What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

[guest1163268]

Something to understand what nurses think about re the Current News and their opinions!

[heron, ASN, RN]

2 minutes ago, MaybeeRN said:

Yawn.  Projection.

Does that mean you have no point? Do you even know what projection is?

[emtb2rn, BSN, RN, EMT-B]

4 minutes ago, MaybeeRN said:

Yawn.  Projection.

No, it’s not projection. It’s a valid observation. 

[toomuchbaloney]

12 hours ago, MaybeeRN said:

No one cares what you think.  

They care even less what you think now that you've demonstrated a rather deep and wide ignorance of a variety of subjects coupled with a trollish style. 

12 hours ago, MaybeeRN said:

Yawn.  Projection.

Nope... just observation.  It's okay though, I take pity on people who are unaware of their ignorance.

[Beerman, BSN]

Good news for Biden.   SCOTUS sides with him, and thus the border will be more porous.

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1104015677/supreme-court-remain-in-mexico-rmm

[Beerman, BSN]

"Americans will have to endure pain at the pump indefinitely in the name of the “liberal world order,” a top economic adviser to President Biden said Thursday — hours after Biden himself said US drivers would have to shell out the big bucks for “as long as it takes” for Ukraine to defeat Russia’s invasion."

https://nypost.com/2022/07/01/biden-adviser-liberal-world-order-demands-enduring-high-gas-prices/

[toomuchbaloney]

"Liberal world order"

That's almost funny, was it supposed to be serious?

[heron, ASN, RN]

6 minutes ago, Beerman said:

"Americans will have to endure pain at the pump indefinitely in the name of the “liberal world order,” a top economic adviser to President Biden said Thursday — hours after Biden himself said US drivers would have to shell out the big bucks for “as long as it takes” for Ukraine to defeat Russia’s invasion."

https://nypost.com/2022/07/01/biden-adviser-liberal-world-order-demands-enduring-high-gas-prices/

I certainly hope so … the sooner the private automobile bites the dust, the better for the world.

[toomuchbaloney]

11 minutes ago, heron said:

I certainly hope so … the sooner the private automobile bites the dust, the better for the world.

There's some truth to that statement.  

[emtb2rn, BSN, RN, EMT-B]

26 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

"Liberal world order"

That's almost funny, was it supposed to be serious?

It is real. However, it is not liberal in the negative sense the term currently has as the concept is over 100 years. Here’s part of an article published in 2020 in the public section of the army’s war college website. If you like this type of analysis, I recommend foreign policy at https://foreignpolicy.com/  

“While many experts see the current liberal world order as having emerged in 1991, they minimize the history of the liberal world order throughout the 20th century, and how it coincided with the American rise in the international system. To understand the rise of the liberal world order requires understanding scholarship in both history and international relations, because the rise of the liberal world order is connected to the rise of the United States in the international system. This development occurred in three phases. The first phase occurred between 1917 and 1945, during which the United States emerged as a world power. The second phase from 1945 to 1991 occurred as the United States stood as one of two superpowers. The third phase began in 1991 and continues to today, where the United States stands as the world’s sole superpower and supporter of the liberal world order. In each phase, the historical environment and policymakers’ desires directly shaped the emerging world order; as the system changed, and the order was challenged, policymakers were forced to respond to buttress it. Creating and maintaining the liberal world order was an active project. If the United States and its liberal allies and partners want to see a liberal order survive, they will need to respond actively, not passively.

First and foremost, the liberal world order is an ideological order, based on liberal ideas and values that include open and free trade, liberal democratic governance, universal human rights, collective security, international institutions, and the rule of law. Though these ideas are shared with many Western countries, the United States remains central to the project. When the liberal order was created, Western countries were in ascendance; now non-Western and non-liberal countries are in ascendance challenging how global the liberal order will be. As the international system continues to change, both liberal and non-liberal states will determine how bounded the order will be. Those states that have benefited the most will have to determine how much they will fight for the institutions that support their economies and security. But to do so, those states will have to decide what to keep and how to defend, adapt, and continue the liberal world order’s institutions and regulations in the changing international system.”

https://warroom.armywarcollege.edu/articles/liberal-world-order/

[toomuchbaloney]

5 minutes ago, emtb2rn said:

It is real. However, it is not liberal in the negative sense the term currently has as the concept is over 100 years. Here’s part of an article published in 2020 in the public section of the army’s war college website. If you like this type of analysis, I recommend foreign policy at https://foreignpolicy.com/  

“While many experts see the current liberal world order as having emerged in 1991, they minimize the history of the liberal world order throughout the 20th century, and how it coincided with the American rise in the international system. To understand the rise of the liberal world order requires understanding scholarship in both history and international relations, because the rise of the liberal world order is connected to the rise of the United States in the international system. This development occurred in three phases. The first phase occurred between 1917 and 1945, during which the United States emerged as a world power. The second phase from 1945 to 1991 occurred as the United States stood as one of two superpowers. The third phase began in 1991 and continues to today, where the United States stands as the world’s sole superpower and supporter of the liberal world order. In each phase, the historical environment and policymakers’ desires directly shaped the emerging world order; as the system changed, and the order was challenged, policymakers were forced to respond to buttress it. Creating and maintaining the liberal world order was an active project. If the United States and its liberal allies and partners want to see a liberal order survive, they will need to respond actively, not passively.

First and foremost, the liberal world order is an ideological order, based on liberal ideas and values that include open and free trade, liberal democratic governance, universal human rights, collective security, international institutions, and the rule of law. Though these ideas are shared with many Western countries, the United States remains central to the project. When the liberal order was created, Western countries were in ascendance; now non-Western and non-liberal countries are in ascendance challenging how global the liberal order will be. As the international system continues to change, both liberal and non-liberal states will determine how bounded the order will be. Those states that have benefited the most will have to determine how much they will fight for the institutions that support their economies and security. But to do so, those states will have to decide what to keep and how to defend, adapt, and continue the liberal world order’s institutions and regulations in the changing international system.”

https://warroom.armywarcollege.edu/articles/liberal-world-order/

Thank you.  You've given me some reading too so. 

[heron, ASN, RN]

On 6/29/2022 at 6:34 PM, chare said:

GOP Rep. Boebert: ‘I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk’

Just when you think the stupidity coming from some politicians can't get any worse.

It’s getting worse. One of the republicans on the Jan 6 Committee just called her out. Coverage is sporifice, so am not completely sure I know what’s going on.

[emtb2rn, BSN, RN, EMT-B]

20 minutes ago, heron said:

It’s getting worse. One of the republicans on the Jan 6 Committee just called her out. Coverage is sporifice, so am not completely sure I know what’s going on.

Here ya go:

https://www.businessinsider.com/kinzinger-slams-boebert-for-criticizing-separation-of-church-and-state-2022-6