just an fyi:
"proning" is not a new discovery...When son was 5, he was hospitalized with pneumonia. I stayed with him , "proned" him while I performed CPTs (chest physiotherapy = solid, cupped pats to rib cage) for 15 min each side, every 2 hours. Helps to break up mucus.
ABSORBER posted:Chico Escuela posted:Anyhow--I thought the stats in the article linked below from today's Washington Post were interesting. The authors have a point of view you may disagree with, but read it anyhow for the data. IMO they are a good demonstration both that covid-19 is a serious problem, and that the degree of seriousness is heavily dependent on geography.
I inserted a couple of charts from the article below. Here is the link:
While you may find the article interesting, by no means use it for the data. It is totally slanted in line with the Post's political agenda.
I posted the following from the latest CDC report at the time on this forum four days ago:
- Based on death certificate data, the percentage of deaths attributed to COVID-19 increased from 4.0% during week 13 to 6.9% during week 14. The percentage of deaths due to pneumonia (excluding COVID-19 or influenza) decreased from 7.5% during week 13 to 7.2% during week 14.
The reason I posted this was to show that common pneumonia deaths still exceeded COVID-19 deaths. Not meant to say COVID-19 deaths are insignificant, just that COVID-19 was not the dominant cause of P&I deaths. Do you honestly think this changed that dramatically in a weeks time? Note the Post just happened to throw in "pneumonitis" as an item in their graphic--the SMALLEST circle. What is "pneumonitis" you ask?
Pneumonia vs. pneumonitis. Pneumonitis is a term used to describe inflammation of the lung tissues without the presence of an infection, whereas pneumonia is inflammation caused by an infection.
Why would they include this? People die from this? Seriously? Where is pneumonia listed on this chart? Non-COVID-19 pneumonia? Also note that while COVID-19 deaths were increasing in week 14, non-flu and non-COVID-19 pneumonia deaths decreased and this is likely because testing for COVID-19 became paramount. Or not. Because people who died of pneumonia now are listed as probable deaths related to COVID-19. 125% insurance payout to providers, don't you know...
And notice the bar charts listed below. Are we to assume the data represented in the cascading graphic above is using the data in the bar charts below? I'm sure! Why hasn't the Post used data for the ENTIRE COUNTRY???!!!
I would stick to posting papers published in the scientific community and not some politically motivated piece authored by our "news" media.
CDC has been hijacked by Trump's political appointees. He initially scrubbed on the information, similar to what he has done with the EPA.
But you already know, that.
Next you will say "Trump wants to provide a better healthcare system."
I'm going to provide you one additional perspective.
Kushner headquarters use to be "666 5th Avenue". lol
JCG posted:Smitty28 posted:JCG posted:ABSORBER posted:JCG posted:"Fake news" started as a description of foreign propagandists knowingly distributing false information in news articles or social media posts disguised as news articles.My definition of fake news: instead of reporting facts, pick and choose certain facts (or not) and arrange them in such a way as to push your agenda and/or institute change.That's not news. That's fake news. And yes, our news media does exactly what you describe foreign propagandists (foreign intelligence services) as doing. Instead, our news media wants to push their agenda and institute change in our own country.I understand that you believe this. I don't. The fact that so many people have come to share your view is the 2nd most important achievement of modern movement conservatism.
But anyway, I still don't see what's fake about those pieces. Maybe there are some on the topic, but I have not seen them.JCG,
Just curious - what would you call what Absorber describes, if not fake news?
Fox News.
I thought you had a more nuanced view that would be an interesting take. My mistake.
baseballmom posted:just an fyi:
"proning" is not a new discovery...When son was 5, he was hospitalized with pneumonia. I stayed with him , "proned" him while I performed CPTs (chest physiotherapy = solid, cupped pats to rib cage) for 15 min each side, every 2 hours. Helps to break up mucus.
Doh!
anotherparent already owned up to making it sound as if it had been recently discovered; I don't think he meant to do that. I think we all agree that "proning" is nothing new.
Collegebaseballinsights, I don't mean to get personal here but...
Have you been tested lately? Are you feeling feverish?
collegebaseballinsights, you get it! 
On the media: We had a brief golden age in the early days of TV when there were only 3 networks and the equal time rule was in force. Cronkite, Huntley & Brinkley and their contemporaries do seem measured and moderate in retrospect. But the rule throughout history was that newspapers (and they were the only game in town for most of the relevant history) chose a side. While the country was considering whether to ratify the Constitution, there were Federalist and Anti-Federalist newspapers. Lincoln locked up several Democratic newspaper editors during the Civil War. William Randolph Hearst was not known for seeking objective reporting at the papers he owned.
Personally, I don't think it is possible to just report "facts." It would be incredibly boring, for one; but more importantly, the decisions about which facts to report and which to leave out are hugely important editorial decisions in themselves. We are fortunate to live in a era when a few keystrokes can call up news from around the world and across the political spectrum. IMO, it's incumbent on us to seek out different views and form our own opinions as best we can.
In other news, my wife the workaholic is keeping busy doing her job remotely during the week, but on weekends has too much time on her hands. Today, we had homemade cinnamon rolls for breakfast, and she just took a pie and some meringues out of the oven before starting to make dinner. Obesity is a risk factor for covid-19, as I recall. So I may be in trouble, folks...
anotherparent posted:TPM posted:My husband is a severe asthmatic struggling through this pandemic. He was hospitalized in November with pneumonia, in January with a bronchial infection and February kidneys sterted to fail due to all the treatments, antibiotics, prednisone. He might have had the virus. He is waiting to get tested when doctor said he can.He still doesn't feel well, which is typical of older corona survivors.
I hope that your husband is doing all right. It is beyond ridiculous that someone like him has not already been tested for this virus.
Thank you.
It's not that easy to get tested unless you present with symptoms. No one knew much about COVID end of last year. Doctors are only doing telemed or phone consults. Once they start serum testing and it let's up down here, he will go.
>Some doctors worry that illness and mortality from unaddressed health issues may rival the carnage produced by the virus in regions less affected by covid-19. And some expect they will soon see patients who have dangerously delayed seeking care as ongoing symptoms force them to overcome their fear.<
>Yet the 700-bed hospital in Charleston is only about 60 percent full, because like most facilities, MUSC discharged everyone it could to make room for the expected coronavirus surge. So far that hasn’t materialized. The hospital has not had more than 10 covid-19 patients admitted at any time, he said.
“We have five covid patients in the hospital right now, and we have five appendicitis cases” with complications from waiting too long to come in for care, Eriksson said.<
Smitty28 posted:JCG posted:Smitty28 posted:JCG posted:ABSORBER posted:JCG posted:"Fake news" started as a description of foreign propagandists knowingly distributing false information in news articles or social media posts disguised as news articles.My definition of fake news: instead of reporting facts, pick and choose certain facts (or not) and arrange them in such a way as to push your agenda and/or institute change.That's not news. That's fake news. And yes, our news media does exactly what you describe foreign propagandists (foreign intelligence services) as doing. Instead, our news media wants to push their agenda and institute change in our own country.I understand that you believe this. I don't. The fact that so many people have come to share your view is the 2nd most important achievement of modern movement conservatism.
But anyway, I still don't see what's fake about those pieces. Maybe there are some on the topic, but I have not seen them.JCG,
Just curious - what would you call what Absorber describes, if not fake news?
Fox News.
I thought you had a more nuanced view that would be an interesting take. My mistake.
Ooooohhh, sick burn!
There's much more to say on the topic but this is a baseball site and I regret it every time I allow myself to get sucked into politics.
Chico Escuela posted:On the media:
They lie, or they lie by omission. Look no further than Biden. He has a woman who has accused him of inappropriate conduct. Have you seen it covered, most likely not. Compare that to Kavanaugh. And it doesn't matter which might be/not be true. Only the way they were covered.
You just have to be really stupid, really nieve, or a complete homer to believe 80% of any news feeds.
This thread is heading for Tebow territory.
CNN is only lying if they are broadcasting! There isn’t one person who could speak truth if they had to. Going back to online poker now.
There are two kinds of fake news. Both sides of the political spectrum are guilty. There are the extreme news sites on either side who push unsourced lies and conspiracy. Then there are the more honest reporting sites that tell the truth but mislead by omitting facts that don’t fit their agenda. Unfortunately two formerly very respected sources who used to be “trusted, go to” news sources have fallen into this category ... The NY Times and Washington Post. I don’t know which nationally visible newspapers would fall into this category on the right. I know locally the Boston Herald would.
When I refer to the Times and the Post as formerly respected it’s based on all media is underwater in terms of trust by the public.
When you’re reading news sources you have to separate news from opinion. How someone interprets the news is not news.
As a country we’re in a place I try not to be. People now go to news sources that reinforce their belief system. We have two very diverse sources of news and each one believes the other is fake news.
I’m a right leaning libertarian. I’m registered as an Independent. I’m not going to BS anyone and say I’m purely independent. Very few Independents are actually independent. They’re people on both sides of the political spectrum who are disgusted enough with their former political party to still be in the party. But they’re more bothered by the opposition party to switch.
How I try to avoid being fed a mass of one sided information is get my news from a news aggregator. I get the same story reported by multiple sources on both side. Then I apply my beliefs against the various sources of information. I rarely watch cable news opinion shows.
When I encounter someone whose opinion I disagree rather than mock them I ask, “Why do you believe that to be true?” It’s a way to learn something. Accepting someone believes differently doesn’t mean having to agree with them.
My best friend’s (we were each other’s best man) parents had their career incomes paid for by the government. His career income has some straight from government or been funded by the government. His wife’s career has been the same.
My parents spent their careers in the corporate world. I started in the corporate world and became an entrepreneur.
Do you think my friend and I would agree on big government and regulation versus small government and deregulation? Do you think we even attempt to debate it?
Re politics
I normally don’t wear political clothes. But I had to once to watch a friend’s wife I don’t care for overreact. The tee said ... CHOOSE LIFE. She went nuts screaming I’m pro life. I told her personally I’m pro life. But as a libertarian the decision someone else makes is none of my business. She didn’t calm down a bit. I might as well have lit a grenade under her when I asked, “So the only two options are “choose life”and “kill babies?”
If people could actually debate abortion on a rational instead of emotional level it would be one of the great intellectual debates.
RJM posted:This thread is heading for Tebow territory.
I was thinking the same thing. Here he is in February 2020
ABSORBER posted:JCG posted:"Fake news" started as a description of foreign propagandists knowingly distributing false information in news articles or social media posts disguised as news articles.My definition of fake news: instead of reporting facts, pick and choose certain facts (or not) and arrange them in such a way as to push your agenda and/or institute change.That's not news. That's fake news. And yes, our news media does exactly what you describe foreign propagandists (foreign intelligence services) as doing. Instead, our news media wants to push their agenda and institute change in our own country.Nothing new as our country has been doing it to foreign countries for a very long time. I just don't want to see it being done by our own news media. I don't know about you but I want media that's impartial.
I am a reporter, editor and publisher and have been in a town of 15,000 for 30 years. The fact is that most reporters do their best to watch an event or listen to what someone says or what a group of people do and write about that as accurately as possible. The problem is you don't like the facts that are reported, so you dismiss it as fake news.
I don't have time to make up news .I'm too busy covering what actually is happening in my community.
It’s not making it up. It’s letting your personal opinions find their way into a report. In my definition of news, I can’t tell what side you believe in or your thoughts politically. You present facts and I get to decide. No one can actually do that anymore. It’s here are the facts and here is what you should think about them.
I liked this site better when I had no idea of anyone’s politics
baseballhs posted:It’s not making it up. It’s letting your personal opinions find their way into a report. In my definition of news, I can’t tell what side you believe in or your thoughts politically. You present facts and I get to decide. No one can actually do that anymore. It’s here are the facts and here is what you should think about them.
I liked this site better when I had no idea of anyone’s politics
Just respect people for having an opinion no matter how bleep’ed it is. 😁
baseballhs posted:You present facts and I get to decide.
Here's the problem with that. I recently covered a meeting in which our mayor appointed someone to a board. The council voted it down 6-0. Apparently there was a second candidate that he did not nominate. (our mayor and our council hate each other and I have to take a Tums every time I write about their meetings.)
I am friends with every person on the council and the mayor. I have worked on committees with them, I have written about them. They are every single one nice people, just not to each other.
After the meeting someone who I went to kindergarten with called to tell me that it was clear I supported the mayor because if i was unbiased, I would have written that the mayor didn't nominate a qualified candidate instead of that the council voted against the person he did nominate.
I presented facts. She judged. That's what she came up with.
If you really want to just have facts, find them yourself. Watch the news conferences, review the statistics as they roll in. I hope you can keep up because it's a full-time job. They are out there, just most people don't have the time or energy or knowledge to seek them out. It's easier to judge those who do it.
Sorry — I think the council thing has been making me mad for a couple of weeks now. Just please for my sanity stick to debating the disease, not the people who cover it.
Iowamom23 posted:baseballhs posted:You present facts and I get to decide.
Here's the problem with that. I recently covered a meeting in which our mayor appointed someone to a board. The council voted it down 6-0. Apparently there was a second candidate that he did not nominate. (our mayor and our council hate each other and I have to take a Tums every time I write about their meetings.)
I am friends with every person on the council and the mayor. I have worked on committees with them, I have written about them. They are every single one nice people, just not to each other.
After the meeting someone who I went to kindergarten with called to tell me that it was clear I supported the mayor because if i was unbiased, I would have written that the mayor didn't nominate a qualified candidate instead of that the council voted against the person he did nominate.
I presented facts. She judged. That's what she came up with.
If you really want to just have facts, find them yourself. Watch the news conferences, review the statistics as they roll in. I hope you can keep up because it's a full-time job. They are out there, just most people don't have the time or energy or knowledge to seek them out. It's easier to judge those who do it.
Sorry — I think the council thing has been making me mad for a couple of weeks now. Just please for my sanity stick to debating the disease, not the people who cover it.
And just as a note, I'm a Democrat. My husband was a state office holder for years so that would have been hard to hide so we don't. We tell people about our political affiliation and promise to do our best to be fair to both sides and invite people who think we aren't fair to tell us what's wrong and why. Some of my best sources are Republicans who respect that.
I think that's the best way to do it because you do chose which facts to include, which comments from which person, etc. I do my very best to be fair to everyone, and I think that's all anyone can ask. And if I fail, I just want someone to tell me what they think I did wrong. Respectfully.
Now I'm taking off my news hat. Sorry for the rant.
Ripken Fan posted:RJM posted:This thread is heading for Tebow territory.
I was thinking the same thing. Here he is in February 2020
Just when I thought there is no way this thread could get any worse....
Iowamom23 posted:baseballhs posted:You present facts and I get to decide.
Here's the problem with that. I recently covered a meeting in which our mayor appointed someone to a board. The council voted it down 6-0. Apparently there was a second candidate that he did not nominate. (our mayor and our council hate each other and I have to take a Tums every time I write about their meetings.)
I am friends with every person on the council and the mayor. I have worked on committees with them, I have written about them. They are every single one nice people, just not to each other.
After the meeting someone who I went to kindergarten with called to tell me that it was clear I supported the mayor because if i was unbiased, I would have written that the mayor didn't nominate a qualified candidate instead of that the council voted against the person he did nominate.
Did you present the facts about the qualifications of the candidate? I mean you must have written the facts as to why they voted against the person. Perhaps he/she was voted down for reasons other than qualifications? All of us get second guessed in our jobs but journalists have it a little worse because their job is the most visible job out there. With a husband in politics, I have to suspect you have a thick skin so I will withhold my advice to forget about the kindergarten critique.
Political bias in reporting is rampant though. As readers, you may have to go to 2-3 articles to get the full range of views where you then can form opinions based on multiple skews.
Very sorry to beat this dead horse again, but I happened to run into a link to this story this morning.
What Doctors on the Front Lines Wish They’d Known a Month Ago: https://nyti.ms/3chAos8
Not fake. There are good journalists doing good work letting us see what's going on in the front lines of this struggle. We are fortunate to have them.
baseballhs posted:
I liked this site better when I had no idea of anyone’s politics
Completely agree which is why I’m strongly considering deleting my account.
I have strong political beliefs which guide many of the decisions I make in life, but a rarely openly discuss them. For one, I’m a pretty private person and I feel no need to try to influence other with my beliefs. My wife once wanted to get those car stick figure stickers showing the members of our family. I asked, why do we need to show everyone we have 3 kids, a cat and dog? No!
I know 50% of our population see things differently than me, which I’m 100% OK with and respect that. But once you start verbalizing those beliefs and try to influence me, I lose respect for you. I can’t help it. Unfortunately, that has happened to several members, whom I previously respected. I’m trying to overlook this, and hopefully when baseball returns, I can be a bigger man and put some of the things I’ve read behind me.
It’s not just reporters/journalists. I also think educators’ political opinions should be a mystery to their students. It frustrates me to hear my kids come home and tell me about political rants that teachers of professors went on. The job is to facilitate learning. Start conversations. Question rationale...for both sides. I don’t think a student should ever know where they stand. That’s hard, but makes them a good teacher. To me, news should be facts. There are plenty of opinion shows Opinion pieces, , blogs. It’s hard to report facts for both sides, but that’s the challenge unless it’s openly an opinion piece. Just my opinion.
baseballhs posted:It’s not just reporters/journalists. I also think educators’ political opinions should be a mystery to their students. It frustrates me to hear my kids come home and tell me about political rants that teachers of professors went on. The job is to facilitate learning. Start conversations. Question rationale...for both sides. I don’t think a student should ever know where they stand. That’s hard, but makes them a good teacher. To me, news should be facts. There are plenty of opinion shows Opinion pieces, , blogs. It’s hard to report facts for both sides, but that’s the challenge unless it’s openly an opinion piece. Just my opinion.
and we know how that is going...unless someone cares to debate that as well.
CTbballDad posted:baseballhs posted:
I liked this site better when I had no idea of anyone’s politics
Completely agree which is why I’m strongly considering deleting my account.
I have strong political beliefs which guide many of the decisions I make in life, but a rarely openly discuss them. For one, I’m a pretty private person and I feel no need to try to influence other with my beliefs. My wife once wanted to get those car stick figure stickers showing the members of our family. I asked, why do we need to show everyone we have 3 kids, a cat and dog? No!
I know 50% of our population see things differently than me, which I’m 100% OK with and respect that. But once you start verbalizing those beliefs and try to influence me, I lose respect for you. I can’t help it. Unfortunately, that has happened to several members, whom I previously respected. I’m trying to overlook this, and hopefully when baseball returns, I can be a bigger man and put some of the things I’ve read behind me.
Don't go. Take a break if you have to, but don't delete your account.
JCG posted:Very sorry to beat this dead horse again, but I happened to run into a link to this story this morning.
What Doctors on the Front Lines Wish They’d Known a Month Ago: https://nyti.ms/3chAos8
Not fake. There are good journalists doing good work letting us see what's going on in the front lines of this struggle. We are fortunate to have them.
Good article, thanks.
old_school posted:Iowamom23 posted:Iowamom23 posted:baseballhs posted:
And just as a note, I'm a Democrat.
you are already stated you are a reporter, that means there was a 95% chance of you being a democrat.
obviously by your rant you care to put out facts, you may not have noticed but that is not what happens in the national media, the large papers or the cable news...facts are not relevant, they take cabinet members of past administrations and present them as objective journalist, they twist, the outright lie and the American people know it. Everyone of them.
Just like this board, many will defend them, lie for them, and mock any who disagree because it supports their core belief of "orange man bad" - the rest which actually include many on both sides just know they are lying because they have ears and it is plainly evident anyone with a stitch of honestly and common sense.
it is funny but does anyone remember the term the silent majority?
Totally unfair of you to go on a rant after Iowamom23. She was just expressing and sharing her thoughts on a situation. I didnt see anything political in what she said, and pointing out that she was a Democrat, after she gave us that information seemed to be totally unintentional to make her out as the enemy.
Correct me if I am wrong, but what's your problem?
old_school posted:baseballhs posted:It’s not just reporters/journalists. I also think educators’ political opinions should be a mystery to their students. It frustrates me to hear my kids come home and tell me about political rants that teachers of professors went on. The job is to facilitate learning. Start conversations. Question rationale...for both sides. I don’t think a student should ever know where they stand. That’s hard, but makes them a good teacher. To me, news should be facts. There are plenty of opinion shows Opinion pieces, , blogs. It’s hard to report facts for both sides, but that’s the challenge unless it’s openly an opinion piece. Just my opinion.
and we know how that is going...unless someone cares to debate that as well.
No interest in debating it, but I teach at a state U and see things closer up than most parents. (I also have a kid in college and a senior in HS.) I teach constitutional law, and most weeks I post a newspaper article or three to my class web site that relates to issues relevant to my courses. So, for example, I have posted several things about the scope of federal and state power to deal with epidemics. We also talk about abortion, religious freedom, euthanasia. In short, there is no getting away from "politics" given what I teach.
Most of my students' anonymous year-end evaluations tell me I run a balanced classroom. I can honestly say no one has ever accused me of showing bias. But there are some issues where I have to say "there is no mainstream constitutional scholar who agrees with this viewpoint." Some of those situations mean I am "taking sides" in a political debate. I hesitate to even give an example, but the most recent case was the news conference where the President and Vice-President asserted that the President has plenary power in an emergency. I don't know of any lawyer or scholar (I am an attorney) anywhere on the political spectrum who supported that contention. And I told my students so.
Why the long story? I think some claims about bias in teaching are overblown. Students are not always very well informed politically, and young folks often hold extreme views, left or right. I think they also sometimes don't recognize when a teacher is trying to provoke discussion. (I tell my students all the time not to assume what I say in class reflects my personal opinions. When we study the pre-Civil War era, for example, I'm usually the only one who will lay out the legal arguments underlying the claims of slave owners. But no, I am not in favor of slavery.)
Professors ought to avoid political bias, but they also don't want to be in the position of saying "is the earth flat? opinions differ..." As Carl Sagan said "It pays to keep an open mind. But not so open that your brains fall out."
I'm not as opposed to college level, and even some high school level, teachers discussing politics in a rational debate. I don't think elementary and really even middle school teachers need to discuss their political beliefs with their students.
I love this board. I like the people who post here. This thread has been enlightening, and has also, I think, been a release valve for some of us (maybe those, like me, who don't do any other social media). I also think that this particular thread has contained the virus from contaminating some of the other actual baseball threads, and that has been good. However, even this thread is deteriorating. I would say it should be closed, as political threads always are on here, except that I fear that then the virus would spread to the other threads that have managed to stay focused on baseball. So, if you don't like it, don't read it.
We are all stressed, and there is no baseball. For the past two years, when I get stressed (with 3 boys, that's much of the time), I read old HSBBW threads, I find it oddly relaxing to read about other people's baseball problems from years ago. There are tens of thousands of threads. Right now I am in about 2012 in the recruiting threads, working forward. There are amazing posts and stories in there; guess what, almost all of them have to do with baseball.
So, if you miss the old baseball discussions, I recommend going and reading some old threads. Maybe it will help.
I agree @anotherparent. There were a couple political posts in another thread that had been politics free until that point. Having this thread a political dump may be good for everyone.
Before this topic closes. If you haven't seen last night's 60 Minutes, you should.
I still think this thread has provided some interesting viewpoints on coronavirus that I have appreciated. The Trump talk is what got me to quit social media, and I just hope it doesn't fully hijack this thread (well, it has, but I hope the thread can return back to coronavirus, even if it is not baseball-related). Let me say, when I read an article about the facts like JCG posted, I find it very interesting. When articles turn into referendums on Trump, I ignore them.
Trying to get back on track, with the caveat that this could be a unique situation, I found an article that I found interesting on Sweden. https://reason.com/2020/04/17/...wns-in-the-long-run/
Good post, let's try to keep in on corona virus and leave politics out of the discussion.
We NEED Got Wood for Sale like no other time! Come back for a visit, woody! Shape up our ship!
Chico Escuela posted:luv baseball, who is the "they" behind this nefarious conspiracy theory? And how did they get to Fauci, Birx, and so many other medical and public health professionals? And get so many other countries to go along?
Disagree (using 20/20 hindsight) with the decisions elected officials from both parties in most of the nation took if you want. But there is no shadowy cabal behind the events of the past few months.
Chico -" they" are Fauci etc. If you want mass voluntary compliance from people in the US there only two ways to get it - at the point of a gun - or scare the hell out of them.
So my point is pretty simple and there isn't any conspiracy theory invovlved. It is my assessment of the message the government has chosen to convey and our response to it.
But to recap my point of view in full: I have serious doubts that the medical community has any true insight into what the oucome would have been had we limited the response to simply staying further apart, stop touching, washing hands etc. I think the estimate of 2.2 million dead was stupid and unrealistic and was never going to happen.
So with the great Dr. Fauci and others guiding the way the plan was developed to slow the spread...or flatten the curve by asking for widespread shutdown.
How to make that happen voluntarily? Scare everyone to death with insane predictions rather than anything approaching a qualified statement. In other words End of times type talk.
They were covering their asses. It gets back to my joke about Trump saving 2 million lives. All politicians operate on the narrative of defining what success is. I we tell you 2 million will die and only 60k die … see it worked! We are great and beneficent leaders and we declare victory ….vote for me.
We bought it for about a 6 weeks and now the growing sentiment is enough is enough I want my life back and I do not believe this is the end of the world so I will take the risk.
At that my friends is truly what being an American is and should be.
luv baseball posted:Chico Escuela posted:luv baseball, who is the "they" behind this nefarious conspiracy theory? And how did they get to Fauci, Birx, and so many other medical and public health professionals? And get so many other countries to go along?
Disagree (using 20/20 hindsight) with the decisions elected officials from both parties in most of the nation took if you want. But there is no shadowy cabal behind the events of the past few months.
I will take the risk.
As long as you only risk yourself, I'm fine with that. Unfortunately, I'm sure you will have to go to the grocery store, or the gas station or some other place and I will have to go there too and then you put me at risk. I really hate the "we're all in this together" commercials, but there is some truth to it.
