Trump Thread 2.0

[nando]

Well this went pretty well.

250 students and staff quarantined in Georgia school district after one week of school

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/08/08/hundreds-students-staff-quarantine-georgia-school-district-cherokee/3327173001/

[nando]

Oh how I love satire...

If you’ve never supported the NRA, now is the time to start

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/08/07/if-youve-never-supported-nra-now-is-time-start/

Dear (Name),

You are on this email list because you have never donated to the National Rifle Association. As you may have read, our organization is going through a rough time. New York Attorney General Letitia James thinks that fraud and corruption are so rampant within us that we ought to be dissolved. That’s why we’re reaching out to you.
We bet that what’s been holding you back all this time is the belief that if you donated to the NRA, it would help put more guns in more places and that such a goal, in your opinion, would make the United States a more dangerous place. Well, we urge you to take a second look and ask: Is that really what the NRA is doing?

A misconception that a lot of people have about the NRA is that we are some sort of gun lobby, trying to put guns into and keep them in the (cold, dead) hands of as many people as possible. But as allegations in a recent lawsuit demonstrate, the NRA is about so much more than that. We are also about subsidizing the personal travel of CEO Wayne LaPierre, his family members and a few trusted affiliates! We’re not just a gun lobby whose annual convention did not take place this year and which seems as though it hasn’t been very active around the coming election. We also believe in the power of travel, and the need to support America’s small-ship owners, or large-yacht owners, depending on your perspective.

So please, if you haven’t, consider giving generously to support this vital organization.

If you look at what your donation would be going to support, you barely see anything to do with guns! According to that same lawsuit we mentioned earlier, millions of dollars have gone to support the travel and lifestyle industries through direct action: putting feet on the ground in Four Seasons hotels, luxury black cars and private golf clubs. Your cash will not help defend the weapons that used to be the top reason children were terrified to go to school; it will go to support the economy of the Bahamas, as well as the hard-working providers of private jets to the Bahamas, and the hard-working providers of private jets to other places. Your dollars will help, in some small way, to make it possible for Wayne LaPierre to spend time on a 108-foot yacht named “Illusions.” That yacht has a chef!

For too long, in people’s minds, the NRA was the organization that would send a shouty older man out every time a devastating shooting occurred to grumpily blame it on something completely unrelated like video games or socialism. We can’t blame you for not supporting such an organization. But look again! Instead, imagine Wayne LaPierre on the deck of “Illusions,” eating a chef-cooked meal! That’s the real NRA. Nary a gun in sight!

Come home to the NRA! We’re not just an organization that gives ratings to members of Congress. We also are what Letitia James called a “personal piggy bank" for Wayne LaPierre. That’s the NRA we know, nothing to do with blaming the victims of gun violence and offering thoughts and prayers — which, after all, are free. Please, give now. If your money actually goes toward gun activism, we’ll be as surprised as you.

And wouldn’t it be a shame to see the NRA dismantled and replaced by some sort of new organization whose priority really was putting guns in the hands of history teachers, for no good reason? That’s the alternative we face.

If you are someone who has supported us in the past and want to know where your money went, please disregard this email.

Warmly,

The NRA

Fun fact: I had a membership in the NRA. You know, back when it was a way to learn about gun safety, get a hunting license, and have some fun (but not pay for someone's yacht).

[2mAn]

dont all trolls live in a basement?

[nando]

I find it humorous the positions people take based on their demographics. I could almost predict the position based on location.

like a certain troll's location in his mom's basement?

(I kid I kid.. I think)

[2mAn]

Guys, dial back the personal insults and do your best to stick to facts... Hope thats not asking too much.

I find it humorous the positions people take based on their demographics. I could almost predict the position based on location.

...carry on...

[nando]

Nope, no dead kids here:

Coronavirus: 7-year-old youngest to die in Georgia, health officials say

A 17-year-old with underlying conditions was previously the youngest victim to die of the virus in Georgia

https://www.foxnews.com/us/7-year-ol...-officials-say

this isn't the first I've seen by far and it won't be the last. Marshallnoise is a sick individual.

I'm sure the parents of the dead 7 year old feel better that "statistically", their child isn't actually dead..

[decay]

I can't believe I missed this gem! The guy will be acquitted for murder 2. The officer did not murder him at all based on both autopsies.

oh, so you can predict this because you're now a lawyer as well as a doctor? what medical training do you have that allows you to interpret those autopsies?

let's face facts. you are a sad troll attention-seeking on an obscure bmw forum for a car you don't even have and sometimes i wonder why we're still engaging you.

[phillipj]

The death rate is probably low because kids haven't been exposed so they haven't gotten it as much. Plus we have no idea what the long term side effects could be, for anyone much less children. It could be nothing, or it could be debilitating. At my age, it would suck but wouldn't be as big of a deal if I had issues long term. But when you're 8 or 9? That's very different.

I hope your mom does OK. Hopefully she wasn't near them for long enough to have been infected. Ironically, my mom died last year of a heart attack - so I don't have to worry about it at least. :|

Thanks. & I'm sorry about your Mom.
I do get worried about my parents, especially now. They are up there and no longer in the best health.

[roguetoaster]

^^^
I was writing about your refutation that deaths have occurred in the sub 18 age group as a direct result of CV. Clearly they have, and if they have it means that they probably will continue to do so. I also contend, but cannot prove that as children are sent back out in to the world the rate of infection and rate of death are both likely to rise. That does not even account for potential transmission from child to adult.

It really depends on what amount of people you feel can be sacrificed so that we can have whatever end result. Personally, I think that kids and parents of children need to be protected from unnecessary risk, and I do not see the harm in taking widespread, substantial precautions to shield them. However, those precautions are for naught if we do not control our infection rate throughout the populace.

Yes, it's not the plague (in terms of mortality), but it's also the 21st century, and we are limited in how we can treat infected people, so we take precautions to prevent infection, just as we did those hundreds of years ago. Clearly, death is not that only impact of contraction, even in healthy people, and that's the real concern in my book.

[CarpHunter]

Oh, he could have done what Sweden did, right?

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87812

How about the Dutch?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-netherlands-gamble-on-limited-intelligent-lockdown-to-control-covid-19/

The government is not supposed to protect you from dying: the government is designed to protect people's rights. And don't get all stupid and say that "people have a right to be alive." Yeah, no shit Sherlock. But they are not entitled to lock people in their houses "for their own good." No, absolutely not.

First, I'm not attacking you, please refrain from the insults. Just asking a question about your opinion. Neither of your links dispute what I said. All i said is this country could learn from what is working in other countries. And apply that knowledge. And their not locking anyone in their homes. That's a ridiculous over exaggeration. Why is it all americans wanna do is stare at their phones and lay on their couch all day, but as soon as your asked to stay home, lay on your couch all day and stare at your phone it's some crazy issue? Not saying you specifically.

You did avoid the main question tho. I'm not leading with it. Really wanna know where you personally draw the line, is it numbers of dead, how long this continues? Like if it's a constant cycle of lock downs for the next 6 months to a a year or more. Look at texas and Florida among others, opened up just to close back down. What if that continues. At what point do you personally start saying shit's not being handled right?

[phillipj]

But again, being infected does not mean they die. We are worried about death here. And if we are worried about death, we identify the people most vulnerable (to Covid) and we work around them. Kids are not dying by this. They factually are not. Old people, nursing home patients and people with generalized poor health are at risk.

School age kids are not killing their parents from this either. That has not been proven even a little. Could they kill grandma? Yeah, really only if she is ill, has diabetes or other severe health problems.

Once again, the kid's lives are not threatened by this disease. Period.

"Are not killing their parents" ? In what, high enough measured numbers right now? Anyone gets it, they can pass it on. The little kid next door can pass it to my 72 year old Mom selling stupid lemonade!

And are we only worried about death? How about if you are bankrupted by hospital bills?

Let's say you lost your job and your health insurance in the pandemic, do you have the bank account to pay for this? There's no vaccine yet. Ok, go so you unfortunately get it, maybe it's bad enough and you go get hospitalized-- there's a mind-boggling ton of costs! And, eventually you do finally get some treatment, something like Remdesivir is priced at over $3,100 for just one course (even though taxpayer dollars subsidized the development of their drug heavily, which now Gilead is making a fortune on).

There are very severe cascading effects of this pandemic you completely forget about in about 1000 regards.

[marshallnoise]

Kids are actually dying, perhaps not in great numbers, but they certainly are. and with more opportunity for exposure, the base number and rate will undoubtedly rise.

We don't know how true or untrue it is, no large studies have been completed, and it's a large unknown at this point. However, we know that parents are not one monolithic block of healthy people, and without a doubt there are many out there who are very susceptible to severe infection.

Once again, they are, and you are really the only person I have ever heard refute that children are at risk. That said, death is not the only lasting impact of CV, we have seen a plethora of long term issues, and not just in those with severe cases requiring hospitalization.

Ultimately, if parents are not given a choice other than to send their kids back to physical school without regard to their individual circumstances we are undoubtedly putting more people of all ages at risk unnecessarily. Alternative solutions are needed, including for those who wish to send their kids back to school, which is fine if they have considered circumstances rationally.

I don't think its right to say "Kids are actually dying." Its ok to say that kids have died by Covid, but statistically, they are not. You have to be careful how you paint the picture.

Please, clarify for me: "Once again, they are, and you are really the only person I have ever heard refute that children are at risk." At risk for what? Death or infection? Because it is REALLY important. I am not saying and never have said that kids won't get infected. I said and will repeat saying, until data proves otherwise, that kids do not die from Coronavirus. Statistically, I am 100% right, even if 1000 kids die from Coronavirus, it really depends on the denominator of that equation. It is critical we have some perspective here. That is all I am trying to bring up.

I am 100% in agreement with your rational, thoughtful analysis of the situation in your last paragraph. We can have a reasonable debate over these things, but we cannot have a reasonable debate if the first thing out of someone's mouth is that the sky is falling and Covid is the new plague. That kind of hysteria is reserved for people who do not belong at the grown up table.

[roguetoaster]

That explains the United State's low rate of infection in children. But again, being infected does not mean they die. We are worried about death here. And if we are worried about death, we identify the people most vulnerable (to Covid) and we work around them. Kids are not dying by this. They factually are not. Old people, nursing home patients and people with generalized poor health are at risk.

School age kids are not killing their parents from this either. That has not been proven even a little. Could they kill grandma? Yeah, really only if she is ill, has diabetes or other severe health problems.

Once again, the kid's lives are not threatened by this disease. Period.

Kids are actually dying, perhaps not in great numbers, but they certainly are. and with more opportunity for exposure, the base number and rate will undoubtedly rise.

We don't know how true or untrue it is, no large studies have been completed, and it's a large unknown at this point. However, we know that parents are not one monolithic block of healthy people, and without a doubt there are many out there who are very susceptible to severe infection.

Once again, they are, and you are really the only person I have ever heard refute that children are at risk. That said, death is not the only lasting impact of CV, we have seen a plethora of long term issues, and not just in those with severe cases requiring hospitalization.

Ultimately, if parents are not given a choice other than to send their kids back to physical school without regard to their individual circumstances we are undoubtedly putting more people of all ages at risk unnecessarily. Alternative solutions are needed, including for those who wish to send their kids back to school, which is fine if they have considered circumstances rationally.

[marshallnoise]

You have to read in to it. Why were rates of infection low in children, probably because parents kept them at home, and they are probably less likely to get tested.

What about when rates are high? Do schools become an excellent transmission space, most likely.

Children are also far less likely to be able to restrain themselves and I suspect that they are more likely to be "invisible" carriers in a family or community space. What happens if the kid picks it up, displays minimum symptoms, passes it on to their parent, and then their parent becomes seriously ill or dead? Now who cares for that child, how does that impact their well-being and long term success, which seems to be the main point in that CDC page?

On a more basic level, these kids are the future of the country, they matter, we don't, maybe we should be more careful with their lives?

That explains the United State's low rate of infection in children. But again, being infected does not mean they die. We are worried about death here. And if we are worried about death, we identify the people most vulnerable (to Covid) and we work around them. Kids are not dying by this. They factually are not. Old people, nursing home patients and people with generalized poor health are at risk.

School age kids are not killing their parents from this either. That has not been proven even a little. Could they kill grandma? Yeah, really only if she is ill, has diabetes or other severe health problems.

Once again, the kid's lives are not threatened by this disease. Period.

[marshallnoise]

Criminally is probably taking it too far - but morally, yes you would be. At least, anyone with a shred of conscience and empathy for others would feel responsible. You know, people who aren't Trump loving psychopaths.

It would be difficult to prove and unlikely to be successful, but I'm sure there will be at least one case brought to the courts. This is America, after all.

No nando, if I did not intentionally infect someone, I would not be morally responsible for giving it to them. Would I feel bad? Yeah, but I would not feel responsible. No one should feel responsible.

Using your logic, Christopher Columbus, who had no idea he and his crew carried diseases that they had developed immunity for, is morally and legally culpable for the lack of immunity the natives had that wound up killing a bunch of them. Its unfortunate, but that's it man.

I forgot though, there are a whole bunch of people being taught in college that Columbus MURDERED the natives by showing up in the first place. People call it genocide!!! With that kind of distortion of reason going on...I don't know what to do with that.

For all of you who want some perspective, legitimate, actual perspective, read this article. https://www.kunc.org/show/kuncs-colo...orical-context