All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (2 Viewers)

[Maxp]

I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?

 

[Richard]

I don’t know where the figures come from or the source of the information, but I’ve been told that the county I live in and the one next to it are two of the top ten hotspot counties in the nation for COVID-19.

 

[J-DONK]

So, I went to Johns Hopkins and Mayo clinic websites to look up information about kidney donation and its short term side effects, because the compromised immune system comment didn't ring true. I didn't see anything about immunodeficiency; there seems to be more concern with the long term effects that short term effects. And I don't know how long "months ago" is... so we have a political commentator talking about medicine, who's not a doctor and probably thought what he said sounded right... but hey, it's on Twitter and he's outraged and typing in caps, so...

Now, the guy donated a kidney. I would think his doctor went over what he needed to do before and after donation. Let's say for the sake of argument, his immune system is compromised, even months after the donation. If I know my immune system is compromised, why would I trust everyone around me to be mindful of me? Even if no pandemic?

Stuff like this reminds me of the beginnings of the AIDS epidemic.

This could be put in the dictionary as a strawman argument. You know his point was about putting other people's families at risk while quarantining themselves. The bigger point of arguing for the reopening of the economy, and claiming it was safe to do so, while hiding the fact they are testing positive.

Let's instead try to narrowly define this down if donating a kidney makes you immunocompromised.

The lack of empathy that conservatives are showing for their follow man is appalling.

 

[SystemShock]

This could be put in the dictionary as a strawman argument.

No.

You know his point was about putting other people's families at risk while quarantining themselves.
Let's instead try to narrowly define this down if donating a kidney makes you immunocompromised.

Maybe it is that English is my 3rd language, but it clearly reads to me that this political commentator is the one making a big deal out of the kidney donation that happened "months ago", and how compromised this man's immune system is, to shout how despicable the GOP is.

And, whether the GOP is despicable or not, I can live without the dramatic license and embellishment from Twitterites looking for likes.

The lack of empathy that conservatives are showing for their follow man is appalling.

I'll let the conservatives know when I talk to them.

 

[SystemShock]

Consider: A few posts ago you say that the representative who chastises another member of the legislative body for knowingly coming to work with COVID-19 symptoms "doesn't know what he's talking about". Then said "it isn't just coming to work knowing one is not fully healthy, as there is an extraordinary circumstance at this time".

You seem to be getting at something within the realm of putting the blame on the person who might've been the victim of negligence. If I am off base, feel free to correct.

You are off base.

The representative doing the chastising either doesn't know about kidney donations, or is making stuff up to dramatize his chastising, and the whole kidney donation thing is a major point of his outrage.

I do think we should be mindful of the ones more at risk, but I also think those more at risk should be mindful of themselves.

 

[Heathen]

You are off base.

The representative doing the chastising either doesn't know about kidney donations, or is making stuff up to dramatize his chastising, and the whole kidney donation thing is a major point of his outrage.

What evidence do you have of him making stuff up? You seem to be getting hung up on the way someone is speaking, not what they are saying.

I'd have to wonder if you'd keep your cool after someone who knew they had Covid-19 and had been around you failed to notify you. I assume if you have a family, you know this act endangered them.

I do think we should be mindful of the ones more at risk, but I also think those more at risk should be mindful of themselves.

Yeah. I disagree, especially in the context of what we're talking about. It's not even an argument. This isn't about judging a guy who went to work after a kidney donation. That's irrelevant if we're talking about where the blame lies in this whole situation.

At this point, if the individual in question failed to contact all of the people he may have come into proximity with -- and the reports say he did, that is what is astoundingly negligent and dangerous.

Period.

 

[zztop]

I'm reading in Wisconsin there has been a flare-up in cases. I wonder why it is such a hotbed with lots of protests etc?

Wisconsin reports record number of new coronavirus cases, deaths

Wisconsin saw a record number of new coronavirus cases and deaths, two weeks after the state’s Supreme Court struck down its stay-at-home order.

www.nbcnews.com

two weeks after the supreme court struck down the stay at home order

 

[wardorican]

I'm reading in Wisconsin there has been a flare-up in cases. I wonder why it is such a hotbed with lots of protests etc?

Wisconsin reports record number of new coronavirus cases, deaths

Wisconsin saw a record number of new coronavirus cases and deaths, two weeks after the state’s Supreme Court struck down its stay-at-home order.

www.nbcnews.com

two weeks after the supreme court struck down the stay at home order

Not sure, but here's their chart.

Here's MS..

Florida

 

[SystemShock]

What evidence do you have of him making stuff up? You seem to be getting hung up on the way someone is speaking, not what they are saying.

What do you mean, what evidence? It's right there on the tweet, stating the man is ummunocompromised [sic] because just months ago, he donated a kidney.

I'd have to wonder if you'd keep your cool after someone who knew they had Covid-19 and had been around you failed to notify you. I assume if you have a family, you know this act endangered them.

I am a mild germophobe: I am the only person I know who washes his hands before he goes to the bathroom. I assume everyone around me is exposed.

Yeah. I disagree, especially in the context of what we're talking about. It's not even an argument. This isn't about judging a guy who went to work after a kidney donation. That's irrelevant if we're talking about where the blame lies in this whole situation.

Well, my point was about the over dramatization and embellishment in the tweet.

At this point, if the individual in question failed to contact all of the people he may have come into proximity with -- and the reports say he did, that is what is astoundingly negligent and dangerous.

Period.

Ok.

 

[Heathen]

What do you mean, what evidence? It's right there on the tweet, stating the man is ummunocompromised [sic] because just months ago, he donated a kidney.

Seriously?

You literally just said a post before that he was "making stuff up to dramatize his chastising". That's what I was responding to. What evidence do you have that he is making stuff up?

I am a mild germophobe: I am the only person I know who washes his hands before he goes to the bathroom. I assume everyone around me is exposed.

So you wouldn't be upset about someone exposing you/your family to a deadly disease or would be 'good' because you sanitize regularly?

Well, my point was about the over dramatization and embellishment in the tweet.

Clearly. And my point still stands that conveying frustration in a way you deem unfit doesn't supersede the dangerous actions of the person he was responding to.

 

[Richard]

The public reactions to COVID-19 and the beginnings of AIDS in the US are similar. When AIDS began to spread, there was a lot of bad information, finger pointing and paranoia due to so much being unknown about HIV. It took years before the public was sufficiently educated as to how it was transmitted. So in time we learned that the "gay plague" was not limited to transmission between homosexual males, but that you could also contract it through heterosexual sex, blood transfusions, sharing needles, etc. Until the public was sufficiently educated though, there was a lot of angst, bad government policies and people behaving badly.

While some of the actions of government and reactions of the public are similar, I believe the outcomes will be far different this time. As we learn the ways COVID-19 can be spread, people will become educated more quickly because valid information is more readily available than it was in the 80s. Back then, we learned that if you weren't an intravenous drug user and practiced safe sex, your chances of contracting AIDS was extremely small. We still don't know all of the factors in COVID-19 transmission, but we do know that you can get it even if you are following the government's proscribed safety guidelines, which makes this a much more serious threat.

What I am rambling about to get to is that we don't need to assign blame to people, we need good information. We don't need the fear and paranoia that grows out of uncertainty; we need competent medical professionals and scientists leading public information and establishing safety guidelines. And we don't need a government making bad policy decisions that negatively impact American lives based on faulty information, expediency or what they hope will happen.

 

[SystemShock]

Seriously?

Seriously.

You literally just said a post before that he was "making stuff up to dramatize his chastising".

Yes.

That's what I was responding to. What evidence do you have that he is making stuff up?

I already told you 3 times.

So you wouldn't be upset about someone exposing you/your family to a deadly disease or would be 'good' because you sanitize regularly?

Most likely. I wouldn't be over dramatic about it and make shirt up, though. I'd also deal with it on a personal level, instead of going to Twitter.

Clearly. And my point still stands that conveying frustration in a way you deem unfit doesn't supersede the dangerous actions of the person he was responding to.

Ok.

 

[The moose]

The public reactions to COVID-19 and the beginnings of AIDS in the US are similar. When AIDS began to spread, there was a lot of bad information, finger pointing and paranoia due to so much being unknown about HIV. It took years before the public was sufficiently educated as to how it was transmitted. So in time we learned that the "gay plague" was not limited to transmission between homosexual males, but that you could also contract it through heterosexual sex, blood transfusions, sharing needles, etc. Until the public was sufficiently educated though, there was a lot of angst, bad government policies and people behaving badly.

While some of the actions of government and reactions of the public are similar, I believe the outcomes will be far different this time. As we learn the ways COVID-19 can be spread, people will become educated more quickly because valid information is more readily available than it was in the 80s. Back then, we learned that if you weren't an intravenous drug user and practiced safe sex, your chances of contracting AIDS was extremely small. We still don't know all of the factors in COVID-19 transmission, but we do know that you can get it even if you are following the government's proscribed safety guidelines, which makes this a much more serious threat.

What I am rambling about to get to is that we don't need to assign blame to people, we need good information. We don't need the fear and paranoia that grows out of uncertainty; we need competent medical professionals and scientists leading public information and establishing safety guidelines. And we don't need a government making bad policy decisions that negatively impact American lives based on faulty information, expediency or what they hope will happen.

Man I can't agree more.

I sure remember trying to get laid in high school it sure was rough until people figured out how it worked.

That is the real problem with this administration not allowing the experts do the talking. No more CDC talking to the press. Just a bunch of idiots doing well idiotic things.

True leadership is about knowing when to get out of the way. True leadership is letting people do their jobs.

 

[Heathen]

I already told you 3 times.

Most likely. I wouldn't be over dramatic about it and make shirt up, though. I'd also deal with it on a personal level, instead of going to Twitter.

So let's make this simple:

When I ask you "What evidence do you have that the guy in question in your own words (below):

either doesn't know about kidney donations, or is making stuff up to dramatize his chastising, and the whole kidney donation thing is a major point of his outrage.

And you come back with:

It's right there on the tweet, stating the man is ummunocompromised [sic] because just months ago, he donated a kidney.

You're not answering the question of what was 'made up'. You're just repeating that the man stated he donated a kidney.

Either you're being intentionally difficult or have a very roundabout and opaque way of getting your point across.

I'm fine with differences of opinion -- but assertions made without evidence are likely to be met with a bit of flak. That goes for me as well as anyone else.

Have a good day.

 

[J-DONK]

No.


Maybe it is that English is my 3rd language, but it clearly reads to me that this political commentator is the one making a big deal out of the kidney donation that happened "months ago", and how compromised this man's immune system is, to shout how despicable the GOP is.

And, whether the GOP is despicable or not, I can live without the dramatic license and embellishment from Twitterites looking for likes.

Really, how long did he talk about donating a kidney? 15 seconds in a 2 minute clip, and you find that as the main point. He also talked just as long about a immunocompromised colleague, and another with children. You just happened to decide he made a big deal out of one point to narrowly focus on. This is the definition of a strawman. You don't want to talk about the overall point.

 

[SystemShock]

Really, how long did he talk about donating a kidney? 15 seconds in a 2 minute clip, and you find that as the main point.

I didn't watch the clip. My response was directed at the text.

This is the definition of a strawman. You don't want to talk about the overall point.

The definition of a strawman is what you are doing.
My point is simply, I am tired of people over dramatizing shirt and making shirt up, especially when dealing with politics, no matter the context.

 

[SystemShock]

So let's make this simple:

When I ask you "What evidence do you have that the guy in question in your own words (below):



And you come back with:



You're not answering the question of what was 'made up'. You're just repeating that the man stated he donated a kidney.

Either you're being intentionally difficult or have a very roundabout and opaque way of getting your point across.

I'm fine with differences of opinion -- but assertions made without evidence are likely to be met with a bit of flak. That goes for me as well as anyone else.

Have a good day.

For fork's sake.

T-h-a-t ___t-h-e___m-a-n-'s___i-m-m-u-n-e___s-y-s-t-e-m___i-s___c-o-m-p-r-o-m-i-s-e-d___b-e-c-a-u-s-e___h-e___d-o-n-a-t-e-d___a___k-i-d-n-e-y___m-o-n-t-h-s___a-g-o.

 

[Heathen]

For fork's sake.

T-h-a-t ___t-h-e___m-a-n-'s___i-m-m-u-n-e___s-y-s-t-e-m___i-s___c-o-m-p-r-o-m-i-s-e-d___b-e-c-a-u-s-e___h-e___d-o-n-a-t-e-d___a___k-i-d-n-e-y___m-o-n-t-h-s___a-g-o.

Stating a fact -- that his immune system may be compromised because of a kidney donation is 'making shirt up' to you?

I'd genuinely appreciate a 'yes' or 'no' instead of another dramatic post. Thanks.

 

[zztop]

Not sure, but here's their chart.

My question was more about wondering why Wisconsin is seemingly heavily protesting stay at home. Why such a strong pushback? I didn't mean about the recent number of outbreaks, I meant I wonder what is prompting all the people protesting there. It also seems strange to me, that most(?) all(?) the protestors don't seem to be wearing masks... Could this be something akin to anti-vaxxers?

Meanwhile I just read Trump is cutting ties with the W.H.O and claiming China is controlling it, or something unsubstantiated