Rand Paul is a Doctor. Jill Biden is Not.

Happy Festivus!

And this greasy-forehead oinker is now calling the Pelosi, Crying Chuck Schumer and The Turtle’s $600 checks for us peasants 5,600 page Porkulus to other nations bill a joke? hint* Obamacare was only 2,700 pages.

Don’t believe it for one second, folks. The sweaty delusional sow is swinging in the wind with her fellow Democrats who shat in the face of us American people.

Gretching Whitmer, Dana Nasty Nessel, Jocelyn Benson, along with do nothing, effete Republican leadership of Mike Shirkey and Lee Chatfield, put 1/3rd of Michiganians in the poorhouse in 2020.

They all really don’t like you.

Don’t you ever forget that.

Epstein didn’t kill himself. Biden didn’t win.

We ALL Know it. . .

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

  1 comment for “Rand Paul is a Doctor. Jill Biden is Not.

  1. January 2, 2021 at 10:25 pm

    Several commentators have criticized journalists using the title.  These individuals have been criticized for criticizing title.  One critic was fired.  Despite my general disagreement with the criticism of journalists using the title doctor, it is a discussion worth having.  The title can be confusing.  As an example, if a PhD is introduced as doctor in a hospital, workers will automatically assume the person is a physician.  However, if the person is introduced as doctor in a physiology lab, they will assume the same individual is a PhD in a biological science. In the end most doctors are understanding.  There are few doctors, of any discipline, that would be angry if the title isn’t used. In another real life example, Sen. Rand Paul was famously at odds with Dr. Fauci in a hearing.  The senator was portrayed as ignorant by many in mainstream media.  Rand Paul is a board certified physician.  Under the circumstances, it would have been appropriate for mainstream media to use the title and address Sen. Paul as Dr. Paul.  Both titles are correct.  However, by ignoring his title, media was able to paint the senator physician as politically biased and out of touch.  He was not.  The interaction did not demonstrate conservative ideological bias risking population health.  It demonstrated ongoing legitimate disagreement within the medical field.  It also demonstrated biased reporting.  The senators professional title was completely worthy to report and purposely ignored.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *