LTC Advocate

Well thank you for saying so! I have to give the care aids credit as well. They are a gold pot of info when the residents start going "off" for lack of a better word! Use. I do not always have their no at my fingertips and do rely of assessments. Never thought about that!

I hear what you are saying and I also think Trump likes being talked about,even talked about bad,as long as he is being talked about......

May I take the time to give ICU nurses some well deserved praise. I look at all of you as earth angels. When I was in nursing school, I was having a very tough time and was seriously considering quitting. My mom who had COPD, went into respiratory failure. Her ICU nurses were amazing! They told me the worst info I could hear and yet they comforted me. They knew I was a nursing student and allowed me to do assessments on my mom with them. (Fitting as she was always my guinea pig). The way they treated me and my mom inspired me to not quite nursing! And here I am. My mom died that day but I nor her ever felt alone. Thank you ICU nurses,you are truly earth angels.

Thank you for that indepth education! I knew it wasn't the best option and should be used as last resort(intubation). In LTC when I made the decision for a sedative, I always evaluate what is best for the resident. If other intervention have failed, they are putting themselves and others at risk, if they are suffering especially when having frightening delusions, I will use the sedatives. I will not however use them before any of that. Only in extreme circumstances, usually when other nurses cannot help, I will use sedative first. It's always based on the situation and most importantly the resident/patient.

I am not an ICU nurse but does intubation sometimes cause a whole new set of potential problems? In LTC some staff are quick to admin or order sedatives for our residents. Sometimes this is the best option especially for the resident. However I do not think it should be the first. Hang in, you seem to be a very apt and empathetic nurse! Trust in your knowledge and instincts and most importantly, your empathy!

Heh....QED? What does that mean? I can see you do not like the song and that is fine, you do not have to. I feel that QED is some sort of an insult, taking into account of the tone on the few of your post I have read. I apologize if this is not correct. If you had something important to say, I think you wouldn't have used letter abbreviations so I will move on. Good day to you. P.S I have all 3 of my Fauci ouchie, and I recommend them and have administered them as well, I stopped counting at around 250 a year ago. I have seen minor systemic reactions, no blood clotts or any serious complications.

Well I guess it comes down to due process. With the more left DOJ and Jan.6 committee, I do not think they will fail to hold Mr. Trump accountable if he is. I think they will fine tooth comb everything so hopefully they will not miss anything and justice will be done. The way is should be.

It is hilarious! Am I terrible for thinking it has a sexual connotation? And thinking that makes it funnier? Rap music is very sexual at times ,the song could be satire but it could be promoting vaccine too! The lyrics are bad but some how brilliant? Thanks for the laugh! We all need it.

I'm sorry but this is funny. Look at his facial expressions! I know why some won't appreciate this but I got a chuckle over it. We all agree the science is sound on the benefits of laughing!!

"Vaccinate your dad and mom"! Hahaha. "I want it in me" Too funny!!

Out of the source you linked,it says the following: " First, incitement to violence requires proof that the defendant intended to incite violence or riot (whether or not it actually occurs). Careless conduct or "emotionally charged rhetoric" does not meet this standard. Second, the defendant must create a sort of roadmap for immediate harm—using general or vague references to some future act doesn't qualify as imminent lawless action. Finally, the defendant's words must be likely to persuade, provoke, or urge a crowd to violence. Profanity or offensive messaging alone isn't enough; the messaging must appeal to actions that lead to imminent violence. With what we know so far, I would agree that Mr.Trumps rhetoric upto and on Jan.6 was careless and emotionally charged. And unless they uncover something,First, incitement to violence requires proof that the defendant intended to incite violence or riot (whether or not it actually occurs). Careless conduct or "emotionally charged rhetoric" does not meet this standard. Second, the defendant must create a sort of roadmap for immediate harm—using general or vague references to some future act doesn't qualify as imminent lawless action. Finally, the defendant's words must be likely to persuade, provoke, or urge a crowd to violence. Profanity or offensive messaging alone isn't enough; the messaging must appeal to actions that lead to imminent violence.there is nothing to suggest he planned the for what happened that day.(not yet) Both those points does not qualify as imminent lawless action. The point of, "likely to provoke or urge a crowd into violence" is subjective on the first 2 points. Unless there is some drastic inflammatory information that comes up, I do not see any criminal charges being held against him. A whole lot of people will not be happy. I hope this won't cause more riots. Again,this is not my personal opinion. I am making no statements to the point that Mr. Trump is guilty or innocent. I am just predicting what I think will not happen.

Again I have to disagree. I do not think Mr.Trump is a fascist nor the millions of people who voted for him. In good continous I can not assign that to my fellow Americans. I know many who did vote for him and they are not fascist. If this the way you think,what would you propose be done about it? All the eople you say have been convinced into fascist? People can and will think what they like. Why is it they have not charged him by now? If there is no current reason not to? I don't understand. I think I referred to the voting machines being evil.

Yes you are correct,it was the DOJ,please accept my apology for my mistake.

Hopefully we will learn and hopefully we all can accept what we learn even if it's not what we want. I hope this committee learns why this happened , how and have ideas to prevent this type of violence and all political violence. We will see!

I'm just offering information I have learned and general summary of what I think is happening based on conversations I have had and allot of reading. I have no concrete evidence or proof of any of the things I said I think people might be feeling. As for democrats abandoning Biden if he was guilty of the things most democrats think of Trump? I would have to respectfully disagree. In my own conclusions from various sources of personal interactions and subjects I have read from an abundance of sources, I do not think a large group of democrats would abandon Biden. Just as the Trump supporters refuse to accept anything negative about Trump,I think there is a large number of democrats that would also deny and explain everything away.on the bases of anything to keep Trump away. Mostly the highly visible democrat politicians that careers depend on it. There is not much room for criticism of Biden and his policies in th Democrat party. However,everyday people both Republican or Democrat probably are not that extreme and will conceded things they like and dislike of President Biden and Mr. Trump. I think allot of people didn't trust the government previously,not just now. Covid and all the events with mandating, masks,conflicting information(or interpreted conflicting information) has allot to do with it. It should be "we the people" but it feels more like,"we the people,except you" type of atmosphere. This applying to both sides. Mutal understanding and compromise seems to be lacking and unfortunately it is "we the people" the everyday people, that suffer the most. In my opinion,both sides should do better!