CDC "Confusion"?

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/553430/

 

Dang Bill Clinton up to his old tricks....

 

Nah they just stop blood flow, cause strokes like "Biden", obesity and diabetes, colon cancer, blindness and all sorts of complication associated with lard ass.. Just wear a mask, sit around for a few years eating Big Macs and Whoppers ..

BTW be sure to send XI a big thank you for not stopping the spread from his country for 60+ days.. That really helped didn't it

 

Clearly the CDC and administration at the time were politicizing the CDC to undermine the Constitution. Politicization is when any party does it. Not just one.

 

I'm perfectly aware of what bad nutrition and sedentary life do; still, like I said, it's not as dramatic or as fast as this acute heart fiber damage.

Are you under the impression that I defend Xi??? In virtually ALL my posts when the topic was raised, I said that Trump standing up to the Chinese is the biggest positive I see in his foreign policy. I consider the Chinese government to be made of liars and profiteers, and I consider China to be the biggest geopolitical adversary we currently have. Forget Russia. China is much worse.

 

Gee Trump Trump Trump, and no XI XI Xi

And the XI, and who spent 40+ days feeding Trump misinformation about human to human transmission.. Like you say "Would it have made a difference ?" Another thing the Trump haters fail to recognize is when Mr. Obatard was faced with his flu he HAD a well stocked inventory of much needed pandemic supplies the Bush Jr left him.. Unfortunately Trump wasn't left the same way, but hey, Trumps the bad guy in all this regardless of how badly it was handle in Dec and January..

All Hail XI

 

The CDC was exploring whether gun violence was a public health problem.

Republicans intervened because any report on the matter would potentially undermine their POLITICAL position

 

The Dickey amendment only prohibited use of funds for research with the intent to advocate or promote gun control. For some reason (not political I’m sure LOL) that took the fun out of it for the CDC. But they did not stop research. In fact CDC research from 1996-1998 (after Dickey) validates private research on defensive gun use in those years. Of course, since it didn’t promote the political views of the CDC at the time you didn’t hear about it. Does it seem odd that the CDC was actually doing research on firearm violence after passage of the Dickey amendment but didn’t report findings at odds with the administration at the time? Wouldn’t that be “politicization” of the CDC?

Isn’t it interesting that research did continue but slowed drastically after the Dickey amendment that only prohibited studies pushing gun control? Isn’t that proof of political bias at the CDC since there was no prohibition on studies not aimed at gun control?

From your link on why the author thinks we need more spending and studies.

This is none of the CDC’s business and gives the game away.

All the above is interesting in the context of firearms, but to address your original point that this is the first politicalization of the CDC is...well...incorrect. Here is a quote from the CDC website on the history of the CDC.

 

Great point to a report on gun violence they put out please

 

How does that work?

Studies only "push" anything after they are done. Sounds like they were stopped from doing before they happened

 

From the Washington Post

Just consider the starkly split response to our piece this week about how the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still had not resumed researching gun violence, two years after President Obama ordered the agency to do so.


Gun rights supporters argue the CDC shouldn't get involved. The agency should stick to controlling and preventing disease, they say.

There’s also a healthy dose of distrust of any research the CDC might conduct – which is why the agency essentially stopped studying the issue in 1996 after the NRA accused the CDC of advocating for gun control. The resulting research ban caused a steep decline in firearms studies nationwide. As a University of Pennsylvania criminology professor explained it, “I see no upside to ignorance."


But even that is a contentious point. So the recent article on the CDC’s continued failure to kick-start gun studies was met by wildly different responses.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6744a3.htm

Yes the CDC did eventually put out a report but it is clear that there was Republican interference until that point....which was my poin t and YOURS (originally)

 

Bill Clinton was the one that signed that piece of legislation...he isn't a Republican

 

That report was released in Nov of 2018....Trump was President and the Congress was owned by the GOP

 

I’m not sure if they put out any reports in those years. It’s irrelevant to our discussion on the Dickey amendment. Research continued under the Dickey amendment. That’s all that’s relevant.

 

You can’t be that naive, can you?

Research didn’t stop. It slowed because studies designed to push control were not funded.

 

My only point has been the CDC has previously been politicized. In fact I supplied a quote from the CDC saying they are.

I understand politicization to you is only if it’s done by a party you disagree with. I don’t care about parties. Trump clearly politicized the CDC by providing funding post Dickey amendment. Both parties have routinely politicized the CDC. All kinds of things including LGBT and AIDS researched by the CDC have been politicized by both parties. Just read some of it and look for emphasis changes depending on what party has predominant power.

Don’t take my word for it. I provided the CDC admitting politicization in it’s own words.

 

Here we have two examples of the CDC being manipulated politically...both times by Republicans

It is NOT normal nor should we accept it

 

Oh look..the WH staffer Caputo who wrote the e-mail to influence the CDC, has Russian ties.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mich...-hhs-covid-reports_n_5f5e8ec0c5b67602f606d011

 

No. The firearms issue was CDC being politicized by the Democratic Party. It was remedied by the GOP with the Dickey amendment. Both parties have politicized the CDC on LBGT and AIDS research.

The CDC admits it’s normal in the quote I provided.

 

Because right now it's probably the safest place in America short of Montana.

 

The Dickey Amendment on its face...was GOP interference in a legitimate research. You have shown nothing that indicates that Dems were forcing the CDC to do anything.

And you include AIDS? That shouldn't fall under the CDC purvue?

The fact that you make that claim shoots anything else you have to say in the ass

But again...no dispute from you that the Trump Admin is NOW interfering in what the CDC puts out. You just claim that is normal. It is not

 

haha hardly

 

You really don’t know much about bureaucracies in general or the CDC specifically, do you? The administration appoints the CDC director. Furthermore, other CDC departments are filled by the administration. Such as the Board of Scientific Counselors, consisting of mostly appointed Special Government Employees. So the CDC under each administration is composed of individuals usually having similar interests, political goals, and methodology as the President. So the administration doesn’t “force” the CDC to do anything. It builds a CDC over time that pursues the goals of the administration.

I get really tired of your strawman arguments. I’ve never said or implied AIDS shouldn’t fall under CDC purview. I simply pointed out it’s prioritized differently under different administrations based on political goals of that administration.

The fact you have to make things up I never said disqualifies you as a serious entity to engage in conversation with. You’ve made a false claim in the original post of yours I responded to. I’ve provided a quote from the CDC proving your claim to be incorrect.

Why aren’t you upset the Clinton administration CDC didn’t publish the data on defensive gun use I referenced earlier? As I’ve pointed out, you only care about “interference” when it’s something you don’t like personally. I don’t get spun up about it because per the Constitution the executive branch has sole authority to involve itself in the departments under executive control. We don’t have to like what each Executive does, but it’s their right to do it and it isn’t rare, it’s normal.