Pandemic

[zipman]

.
1. Trump gutted the CDC mission in China BEFORE the pandemic and has crippled our foreign service in general. These are the early warning systems for things like pandemics.

2. Trump dismantled the NSC pandemic response unit BEFORE the pandemic. This group would have been analyzing information from the aforementioned foreign service agencies.

3. Trump discarded the previous administration's detailed pandemic response plan. Many of the items in that plan would have helped mitigate the initial impact of Covid, and facilitated the long term testing, tracing, and treatment for Covid.

4. Trump LIED about the virus and role modeled behavior that exacerbated the crisis.

5. At the same time he failed to protect the country from Covid, he took actions that increased the vulnerability of the public by attacking the ACA.

6. SAD!!!

Bingo.

Too realize how bad it is, the White House now had more active cases of Covid-19 than many countries.

Fucking morons.

 

[DeluxAuto]

1. The same CDC who was lying about numbers? https://canadafreepress.com/article/the-cdc-confesses-to-lying-about-covid-19-death-numbers

2. Not quite. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...didnt-fire-pandemic-response-2018/3437356001/

"the reorganization of the NSC was necessary after the "bloat that occurred" under Obama, when the staff quadrupled to nearly 400 – a figure that even members of the Obama administration agreed was too large."


And what about banning travel from China? Trump did that, Biden called it xenophobic. In two instances, Pelosi and DeBlasio I believe, called for people to attend the festivals in their respective Chinatowns.

While I am gaining some answers from the left, I admit your childish rants have made clear that being polite to such as you is pointless.

A Canadian paper that looks like it's a GeoCities site, promoting a Drudge-like site and the American "Thinker."

The USA Today article is an argument with someone on a social media post:
"In 2018 Trump fired the ENTIRE pandemic response team," one recent social media post reads. "Keep re-posting this until the election."

You tried

 

[Lazaran]

A Canadian paper that looks like it's a GeoCities site, promoting a Drudge-like site and the American "Thinker."

The USA Today article is an argument with someone on a social media post:
"In 2018 Trump fired the ENTIRE pandemic response team," one recent social media post reads. "Keep re-posting this until the election."

You tried

After scouring the Internet that's the best one of Trump's bimbos could come up with???

SAD??!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

1. The same CDC who was lying about numbers? https://canadafreepress.com/article/the-cdc-confesses-to-lying-about-covid-19-death-numbers

You claim in your signature to be "Trying to understand both sides of the political issues in the U.S., without much luck."

However you keep using links from questionable sources as the CFP. Which in Canada is considered by Canadians as on par with the National Enquirer for journalistic integrity.



Canada Free Press is an overtly Christian, extreme right website that peddles conspiracy theories such as Obama being an Islamic Terrorist and 9/11 as an inside job. They also promote pseudosciences such as human-influenced Climate Change Denial and Creationism.

Canada Free Press routinely uses strong loaded wording that always favors the right such as this: New Poll Results Freaking out Democrats. When it comes to sourcing they favor right biased sources and occasionally use sources that we have rated as Questionable.

A factual search reveals numerous failed fact checks.

Overall, we rate Canada Free Press Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of conspiracies, and numerous false claims.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/canada-free-press/


As such this leads me, to think you are not looking to understand both sides, but to look for information that fits into your existing bias of both sides...

 

[Paul_Chance]

.
1. Trump gutted the CDC mission in China BEFORE the pandemic and has crippled our foreign service in general. These are the early warning systems for things like pandemics.

2. Trump dismantled the NSC pandemic response unit BEFORE the pandemic. This group would have been analyzing information from the aforementioned foreign service agencies.

3. Trump discarded the previous administration's detailed pandemic response plan. Many of the items in that plan would have helped mitigate the initial impact of Covid, and facilitated the long term testing, tracing, and treatment for Covid.

4. Trump LIED about the virus and role modeled behavior that exacerbated the crisis.

5. At the same time he failed to protect the country from Covid, he took actions that increased the vulnerability of the public by attacking the ACA.

6. SAD!!!

I like numbered lists, as they give something coherent to respond to. Let me provide some information around a few of these items.

1. The CDC unit in China was not an operational group to start with. It was an advisory group. Dr. Linda Quick, who is the person often cited as having been fired by Trump, was a trainer - and specifically she trained Chinese personnel on the administrative tasks around CDC reporting of events and advised them on pandemic response (she's an epidemiologist) This unit was not tasked with primary field operations of any sort - they were administrative liaisons located in Beijing. She quit when she received word that her specific position was being cut as a general downsizing of the administrative liaisons role after the WHO and CDC both rated China's pandemic response unit as excellent. The lack of this position did not have any impact on the WHO's and CDC's initial reporting - because that wasn't their job. Other CDC personnel still in China to this day had that operational responsibility.

2. The NSC unit that was disbanded was an administration unit on the NSC. It was assembled and placed on the NSC to combat Ebola. It's mission was nearing completion and its head, Retired Rear Admiral Timothy Ziemer, resigned. He wasn't fired. The unit was not replaced because it's charter (fighting Ebola) had been completed. He led that group from 2006 to 2017. He served on the NSC for barely a year. was previously responsible for the the official malaria tracking and response unit as part of a post retirement career with a think tank and an NGO.

Rear Admiral Ziemer was a naval command officer who background was...a helicopter pilot the mid-Atlantic operational command group. He was not a "pandemic expert" in any medical or scientific sense, but rather in the sense of running complex government programs. His "staff" of the unit was administrative.

The Trump administration formed a new unit to combat the corona virus, commanded by Admiral Brent Giroir. Giroir is a commissioned Admiral in the Public Health Service. Admiral Giroir is a doctor (a pediatrician), and his background for many years was in bio-defense, infectious disease, and pandemics. He was largely responsible for the excellent US ventilator response and PPE distribution - which was an impressive feat of logistics if you ever want to read about it in detail.

At the end of all the furor in the beginning about the lack of hospital beds (ICU) and ventilators there is one statistic that matters - no one died for lack of an appropriate hospital bed or ventilator. Other than the periodic panic porn articles about certain places, the response there was timely, accurate, and highly effective.

3. I've actually read the plan - and it's typical government advisory committee gobblety gook. Here's a link in case you're curious. https://brian.carnell.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/WH-Pandemic-Playbook.pdf. It isn't a plan in any traditional definition of plan - its a series of very high level recommendations and considerations and it's written specific of the NSC. Most importantly, from a pandemic response it has no trigger criteria (when X happens, do Y). That isn't it's intention. It's intention is for its use by the NSC to coordinate the response of the other agencies who have the operational portfolios. I'd recommend reading it if you're actually curious.

4, 5 and 6 are opinions, and everyone is welcome to their own opinion.

The politics of it are up to everyone's own choice of course. I'm not a Trump supporter or a Republican (I'm a radical centrist, who believes that effective governance lies in the middle way - and I voted Green last time around because I couldn't/wouldn't choose between idiots.)

When you're evaluating complex issues, you should try and delve into the contextual details, because that's often where the truth lies. When it comes to the whole "Biden would've" claims and articles online - I am usually just very curious about what specific steps he would have taken, when, and how they were supposed to work out differently than the course of history has taken. And of course, all of that is an exercise in imagination. If Biden wins come November (and I am voting for him, because generally speaking he is not an idiot) I'll be hugely curious what he actually does and how it works.

Stay safe out there folks.

 

[fgarvb1]

SO.

You Assholes ready for the second wave?

 

[Lazaran]

I like numbered lists, as they give something coherent to respond to. Let me provide some information around a few of these items.

1. The CDC unit in China was not an operational group to start with. It was an advisory group. Dr. Linda Quick, who is the person often cited as having been fired by Trump, was a trainer - and specifically she trained Chinese personnel on the administrative tasks around CDC reporting of events and advised them on pandemic response (she's an epidemiologist) This unit was not tasked with primary field operations of any sort - they were administrative liaisons located in Beijing. She quit when she received word that her specific position was being cut as a general downsizing of the administrative liaisons role after the WHO and CDC both rated China's pandemic response unit as excellent. The lack of this position did not have any impact on the WHO's and CDC's initial reporting - because that wasn't their job. Other CDC personnel still in China to this day had that operational responsibility.

2. The NSC unit that was disbanded was an administration unit on the NSC. It was assembled and placed on the NSC to combat Ebola. It's mission was nearing completion and its head, Retired Rear Admiral Timothy Ziemer, resigned. He wasn't fired. The unit was not replaced because it's charter (fighting Ebola) had been completed. He led that group from 2006 to 2017. He served on the NSC for barely a year. was previously responsible for the the official malaria tracking and response unit as part of a post retirement career with a think tank and an NGO.

Rear Admiral Ziemer was a naval command officer who background was...a helicopter pilot the mid-Atlantic operational command group. He was not a "pandemic expert" in any medical or scientific sense, but rather in the sense of running complex government programs. His "staff" of the unit was administrative.

The Trump administration formed a new unit to combat the corona virus, commanded by Admiral Brent Giroir. Giroir is a commissioned Admiral in the Public Health Service. Admiral Giroir is a doctor (a pediatrician), and his background for many years was in bio-defense, infectious disease, and pandemics. He was largely responsible for the excellent US ventilator response and PPE distribution - which was an impressive feat of logistics if you ever want to read about it in detail.

At the end of all the furor in the beginning about the lack of hospital beds (ICU) and ventilators there is one statistic that matters - no one died for lack of an appropriate hospital bed or ventilator. Other than the periodic panic porn articles about certain places, the response there was timely, accurate, and highly effective.

3. I've actually read the plan - and it's typical government advisory committee gobblety gook. Here's a link in case you're curious. https://brian.carnell.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/WH-Pandemic-Playbook.pdf. It isn't a plan in any traditional definition of plan - its a series of very high level recommendations and considerations and it's written specific of the NSC. Most importantly, from a pandemic response it has no trigger criteria (when X happens, do Y). That isn't it's intention. It's intention is for its use by the NSC to coordinate the response of the other agencies who have the operational portfolios. I'd recommend reading it if you're actually curious.

4, 5 and 6 are opinions, and everyone is welcome to their own opinion.

The politics of it are up to everyone's own choice of course. I'm not a Trump supporter or a Republican (I'm a radical centrist, who believes that effective governance lies in the middle way - and I voted Green last time around because I couldn't/wouldn't choose between idiots.)

When you're evaluating complex issues, you should try and delve into the contextual details, because that's often where the truth lies. When it comes to the whole "Biden would've" claims and articles online - I am usually just very curious about what specific steps he would have taken, when, and how they were supposed to work out differently than the course of history has taken. And of course, all of that is an exercise in imagination. If Biden wins come November (and I am voting for him, because generally speaking he is not an idiot) I'll be hugely curious what he actually does and how it works.

Stay safe out there folks.

1. The.CDC mission in Beijing was cut from 47 staff to 14

2. The NSC pandemic response unit should not have been disbanded with the high likelihood of another pandemic during the Trump administration being predicted by most experts. It should have been expanded in preparation for the predicted pandemic that did materialize. It was another case of Trump's " who knew" trope.

3. I've read the playbook left by the Obama Biden administration, and it speaks directly to points 1. and 2. in regards to the Trump administrations failure in maintaining America's foreign service infrastructure, and it's ability to communicate and coordinate with countries where the virus was actively spreading. The magnitude of Covid's impact in the U.S. was directly related to a lack of human resources due to cuts, and a lack of diplomacy by the Trump administration. The national response once Covid became a domestic issue was also a failure on the administrations part. They should have read the playbook.

4., 5., and 6. are not opinions. They're historical facts.

That's how I determined Trump's culpability for the current crisis.

 

[jomar]

So figbee, what prompted you to post a red masque of death variant denial thread at this point in time?

 

[NG1274]

A Canadian paper that looks like it's a GeoCities site, promoting a Drudge-like site and the American "Thinker."

The USA Today article is an argument with someone on a social media post:
"In 2018 Trump fired the ENTIRE pandemic response team," one recent social media post reads. "Keep re-posting this until the election."

You tried

Yep, totally dropped the ball on that one. Mistake on my part.

 

[NG1274]

You claim in your signature to be "Trying to understand both sides of the political issues in the U.S., without much luck."

However you keep using links from questionable sources as the CFP. Which in Canada is considered by Canadians as on par with the National Enquirer for journalistic integrity.



Canada Free Press is an overtly Christian, extreme right website that peddles conspiracy theories such as Obama being an Islamic Terrorist and 9/11 as an inside job. They also promote pseudosciences such as human-influenced Climate Change Denial and Creationism.

Canada Free Press routinely uses strong loaded wording that always favors the right such as this: New Poll Results Freaking out Democrats. When it comes to sourcing they favor right biased sources and occasionally use sources that we have rated as Questionable.

A factual search reveals numerous failed fact checks.

Overall, we rate Canada Free Press Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of conspiracies, and numerous false claims.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/canada-free-press/


As such this leads me, to think you are not looking to understand both sides, but to look for information that fits into your existing bias of both sides...

I already agreed I dropped the ball on that one, should have checked more sources.

Well, I could see how you would come to that conclusion. The explanation is quite simple. From one side, if I ask questions, I get opinions and facts that are quickly verified. On the other side, I get far more name calling, insults, and far more 'cause I said so' statements, which makes me go looking to see if they had a point or was it more feelings.

Also if one side makes a blanket statement, and I ask for evidence, it isn't necessarily that I don't believe them, rather that I've never seen any evidence to support such a statement, do they have any? Which often results in the name calling.

Would you venture an opinion on why people won't, when asked why they believe something, show why versus insults? Thanks.

 

[Lazaran]

^
From one side he gets opinions and facts that are quickly verified.

*chuckles*

 

[Paul_Chance]

1. The.CDC mission in Beijing was cut from 47 staff to 14

2. The NSC pandemic response unit should not have been disbanded with the high likelihood of another pandemic during the Trump administration being predicted by most experts. It should have been expanded in preparation for the predicted pandemic that did materialize. It was another case of Trump's " who knew" trope.

3. I've read the playbook left by the Obama Biden administration, and it speaks directly to points 1. and 2. in regards to the Trump administrations failure in maintaining America's foreign service infrastructure, and it's ability to communicate and coordinate with countries where the virus was actively spreading. The magnitude of Covid's impact in the U.S. was directly related to a lack of human resources due to cuts, and a lack of diplomacy by the Trump administration. The national response once Covid became a domestic issue was also a failure on the administrations part. They should have read the playbook.

4., 5., and 6. are not opinions. They're historical facts.

That's how I determined Trump's culpability for the current crisis.

1. The CDC mission was (and still is) a training mission. It did not/does not contain any field personnel. It was and is a highly successful mission, having graduated over 250 FETP's (Field Epidemiology Training Program) personnel who work with the Chinese CDC. The mission was not involved in any reporting chains or investigation chains. The unit had no responsibility or authority in reporting/investigating outbreaks.

The detection of emerging diseases lays squarely with the Chinese CDC, who reported the outbreak to WHO. Had this mission had it's previous full staff complement it would not have made any difference because it was simply not in the chain. China's CDC is technically competent. The reporting chain goes like this - China Heathcare reports to Chinese CDC. Chinese CDC evaluates and reports to the WHO. The CDC is not even in the chain.

When the outbreak began, the US CDC offered, multiple times, to send field personnel to Wuhan to assist. The CCP declined the offer, as is their right as a sovereign nation. Would the deployment of a CDC field team to Wuhan made a difference? That's a what-if I can't answer. The problem wasn't technical skills at the point of outbreak (the Chinese had it sequenced and understood lightening fast, they are technically very competent).

2. The NSC pandemic response team only existed for a few years. Dismantling the team at the NSC did NOT impact the CDC and Department of Health teams. The NSC team only existed to serve as an administrative and coordinating liaison (the whole purpose of the NSC). They had no field responsibilities. They were simply consumers and coordinators of product developed by other government agencies.

3. I linked the pandemic playbook above, so folks can review it and draw their own conclusions. As for predicting the pandemic - a fair number of folks have claimed "I told you/them so" but no one (except a crazy psychic and a novelist) got any of the detail right (originating in Wuhan, striking in 2020) and they were wrong on many of the details.

One of the things that I find questionable is this - chaos theory - in any event with a long and complex chain of events we can certainly speculate about "what if", but we can never know if our speculation would have had any change on the final impact - because the what if never actually happened and so never played out.

Remember, a pandemic is like a water in this respect. It is a force of nature seeking the path of least resistance. Close one path and it will do its best to find the next path and the next and the next. Given that we know that the virus was here in the US before the Chinese CDC detected it, it's most probable that any of the changes in personnel and agencies would not have made any difference.

 

[NG1274]

1. The.CDC mission in Beijing was cut from 47 staff to 14

2. The NSC pandemic response unit should not have been disbanded with the high likelihood of another pandemic during the Trump administration being predicted by most experts. It should have been expanded in preparation for the predicted pandemic that did materialize. It was another case of Trump's " who knew" trope.

3. I've read the playbook left by the Obama Biden administration, and it speaks directly to points 1. and 2. in regards to the Trump administrations failure in maintaining America's foreign service infrastructure, and it's ability to communicate and coordinate with countries where the virus was actively spreading. The magnitude of Covid's impact in the U.S. was directly related to a lack of human resources due to cuts, and a lack of diplomacy by the Trump administration. The national response once Covid became a domestic issue was also a failure on the administrations part. They should have read the playbook.

4., 5., and 6. are not opinions. They're historical facts.

That's how I determined Trump's culpability for the current crisis.

Would you mind showing why you state #5 is a fact? What did he do that increased the vulnerability of the public? And also, what should have been done, in your opinion, that would have increased protection from Covid? Genuinely want to know.

 

[Lazaran]

^
Can quickly verify opinions and facts from one side but can't seem to find any information on Trump's attacks on the ACA and the individual mandate that have resulted in millions of people not having health insurance. His attacks on undocumented immigrants has made that group more vulnerable to Covid because they are less likely to seek medical treatment for fear of being arrested. Those immigrants being driven onto the shadows doesn't mean that they still can't infect other legal citizens in the community.

Trump's actions have created the perfect conditions for Covid to inflict maximum damage to the country.

SAD!!!

 

[LLCox]

Covid just scored with trumps Press Sec.... poor baby

 

[FescueFan]

Covid just scored with trumps Press Sec.... poor baby

Oh noes there is a what 97% chance they'll be just fine?? BETTER SHUT THE PLANET DOWN!!!! forever.....cuz COVID is soooooooooooooo scary!

 

[fgarvb1]

So figbee, what prompted you to post a red masque of death variant denial thread at this point in time?

Why Not?

If all you think all that you hear from the Democrats is the Gospel ...I have some BAD news for you!

Which party plays this song?

"Won't Get Fooled Again"

Election after Election.

Sad really.

 

[Paul_Chance]

4. Trump LIED about the virus and role modeled behavior that exacerbated the crisis.

5. At the same time he failed to protect the country from Covid, he took actions that increased the vulnerability of the public by attacking the ACA.

6. SAD!!!

Okay, I'll bite. Let me pivot to the three items in the original list that I didn't initially argue and generally dismissed as "opinion".

4. No doubt, Trump initially downplayed the virus and expressed a most optimistic outlook and he's a crappy role-model. (That's across the board, not just related to the pandemic.) Did it exacerbate the crisis? Even if Trump LIED the real question is - did it impact the progression of the pandemic? There, the answer is generally "no". Why is that? Because the notifications and triggers all fired as designed at the Department of Health and Human Services and the CDC. The parts that were under Trump's control (mainly the declaration of a health emergency) also fired as designed. So, I find this particular argument is not meaningful in a "fight the pandemic" sense, though, obvsiously, plenty of people find it meaningful in the great political battle.

My personal opinion - the biggest failure was in messaging from the CDC (which did lie to us about masks, deliberately, to prevent a panicked rush on PPE) and the various State Health Departments. Playing the what if game, I think that had they come out with a consistent, simple, unified message more people would have gotten and followed the basic advice (Social distance, Wash your hands, wear a mask). But. I understand "what I would have done" and "what they should have done" are just mental exercises. Once the waters pouring in, it's a little late to think "damn, I should have dry docked the ship before I left".

5. This particular argument is not really relevant to fighting the pandemic. Why? The only part of the ACA that changed (by court order) was the invalidating of the fee/tax for non-compliance. The ACA marketplace is still out there and running strong. The subsidies for low income people are still available and in place. All other aspects of the plan (excepting the religious exemption being expanded by the court) are still the law of the land.

Now, a lot of people lost their insurance due to the loss of their jobs (about 12 million last estimate I saw). But the direct cause of that was the decision to shut down the economies at the state level. That varied widely from states that never shut down (ala South Dakota) and states that went full Pandemic Nazi (Michigan).

But, the conflation of health insurance and health care is always a mistake. Not a single life was lost due to a lack of health care (see earlie points about ICU beds and ventilators). Remember, in America, the model is "treat first, pay later" in any emergency circumstance - just get to the ER and they'll start treatment, which was minimal and palliative at beginning of the pandemic.

6. SAD - I'm sorry it makes you feel sad. For those it struck close it was a true tragedy. Every death is, whether it was the pandemic or any of the other thousand things that will kill you. Your emotional state is valid. The only thing I will say there is every life ends in death, so do not fear death, it's like fearing the sunset.

Every complex event (like the pandemic) is the result of long chain of causation. That chain rapidly attenuates and individual actions or failure to act are swallowed in the larger tides.

 

[Lazaran]

Okay, I'll bite. Let me pivot to the three items in the original list that I didn't initially argue and generally dismissed as "opinion".

4. No doubt, Trump initially downplayed the virus and expressed a most optimistic outlook and he's a crappy role-model. (That's across the board, not just related to the pandemic.) Did it exacerbate the crisis? Even if Trump LIED the real question is - did it impact the progression of the pandemic? There, the answer is generally "no". Why is that? Because the notifications and triggers all fired as designed at the Department of Health and Human Services and the CDC. The parts that were under Trump's control (mainly the declaration of a health emergency) also fired as designed. So, I find this particular argument is not meaningful in a "fight the pandemic" sense, though, obvsiously, plenty of people find it meaningful in the great political battle.

My personal opinion - the biggest failure was in messaging from the CDC (which did lie to us about masks, deliberately, to prevent a panicked rush on PPE) and the various State Health Departments. Playing the what if game, I think that had they come out with a consistent, simple, unified message more people would have gotten and followed the basic advice (Social distance, Wash your hands, wear a mask). But. I understand "what I would have done" and "what they should have done" are just mental exercises. Once the waters pouring in, it's a little late to think "damn, I should have dry docked the ship before I left".

5. This particular argument is not really relevant to fighting the pandemic. Why? The only part of the ACA that changed (by court order) was the invalidating of the fee/tax for non-compliance. The ACA marketplace is still out there and running strong. The subsidies for low income people are still available and in place. All other aspects of the plan (excepting the religious exemption being expanded by the court) are still the law of the land.

Now, a lot of people lost their insurance due to the loss of their jobs (about 12 million last estimate I saw). But the direct cause of that was the decision to shut down the economies at the state level. That varied widely from states that never shut down (ala South Dakota) and states that went full Pandemic Nazi (Michigan).

But, the conflation of health insurance and health care is always a mistake. Not a single life was lost due to a lack of health care (see earlie points about ICU beds and ventilators). Remember, in America, the model is "treat first, pay later" in any emergency circumstance - just get to the ER and they'll start treatment, which was minimal and palliative at beginning of the pandemic.

6. SAD - I'm sorry it makes you feel sad. For those it struck close it was a true tragedy. Every death is, whether it was the pandemic or any of the other thousand things that will kill you. Your emotional state is valid. The only thing I will say there is every life ends in death, so do not fear death, it's like fearing the sunset.

Every complex event (like the pandemic) is the result of long chain of causation. That chain rapidly attenuates and individual actions or failure to act are swallowed in the larger tides.

You're veeeery generous with your absolution of Trump's culpability in exacerbating the impact of Covid, from early warning failures, to national messaging and policy.

The CDC's messaging was a direct result of them contorting their advisement to fit Trump's narrative. If you think they were speaking freely then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Ask Rick Bright what happened when officials tried to tell the public the truth about Covid back in March and April.

Trump's attacks on the ACA and eliminating the individual mandate led many people to go uninsured; I don't think that made the country more resilient in the face of a pandemic.

SAD!!! is not how I feel. It is a play on Trump's own word to describe his epic failure.

 

[DeluxAuto]

SO.

You Assholes ready for the second wave?

Considering you're literally the virus's target, being old and living in one of the most infected states, maybe you should STFU, wear a mask, and stay indoors.

Or die. Whatever.

Yep, totally dropped the ball on that one. Mistake on my part.

*applause*

We don't get that much around here - appreciated.

 

[jomar]

Why Not?

Fair enough

Which party plays this song?

"Won't Get Fooled Again"

Election after Election.

Sad really.

Fake news! But back in the real world which party played Born in the USA not realizing it’s a protest song?

 

[fgarvb1]

Considering you're literally the virus's target, being old and living in one of the most infected states, maybe you should STFU, wear a mask, and stay indoors.

Or die. Whatever.



*applause*

We don't get that much around here - appreciated.

Dream On Walt Disney!

 

[NG1274]

^
From one side he gets opinions and facts that are quickly verified.

*chuckles*

Chuckle all you like, when I ask for details from one side, I get responses. Usually pm, but polite responses with facts or cites showing their position.

From you, well, there you go.

 

[NG1274]

^
Can quickly verify opinions and facts from one side but can't seem to find any information on Trump's attacks on the ACA and the individual mandate that have resulted in millions of people not having health insurance. His attacks on undocumented immigrants has made that group more vulnerable to Covid because they are less likely to seek medical treatment for fear of being arrested. Those immigrants being driven onto the shadows doesn't mean that they still can't infect other legal citizens in the community.

Trump's actions have created the perfect conditions for Covid to inflict maximum damage to the country.

SAD!!!

Ah, I think I found the problem in understanding. I am asking both sides why they think the way they do. One side responds with facts or cites showing their line of reasoning. The other side, by and large, responds with name calling and statements like "it is obvious" and so forth, not putting forward any actual reasons beyond emotional ones.

When someone says they believe X and here is why, it is easy enough to check on the why. When someone says it is obvious and you are <insert name calling here>
there is no place to start. While I could certainly go looking for articles that support their line of reasoning, I don't know exactly why they came around or believe something specific. I would ask them to show me, not because they must, but because I want to understand.

The setup in my state is testing is free and if you are sick, go to the ER and you will be helped. The insurance/paying part is later, so no change in the insurance is stopping anyone from getting help at the moment.

As for attacks on illegal immigrants, it seems more like enforcing existing laws. While many find themselves in a conundrum (I'm thinking the children that never new any other life than living here), others willingly broke the law, which needs to be addressed. Certainly a worthy topic of discussion, but also worth its own thread, don't you think?

 

[Lazaran]

^
Thinks because others won't play his game and spoon feed him readily available information it validates an unsubstantiated point he is trying to make.

SAD!!

*chuckles*