So why did Grifty trot out a cancer patient? In their heedless quest to chainsaw the federal budget, the world’s most powerful person and the richest man on Earth managed to cut a program that had cost nothing at all—while developing more than 60 drugs for children with cancer and rare, life-threatening diseases.“This program has not cost taxpayers a dime,” notes Nancy Goodman, who conceived and championed the Give Kids A Chance Act, which passed Congress in 2011 and now needs renewal.I think you are a heartless **** bastard because you support the dems unable to stand and clap for a 13 year old with brain cancer who was given 5 months to live in 2018 and all he wanted to do was be a cop. Trump had his make a wish moment and made the kid an hoary SS officer. No dem stood and clapped. YOU supported this
He believes this.Blackvegetable » Today, 7:43 am » wrote: ↑
managed to cut a program that had cost nothing at all—while developing more than 60 drugs for children with cancer and rare, life-threatening diseases.“This program has not cost taxpayers a dime,” notes Nancy Goodman, who conceived and championed the Give Kids A Chance Act, which passed Congress in 2011 and now needs renewal.
Hole, focus.HarperLee » 34 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ "which would lead to layoffs..."
Odd..
When the pipeline was shut down I didn't hear any Democrats care about layoffs.
And when Clinton bragged about cutting 337,000 government jobs I don't remember any resistance...
Moran, anyone cures cancer catches a bullet. No one is trying. TREATING cancer is far more lucrative.Blackvegetable » 16 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Hole, focus.
You started yapping about kids with cancer...
There's more to it than pinning a tin star on one...
Irony deficient dick sucker believes this claptrap. ^Blackvegetable » Today, 7:43 am » wrote: ↑
managed to cut a program that had cost nothing at all—while developing more than 60 drugs for children with cancer and rare, life-threatening diseases.
Guaranteed he saw red after skimming the headline and never read further...Cannonpointer » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ The irony deficient dick sucker beevee believes in free stuff.
FWEE STUFF! THE OWANGE MAN FWEW AWAY OUW FWEE STUFF!
He has no concept -no adult thoughts. There's a program, you see. It developed SIXTY FREE DRUG FOR LITTLE KIDS! No, really.
No, REALLY!
STOP LAUGHING! THIS HAPPENED!
THE OWANGE MAN FWEW AWAY OUW FWEE STUFF!
I want you to really, really think about that statement. I mean REALLY - not a once over. Do a deep mental dive on that statement, and ask yourself if you should care - and if so, why?Mrkelly » 49 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
However, those savings come at a steep cost for the pediatric cancer research community.
I took your adviceCannonpointer » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I want you to really, really think about that statement. I mean REALLY - not a once over. Do a deep mental dive on that statement, and ask yourself if you should care - and if so, why?
Observe your assumptions in arriving at your conclusion, and question them against a hundred years of evidence.
We have a medical research establishment so incredibly powerful that it can develop not one, but FOUR patented vaccines for a novel corona virus in a SINGLE YEAR. Clearly, such a prodigious set of institutions could have cured cancer since 1913, when the american cancer society (and the creature form jekyll island) was born into our midst.
Ask yourself - in your adult voice - what would happen to anyone who cured cancer. And ask yourself if anyone from the "pediatric cancer research community" is sucking your dick on the regular, that you should give a ****. Because what they AIN'T **** DOING is curing pediatric cancer.
There isn't a baby. If there was a baby, we'd have cured cancer.Mrkelly » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I took your advice
and you are right
**** um
it can’t be fixed
out with the bath water
sadly, their are a lot of babiesCannonpointer » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ There isn't a baby. If there was a baby, we'd have cured cancer.
That *** PG'd us, by the way. He is really protective of this particular lie.