Welcome to tyranny.

[bripat9643]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.

Agreed.

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed source of income. You're free to hold whatever priorities you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to impose them on us. Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck if your grandma dies because she refused to isolate herself. That's her problem, not mine. I need to work, and my job takes precedence over your grandma. End of story.

You should be pressuring the Federal government to produce more tests then. It's the only way you're going to safely return to work.

The government is doing everything humanly possible to get those tests.

Local governments are, Trump is more concerned that he can still enjoy a steak.

Which is pure BS because the federal government has more pull than local governments. If the federal government can't get them, neither can local governments.

Yes, they do. That's why they should be doing more. Instead of using the power of the executive to keep meat packing plants open, he should be using the power of the federal government to ramp up testing.

He must have been reading your mind:

Trump says he will use Defense Production Act to increase swabs for testing

President Trump announced Sunday that he will use the Defense Production Act to direct a company to increase production of badly-needed swabs for coronavirus testing.Trump said at a White House new…

thehill.com

Or listening to the pleadings of health professionals. It's a start, but if Doddering Don wants people back to work, they have to do better. We need to be testing 5 million or more people a day.

No we don't. 99.9 % of people who get it will survive it. 95% won't even know they had it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.

Agreed.

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed source of income. You're free to hold whatever priorities you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to impose them on us. Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck if your grandma dies because she refused to isolate herself. That's her problem, not mine. I need to work, and my job takes precedence over your grandma. End of story.

You should be pressuring the Federal government to produce more tests then. It's the only way you're going to safely return to work.

The government is doing everything humanly possible to get those tests.

Local governments are, Trump is more concerned that he can still enjoy a steak.

Which is pure BS because the federal government has more pull than local governments. If the federal government can't get them, neither can local governments.

Yes, they do. That's why they should be doing more. Instead of using the power of the executive to keep meat packing plants open, he should be using the power of the federal government to ramp up testing.

He must have been reading your mind:

Trump says he will use Defense Production Act to increase swabs for testing

President Trump announced Sunday that he will use the Defense Production Act to direct a company to increase production of badly-needed swabs for coronavirus testing.Trump said at a White House new…

thehill.com

Or listening to the pleadings of health professionals. It's a start, but if Doddering Don wants people back to work, they have to do better. We need to be testing 5 million or more people a day.

So he should just snap his fingers and make it happen? He's doing everything he can, but the federal government is not in total charge of the states. If the states want more test kits, why don't they buy them? The answer is simply because there is not an ample supply of them.

 

[bripat9643]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.

However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.

Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.

States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea

www.politifact.com

That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

Apparently it is those you elected, blitz bulb.

I didn't elect any of them, moron.

You are compromising the democratic process

How am I doing that?

 

[bripat9643]

It is potentially deadly to anyone who gets it. 20% of the deaths in the United States are people under 65. You are eager to display your ignorance.

20% of US COVID-19 Deaths Were Aged 20-64

A study from the CDC on cases between February 12 and March 16 also showed that patients aged 20 to 44 appeared to be at higher risk for hospitalization and ICU admission.

www.medscape.com

A paper cut is "potentially deadly," moron. That phrase is meaningless..

As for your 20% claim, it's dead wrong. Only 4.5% of people who die are under 65 years of age.

Coronavirus Age, Sex, Demographics (COVID-19) - Worldometer

 

[Bleipriester]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.

However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.

Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.

States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea

www.politifact.com

That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

Apparently it is those you elected, blitz bulb.

I didn't elect any of them, moron.

You are compromising the democratic process

How am I doing that?

You didn´t elect any of them, moron.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

I was telling my son just last night, while we discussed current events, that a lot of state governments are in for a huge surprise about how much the power to govern derives from the consent of the governed.

Btw, I was so proud of him when he said, "Yeah, that's why we have a 2nd Amendment: to make sure they HAVE to have our consent."

 

[Cecilie1200]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

None of my loved ones are going to die from COVID, moron. If your grandma dies because she refuses to isolate herself, I couldn't give a shit. You worry about your loved ones and I'll worry about mine. I do care if I go bankrupt because of this shutdown, and so do about 200 millions others. Your theory that economic pain doesn't matter doesn't pass the laugh test. That's the kind of thing that only people with a gauranteed income say. They are douchebags.

I definitely think Kondor should take his bumper-sticker slogans to any third-world country of his choice and try telling THEM that poverty and economic depression are no big deal and not a threat to their lives.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

Nobody expects responsibility from you, but from your government that tells you no you cannot drive on the sidewalk.

A virus is not comparable to driving on the sidewalk, you moron.

Don´t breath at me then.

As if I would EVER let a third-rate nobody twerp like you close enough to me to breathe on.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Except they don't actually have any laws that allow them to negate people's civil rights, and if they tried to pass one, it would be illegitimate for conflicting with the highest law in the country.

Please notice that NONE of these lockdowns and crazed, fascistic orders popping up have actually been LAWS at all. They've been executive orders by governors. Last time I checked, there's not a single state in the US where the governor makes the laws.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Most Americans don't want to do construction... Nobody goes to college for four years to work construction.

Most don't go to college for four years either. We still have a sizable blue-collar working class that will take those construction jobs.

As usual, JoeB131 is only demonstrating the ignorance and hubris which pretty much defines him, when he disparages construction work, as he does, and imagines that he is in any way better to (or even equal to) a typical construction worker.

Construction is honest, valuable work, and there is good money to be made in it, especially in the skilled trades.

I've been an IT guy in the distant past, a programmer, data analyst, and all-round maintainer of computer equipment.

In that part of my life, like JoeB131 I arrogantly thought myself better than anyone who did anything as menial as construction or other physical labor.

I was wrong, then.

I now find construction work far more satisfying, rewarding, and meaningful than I ever found IT work.

I always felt that people are all geared for different things. You're not going to make a surgeon into a linebacker for the NFL, and you're not going to make your garbage man a scientist.

I come from a construction family. I was mixing cement since 12 years old, and did that until I turned 18 and got a full time job. Heck, I still did it during the Reagan recession for a spell.

In any case, I can't stand working indoors like an office, a cubical, in front of the same drill press day after day. When I work, I need to be outside, so I spent most of my life driving. I inherit my desire to be outside from my father, who always felt the same.

The father of a friend of mine growing up was a severe alcoholic. He'd even drink at his job as a butcher. One day he got laid off, and got a job with the city school system as a bus driver. From there, he got his boiler operators license, and did janitorial work. While he was working there, he quit drinking, then he quit smoking. He turned out to be a total opposite of his previous self.

He didn't realize how chopping up animals day in and day out was affecting him. My friend once said his father told him the day he lost his job as a butcher, was the best day of his life.

See, I'm the opposite of you. I would rather shoot myself in the foot than do any sort of manual labor, but I am a flipping genius at desk jobs that involve managing tedious data and details. Doesn't matter what industry it's in, or what software is being used, because if you give me free rein for a couple of weeks, I'll teach myself everything I need to know.

Everyone is different, and has a niche they fill perfectly . . . which is good, because whatever the job is, SOMEONE needs to do it.

 

[miketx]

The 115-year-old Supreme Court opinion that could determine rights during a pandemic

When a US appeals court ruled this week that Texas could prevent physicians from performing abortions because of the Covid-19 pandemic, the judges leaned heavily on a 1905 Supreme Court decision against a Massachusetts man who had refused vaccination during a smallpox outbreak.

www.cnn.com

I'm still waiting for someone to show us where judicial review exists in Article III.

I don't matter when the judicial guys are all corrupt partisan traitors.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

Where did Bri say that all laws must exist in the Constitution? Have you always been this fucking illiterate, or is it only when you somehow think sounding stupid will be a "brilliant" debate tactic?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.

Agreed.

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

I hold that you're setting up a false dichotomy, and I utterly reject your premise that this is a choice between "economics or death".

Since the lockdown was never intended to "save lives and keep people from ever getting sick at all", there's no point in continuing it beyond the point where it has accomplished it's REAL purpose. It was intended to slow the rate of infectious spread and give our medical facilities time to increase their ability to respond and to give our scientists time to learn more about the virus so that we could make smarter choices going forward.

The fact that fucktards like you misunderstood and thought the lockdown was about cowering in our houses until the virus magically went entirely away - and, coincidentally, you had a chance to use it to further your political agenda - doesn't make any of us beholden to acting like your perception was real or sane.

 

[Bleipriester]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Except they don't actually have any laws that allow them to negate people's civil rights, and if they tried to pass one, it would be illegitimate for conflicting with the highest law in the country.

Please notice that NONE of these lockdowns and crazed, fascistic orders popping up have actually been LAWS at all. They've been executive orders by governors. Last time I checked, there's not a single state in the US where the governor makes the laws.

Check, which laws enable them to issue Executive Orders.

 

[Bleipriester]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

Where did Bri say that all laws must exist in the Constitution? Have you always been this fucking illiterate, or is it only when you somehow think sounding stupid will be a "brilliant" debate tactic?

You just insisted on direct laws. Now it is the other way round. Who is that third rate idiot?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The solvency of a given business shut down by the pandemic is not worth the life of a single American citizen.

Is it worth the livelihoods of all the employees who depend on that company for the jobs that allow them to feed and house and otherwise support themselves and their families?

How much poverty, famine, homelessness is your spite toward such a company worth?

Human life is more important than the solvency of a given company.

Human life is more important than the economic well being of that company's employees.

Human life is not separate from the ability to sustain that life, moron, no matter HOW "noble" your talking points sound to you.

Why do I suspect that YOUR income has not disappeared due to this virus?

There is no question of sustaining human life from an economic vantage point.

No one in this country is going to starve.

People will, however, die in vastly higher numbers, if we begin cramming them back together within work-places before we're ready and before the virus begins to lose ground.

You basically say "Phukk it... re-open... send 'em back to work."

I basically say "You need to tough it out until the pandemic eases... better broke than six feet under."

There is a lot of question about sustaining human life from an economic vantage point. Just because your thought masters haven't told you to know about it doesn't mean it isn't true. Why don't you take yourself to the third world country of your choice and tell THEM that economic devastation is no threat to THEIR lives?

And guess what, shitstain? The fact that you just dismissively assert that "No one in this country is going to starve" does not make it fact, and the fact that it's YOU saying it actually makes it much more likely that it's bullshit. The experts are telling us that our food supply chain is in trouble, farmers are having to dispose of tons of produce, chicken, and pork, and millions of Americans are dependent on food banks. But hey, if you just wave your hand and say, "Everything's fine, we can lockdown forever and nothing will change", that just fixes everything.

You clearly haven't listened to anything that has been said to you by anyone other than the voices in your own pinhead and your thought masters, so you will fucking spare me your attempt to tell me what I am thinking and saying. While I realize that the only possible way your stupid ass could ever hope to win an argument is against a straw man you created, I am not obligated to play along with you.

YOU are saying, "Lockdown everything forever and pretend that the downside doesn't matter, since it doesn't affect ME!"

I am saying, "Lockdowns are unsustainable and the problems they cause are every bit as devastating and important as the effects of the coronavirus. Find smart ways to manage and balance the risks and rewards, like we do for everything."

Only in your own vapid mind is your point of view the sensible OR the moral one.

 

[Kondor3]

...I definitely think Kondor should take his bumper-sticker slogans to any third-world country of his choice and try telling THEM that poverty and economic depression are no big deal and not a threat to their lives.

What bumper-sticker slogan would that be, genius?

"Human life is more important than corporate solvency" ?

Do you believe that corporate solvency is more important than human life?

Truly?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The solvency of a given business shut down by the pandemic is not worth the life of a single American citizen.

Is it worth the livelihoods of all the employees who depend on that company for the jobs that allow them to feed and house and otherwise support themselves and their families?

How much poverty, famine, homelessness is your spite toward such a company worth?

Human life is more important than the solvency of a given company.

Human life is more important than the economic well being of that company's employees.

Is it more important that the ability of people to feed their families?

What a fucking dumbass.

Nobody in this country is going to starve.

Consequently...

Yes...

Human life is more important than the solvency of a given company or the economic well-being of its employees.

Human life trumps all of that $hit.

No 'dumba$$' involved... merely eternal truth.

Something that whiny-bitch Trump butt-sniffers are entirely incapable of comprehending.

Basically, I just heard you say, "I can't know about any problems that my talking points didn't tell me to know about."

We'll all get right on ignoring all the experts telling us that food supply chains are breaking down and record numbers of people are flooding into food banks, because you "know" that nothing is going to be any different than always . . . at least until your talking points tell you to start knowing it.

It's amazing how butt-sniffers for the Democrats like you can squawk, "Human life! Human life!" about every topic under the sun, and be shit-stupid enough to think you're saying something real.

It's a good thing your thought masters have ordered you to believe that you have some moral standing, because God knows it's the only way an imbecile like you would ever have that experience.

Sit down and mind your manners, child.

Be man enough to make me, eunuch. I'm going to keep saying whatever I want to, and you will suffer it in your impotence to stop me, or you will run away like the dickless coward I know you to be. Which is it going to be?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

None of my loved ones are going to die from COVID, moron. If your grandma dies because she refuses to isolate herself, I couldn't give a shit. You worry about your loved ones and I'll worry about mine. I do care if I go bankrupt because of this shutdown, and so do about 200 millions others. Your theory that economic pain doesn't matter doesn't pass the laugh test. That's the kind of thing that only people with a gauranteed income say. They are douchebags.

Mind your manners in the presence of your betters, pi$$ant.

You hold that financial solvency trumps human life.

You are scum.

He does mind his manners in the presence of his betters. Too bad for you that you aren't one of them. Pissant.

I suggest you hold your breath until your "moral" condemnation matters to anyone but you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

None of my loved ones are going to die from COVID, moron. If your grandma dies because she refuses to isolate herself, I couldn't give a shit. You worry about your loved ones and I'll worry about mine. I do care if I go bankrupt because of this shutdown, and so do about 200 millions others. Your theory that economic pain doesn't matter doesn't pass the laugh test. That's the kind of thing that only people with a gauranteed income say. They are douchebags.

Mind your manners in the presence of your betters, pi$$ant.

You hold that financial solvency trumps human life.

You are scum.

Economic pain is always balanced against human life. We could stop all traffic deaths tomorrow if we established a national speed limit of 5 mph. According to you the fact that we don't means we hold that financial solvency trumps human life. The concept of perfect safety is absurd. The only question is how many deaths are we willing to tolerate, and so far we haven't even come close to what we've tolerated in the past.

Every choice is a trade off. Only douchebags fail to acknowledge that reality.

Self-absorbed, hypocritical douchebags. Do you really think that Kondor would be prattling his little slogan to us if it was HIS "financial solvency" that was on the line? The only reason he thinks economics are disposable to achieve his agenda is because it's not hurting HIM.