hmmmm, why am i not surprised to see you go all-in on the republican spin of this, focusing on the 'bragging about tanking stock prices' part, while omitting the second half of that sentence, pointing to the money saved for taxpayers?

just because republicans and their propaganda outlets are trying to do damage control after being caught now, rationalising their attempts to undermine the investigation into drug pricing by suggesting to drug companies not to fully cooperate, does not mean you have to uncritically accept their ridiculous excuses and side with the people who choose the well-being of drug companies over the well-being of the american people.

see, the problem with being so incredibly biased and narrow-minded on every single issue is that you miss such golden opportunities to pretend that you're not just a low info partisan hack. this issue is so uncontroversial and clear cut that really no one in their right mind would try to defend siding with price gouging drug companies - but you just couldn't help yourself, you just had to go full shill again, trying to defend the indefensible...

sorry, but there just is no spin that could justify this - not even your desperate and dishonest 'b-b-but while investigating and trying to stop price gouging he bragged about the impact their investigation already had on companies engaging in such immoral and cynical practices - dems bad, right?' 'argument'. even IF that were the full story (which you could easily have checked - the transcripts and some of the videos are publicly available, buzzfeed merely happened to be the outlet breaking the story), cummings would still be on the right side of this...

This isnt republican spin. Nor does calling it spin invalidate my position or Jordan's position.

Its citing the actual message in question and putting forth his actual reasons for what he did.
A minimal bar that is necessary to have an honest and accurate representation or conversation about what happened, that you failed to meet.

Regurgitating your usual bevy of insults and buzzwords to impugn the motives and character of people who disagree with you and your terrible behavior is STILL not a real argument, not even if you do it for 2 years straight. Shameful and disgraceful.

People are quite capable of having legitimate differences of opinion, particularly when it comes to identifying and criticizing hyper-partisan investigations and not supporting people bragging about tanking US stock prices as a result of said investigations.

Somehow providing additional information and looking into the reasons for someone's beliefs and actions makes me the low-info partisan hack..
..whereas the guy who posts a buzzfeed article and is wholly disinterested in pursuing or understanding further information while arrogantly and dishonestly writing off anyone who disagrees is supposedly the enlightened one. Hilarious delusion.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Apr 10 2019 04:54pm

if hyperfocusing on one part of a sentence and completely omitting the second part isn't a 'spin', i don't know what is.

of course you are allowed to side with price gouging drug companies and their political allies, but that doesn't put you on the right side of history (or decency for that matter). i suspect it's probably more partisanship than genuine sympathy for drug companies with you, but that still doesn't make it much better that you're trying to rationalise behaviour undermining the attempts to stop those companies from engaging in such practices. talk about 'shameful and disgraceful'...

Ah right, disagreeing with the actions of a hyperpartisan investigation, or citing the actual reasons someone gives for their position, means you are "siding with 'price gouging companies' and their political allies."

Then you unironically try to claim im not on the right side of history or decency

If you actually had the honesty and integrity to read and consider what was said you would realize Jordan and I are not happy with the current state of drug companies and prices either.
He explicitly said as much and called for bipartisanship.
We merely disagree with a hyperpartisan democrat investigation and some of their 'solutions'.
Google the word 'nuance'

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Apr 10 2019 05:03pm

just because someone claims 'partisanship' to justify their siding with price gouging drug companies doesn't make that a fact. you are at a point where you don't even question the first layer of dishonesty anymore and just fully commit to the excuse.

you remind me of the 'of course you are allowed to protest, but just not THAT way' crowd, with 'that' applying to every form of protest they are confronted with that has shown to raise some kind of awareness. well of course we want to fight price gouging - just not like 'THAT'... how gullible can you be?

Ah right, he is being "dishonest" about cummings being partisan. good one
I'm sure hes just lying about Cummings acting unilaterally and not consulting the republicans.

If you feel that is actually the case, go ahead and make that argument with supporting facts.
Dont just insult and grasp at straws that have little to do with what i said and call it a day.

In the extraordinarily unlikely (read:impossible) scenario that he is lying about Cummings being partisan, his letter that I posted is still extremely relevant to the conversation about what his actual positions are and why he purportedly is acting this way and holding these beliefs. It warrants consideration and posting it is not proof of 'low-info partisan hackery' or any of the other unfounded despicable claims you made about me.

What i remind you of in your delusions is irrelevant.
Calling me gullible is unfounded.

Taking specific issue with particular actions (or citing someone's reasons for doing so) is not the same as opposing all policies intended to address drug prices and big pharma.
No, Not even if it reminds you of a scenario where you think someone else would oppose all policies or actions.

you might not be intelligent enough to realise that, but accusing someone of partisanship (while ironically omitting the second half of a statement you cite as proof thereof!) in order to justify your scummy move, does neither prove said partisanship nor is it a valid reason to advise drug companies not to cooperate with the investigation into their pricing policies.

again, i realise you're completely committed to this right now, and there is no way you would even critically think about the validity of your excuses, but that does NOT change the facts about this issue.

Cummings is definitely a very partisan democrat acting in a partisan manner.

You cant even admit that very basic fact.. let alone address the arguments and merit of what we are saying. Incredible.

Recognizing that fact and citing a politician in question mentioning that among his documentation of events in a letter is not 'scummy'.

Insulting my intelligence when you cant come up with a decent argument is pathetic and unfounded.
Sadly thats your usual behavior on this forum.

I dont have 'excuses'. I dont need 'excuses' for posting extremely relevant information about the conversation and picking apart your posts. That was fully justified.

again, your personal feelings and evaluations of cummings' character are completely irrelevant in this context. show me proof of cummings' alleged partisanship hurting the goal of this investigation (which you pretend to support), and explain how suggesting drug companies not to cooperate is the right thing to do. until you can do that, you're merely uncritically regurgitating the lazy excuses of corrupt republican operatives siding with price gouging drug companies over customers.
and no, a letter misrepresenting someone by only quoting half sentences is not proof of their partisanship, let alone proof of that partisanship working against the goals you allegedly support.

You simply don't have an argument that addresses what I say.
Talking about my 'personal feelings' and claiming i'm "uncritically regurgitating" something when you don't have the integrity to examine the issues, arguments and facts yourself is not a valid argument.
It just exposes the flaws in your own character and intellect.

Cummings being a longtime known partisan who is making unilateral decisions without consulting republicans on the committee is proof of his partisanship.
His partisanship isnt in question and isnt the real issue here.
Its just something you desperately grasped at when the conversation wasn't going your way.

Warning companies that a partisan democrat investigation is bragging about tanking stocks and leaking sensitive information is arguably the right thing to do.
You may disagree, you have a number of shit opinions and thats fine to a degree, but other people can and do have their more reasonable views too.

Note that people don't have to agree that it was the right thing to do in order for you to be incredibly wrong and out of line here.
You falsely attacked me for posting the relevant information when you were ignorant of his reasons for doing so, you falsely portray us as opposing all policies intended to combat drug prices and big pharma when we do not, you ridiculously claimed that we were being "dishonest" and "scummy" for recognizing the obvious fact that a partisan democrat was involved.

Instead of informing yourself and honestly considering others' positions you were content with posting a buzzfeed article, spewing your usual list of insults at people who post something you dont like, falsely claiming that the issue is uncontroversial and clear cut to avoid real consideration and critical thinking, and making the claim that republicans "love drug companies more than people".

A comprehensively despicable and inaccurate display.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Apr 10 2019 06:50pm