus claim. The facts show your above assertion is false.

As for AIDS Spending under Reagan, AIDS was first identified by CDC in 1981.

This is in itself an exaggeration. They did not identify AIDS in 1981. They had no idea what it was. They thought they had a new strain of pneumonia that was for some reason found in 5 gay men.

From 1981 though 1986 combined spending on AIDS was $438 million over 6 years. That's a combined average of $73 million per year. To put that in perspective over $6 billion were spent on AIDS research in 2009 alone. That number right there indicates just how much more the Reagan administration could have done. $73 million per year is a paltry and pathetic sum to spend on a communicable disease that had killed over 40,000 people and growing at that time (1986). The real effort to figh AIDS by the Reagan administration didn't even begin till 1987 when $500 million was spent. Again to put into perspective how inadequate Reagans response to the AIDS epidemic was George H. W. Bush spent more on federal AIDS funding in his first year then Reagan did in his entire two terms!

You are now outright lying. There were not 40,000 deaths by 1986. There were 50,000 cases reported by 1987, about 24k deaths.

There is now more spending because we have a far greater understanding of AIDS in 2009 than we did in 1981-1986. pretending otherwise is simply revisionist. You are pretending that we should be spending the same despite a far greater understanding of the problem. You are also revising history on the funding from $44 million in 1983 to $103 million, $205 million, $508 million (1986 budget done in 1985), $922 million, and then $1.6 billion in 1988. You want to include 1981 and 1982 when the 81 budget was done long before the problem was known and the 1982 budget was done with very little known.

The facts are irrefutable. For 7 years Reagan response and the resources he commited to AIDS were inadequte by orders of magnitudes and because of this a lot of good people died.

Also... do note... there was no mention of AIDS from the Dems at the 1984 convention? No mention of the fact that Dems were not pushing this either? Or to the contrary the major Dems in NY (an epicenter of AIDS back then) not only refusing to meet with AIDS groups but also nixing funding for AIDS research? You like to bash Reagan because that is what party hacks like you do. But the reality is that Reagan acted like many politicians back then. Like most, he had no idea what AIDS was (nor did the scientists for the first couple of years, despite your revisionism) nor the level to which it would progress. Looking back in hindsight it is easy to say 'they could have done more'. But as the epidemic spread and more information was learned, more was being done to combat it.