Ts and Ps

RaceBannon said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

"Hoax!" is a convenient strawman. Excuse me, strawzir.

Meh, fuggit, not worth typing more. Trust in government competence, @HHusky , I'm sure it'll turn out great.

The underreaction of the federal government has not inspired confidence, I agree.

Sled, Ivan and Race seem to be on the Hoax Wagon. If you have a more nuanced position, that would be rfreshing.

I've written 100x more than prudent about the whole shitshow. Read, or don't, at your leisure. As a Wash-en-tone-ean, I've given up hope at this point. Nothing I say or do matters.

What approach are you advocating vis-a-vis the virus?

What's your national approach dick face. You've only been asked a thousand times

WestlinnDuck said:

Unified approach? Like your unified approach to paying more taxes? You feel you have a moral obligation to pay more taxes but won't until the government forces everyone to pay more taxes. South Dakota is just like NYC. The dazzler's unified approach - young people are just like old people.

RaceBannon said:

HHusky said:

RaceBannon said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

"Hoax!" is a convenient strawman. Excuse me, strawzir.

Meh, fuggit, not worth typing more. Trust in government competence, @HHusky , I'm sure it'll turn out great.

The underreaction of the federal government has not inspired confidence, I agree.

Sled, Ivan and Race seem to be on the Hoax Wagon. If you have a more nuanced position, that would be rfreshing.

I've written 100x more than prudent about the whole shitshow. Read, or don't, at your leisure. As a Wash-en-tone-ean, I've given up hope at this point. Nothing I say or do matters.

What approach are you advocating vis-a-vis the virus?

What's your national approach dick face. You've only been asked a thousand times

You mean you asked once before.

The Feds could have been the one purchaser of PPE, etc., instead of making the states bid against each other.

We could have had a unified policy of being open or not.

I wouldn't have called for the "liberation" of states with Democratic governors.

I wouldn't have trivialized the threat.

My message would have been that we can't have a healthy economy before we get the virus under control.

Would Damone have bitched? Of course.

You would have done what Daddy told you to do.

So you would have shut the whole country down

When and for how long?

What if a state told you to fuck off? Send troops?

Really it sounds like you just have a bunch of bullshit talk

Trump did more than you are advocating

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.

Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.

Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.

The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.

Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.

No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.

WestlinnDuck said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.

Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.

The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.

Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.

No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.

Needs to be a unified approach. Except if the dazzler is involved.

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.

Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.

The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.

Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.

No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.

If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.

Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.

Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.

The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.

Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.

No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.

If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.

Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.

I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

NorthwestFresh said:

HHusky said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first

People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.

But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”

. . .

We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?

Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.

Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.

How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.

What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.

I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.

Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.

The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.

Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.

No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.

If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.

Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.

I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.

Oh, interesting. Well, I'm sure your motivations were pure. Free-thinkers like us will keep making the decisions best for us. Those travel radii are for people who don't know better anyhow.

I just don't have the option of waiting to see whether the Midwest and the West Coast get moved closer together.