Those Dems need to TRUST THE SCIENCE

Chris Cuomo said he was quarantined in his basement to protect his wife and kids from the virus.  But he was seen by a passer-by breaking the travel ban and the stay-at-home order.  Cuomo was playing with his family in the yard of an undeveloped property.  When the man asked Cuomo why he wasn't quarantined at his residence, Cuomo threatened retaliation

Source? Link?

---

Those Dems need to TRUST THE SCIENCE

Chris Cuomo said he was quarantined in his basement to protect his wife and kids from the virus.  But he was seen by a passer-by breaking the travel ban and the stay-at-home order.  Cuomo was playing with his family in the yard of an undeveloped property.  When the man asked Cuomo why he wasn't quarantined at his residence, Cuomo threatened retaliation

Source? Link?

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/49290...-with-cnns

The Long Island bicyclist, a 65-year-old man who only identified himself as David, told the Post he decided to file a police report to document the alleged incident in case he feels "that this guy’s a threat to me."

The bicyclist told the Post he's lived in East Hampton for most of his life.

David said the verbal confrontation occurred after he saw Cuomo outside on Sunday.

"I just looked and said, ‘Is that Chris Cuomo? Isn’t he supposed to be quarantined?'” David said after one of the two women there approached him. "I said to him, ‘Your brother is the coronavirus czar, and you’re not even following his rules — unnecessary travel.'"

"'Who the hell are you?! I can do what I want!' He just ranted, screaming, ‘I’ll find out who you are!’" Cuomo responded, according to David.

"He said, ‘This is not the end of this. You’ll deal with this later. We will meet again.’ If that’s not a threat, I don’t know what is," David added.

Cuomo talked about the back-and-forth on his SiriusXM program, "Let's Get After It," on Monday while explaining that being a public figure prevents him from firing back at people talking "BS" to him.

"I want to be able to tell you to go to hell, to shut your mouth," Cuomo said. "I don’t get that doing what I do for a living, me being able to tell you to shut your mouth or I will do you the way you guys do each other."

“I don’t want some jackass, loser, fat-tire biker being able to pull over and get in my space and talk BS to me, I don’t want to hear it,” he added.

---

Those antibody tests aren't really relevant to your point.
Total deaths in New York City this month, even with the city shut down, exceeds those in September 2001. No way around that math.

Emotional drivel.  

1.) We didnt artificially cause a great depression in September 2001

2.) They just FOUND 3700 deaths to add to the tally without testing.  

3.) Remember the 40k ventilators?


4.) A one month outlier in the most densely populated landmass in the country doesnt make this a 100 years pathogen.  In order to make that claim you need an accurate infection rate, transmission rate, and death rate.

1) right. if these extra deaths are virus-related, presumably there would be even more deaths if the economy was totally open.

2) Right. We don't know exactly who died of what. But we do know that way more people died last month than during September 2001, and there is no explanation for that so far other than the virus.

3) relevance?

4) sure, the discussion is not over, but it is hard to explain all these extra deaths unless you agree that the virus is uniquely deadly and we need it to at least partially shut down the economy to fight it.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Emotional drivel.  

1.) We didnt artificially cause a great depression in September 2001

2.) They just FOUND 3700 deaths to add to the tally without testing.  

3.) Remember the 40k ventilators?


4.) A one month outlier in the most densely populated landmass in the country doesnt make this a 100 years pathogen.  In order to make that claim you need an accurate infection rate, transmission rate, and death rate.

1) right. if these extra deaths are virus-related, presumably there would be even more deaths if the economy was totally open.

2) Right. We don't know exactly who died of what. But we do know that way more people died last month than during September 2001, and there is no explanation for that so far other than the virus.

3) relevance?

4) sure, the discussion is not over, but it is hard to explain all these extra deaths unless you agree that the virus is uniquely deadly and we need it to at least partially shut down the economy to fight it.

Did I ever argue that a place like NYC wouldn't require mitigation?  The problem is that NYC is the outlier not the pattern domestically.  It makes no logical sense to impose the same policies in rural south Dakota that you do in NYC.

Moreover, as hard as NYC has been hit, that doesnt make the CORONA VIRUS a 100 years virus anymore than 911 makes the war on terror ww2.  You still need an actual rate of infection, transmission, and mortality.  Then we can better understand what were dealing with.

---

The most dangerous virus in over 100 years emerges on the doorstep of one of the the most advanced virology labs in the world, and people seriously bought the whole “anteaters at a market” story...

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

Fake news.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

1) right. if these extra deaths are virus-related, presumably there would be even more deaths if the economy was totally open.

2) Right. We don't know exactly who died of what. But we do know that way more people died last month than during September 2001, and there is no explanation for that so far other than the virus.

3) relevance?

4) sure, the discussion is not over, but it is hard to explain all these extra deaths unless you agree that the virus is uniquely deadly and we need it to at least partially shut down the economy to fight it.

Did I ever argue that a place like NYC wouldn't require mitigation?  The problem is that NYC is the outlier not the pattern domestically.  It makes no logical sense to impose the same policies in rural south Dakota that you do in NYC.

Moreover, as hard as NYC has been hit, that doesnt make the CORONA VIRUS a 100 years virus anymore than 911 makes the war on terror ww2.  You still need an actual rate of infection, transmission, and mortality.  Then we can better understand what were dealing with.

I feel like the goal posts are moving.  Say we agree about NYC.  Say we agree about "rural South Dakota", that there doesn't need to be the same level of restriction there.

What's in between? Should cruises be continuing? Theme parks? Conventions? Plays? Basketball games?  What do you think should be "open" now that is not open?

---

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

Fake news.

It's not news at all.  It's mostly speculation about what is likely and what is unlikely.  Which part is fake to you?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Sweden might have the right idea. Stay-at-home for those who are vulnerable, but life goes on for the young and healthy.

---

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

---

Fake news.

It's not news at all.  It's mostly speculation about what is likely and what is unlikely.  Which part is fake to you?

Most of it is just your misguided speculation being presented as "factual".  The parts in bold are very much fake.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

The most dangerous virus in over 100 years emerges on the doorstep of one of the the most advanced virology labs in the world, and people seriously bought the whole “anteaters at a market” story...

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

1. Releasing it intentionally? Probably not. Releasing it negligently by failing to adequately control access to the facility and sterilization on the way in and out? Highly likely.

2. Dormant inside bats for years? Bats inside of the Wuhan virology lab, maybe. If the virus did trace back to the same bat colony that SARS does, as has been speculated, why didn't it show up long ago in either researchers that continue to study those bats, in the surrounding wildlife, or in the researchers themselves?

3. Bats were not sold at the Wuhan market. There has been very little consistency of message about that hellhole, but that's been a commonly agreed-upon statement.

4. There's a "cultural aversion" here to giving your boss bad news about [BLEEP] hitting the fan, especially if you did it. Whether they intended to release COVID-19 or not, failure to disclose the leak and, apparently, hoping it would just go away becomes malicious instantly.

Won't get too far into the WHO here because there's a lot of egg on their faces right now, but cutting funding was absolutely the wrong decision during a [BLEEP] pandemic. Afterwards, sure, cut funding until they've changed their leadership and power structure. But during it? No. How [BLEEP] stupid do you have to be to tell one of the organizations most directly addressing a pandemic that you're not funding their efforts anymore because you think they're doodyheads?

---

---

It's not news at all.  It's mostly speculation about what is likely and what is unlikely.  Which part is fake to you?

Most of it is just your misguided speculation being presented as "factual".  The parts in bold are very much fake.

Hey, I looked more into it, and you're right, there was never any Cultural Revolution in China.  They have a time honored tradition of free speech and speaking truth to power, similar to ours. What was I thinking? Thank you for pointing me to the truth.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

1. Releasing it intentionally? Probably not. Releasing it negligently by failing to adequately control access to the facility and sterilization on the way in and out? Highly likely.

2. Dormant inside bats for years? Bats inside of the Wuhan virology lab, maybe. If the virus did trace back to the same bat colony that SARS does, as has been speculated, why didn't it show up long ago in either researchers that continue to study those bats, in the surrounding wildlife, or in the researchers themselves?

3. Bats were not sold at the Wuhan market. There has been very little consistency of message about that hellhole, but that's been a commonly agreed-upon statement.

4. There's a "cultural aversion" here to giving your boss bad news about [BLEEP] hitting the fan, especially if you did it. Whether they intended to release COVID-19 or not, failure to disclose the leak and, apparently, hoping it would just go away becomes malicious instantly.

Won't get too far into the WHO here because there's a lot of egg on their faces right now, but cutting funding was absolutely the wrong decision during a [BLEEP] pandemic. Afterwards, sure, cut funding until they've changed their leadership and power structure. But during it? No. How [BLEEP] stupid do you have to be to tell one of the organizations most directly addressing a pandemic that you're not funding their efforts anymore because you think they're doodyheads?

Maybe Bill Gates can cover the bill?

---

Most of it is just your misguided speculation being presented as "factual".  The parts in bold are very much fake.

Hey, I looked more into it, and you're right, there was never any Cultural Revolution in China.  They have a time honored tradition of free speech and speaking truth to power, similar to ours. What was I thinking? Thank you for pointing me to the truth.

Typical liberal. Present your opinion as fact. Get called out on it. Back down.

As predictable as the sun rising in the East tomorrow.

---

Looking at the people/countries who are upset over Trump defending the WHO tells you everything you need to know.

---

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

4. There's a "cultural aversion" here to giving your boss bad news about [BLEEP] hitting the fan, especially if you did it. Whether they intended to release COVID-19 or not, failure to disclose the leak and, apparently, hoping it would just go away becomes malicious instantly.

Won't get too far into the WHO here because there's a lot of egg on their faces right now, but cutting funding was absolutely the wrong decision during a [BLEEP] pandemic. Afterwards, sure, cut funding until they've changed their leadership and power structure. But during it? 

We have a free-wheeling discussion here and our "bosses" such as they are compete with each other and don't always keep each other's secrets.  We have whistleblower protections and people use them.  The engineers who stamped the drawings can interrupt and redirect work at job sites even if they have no financial connection to the owner or contractor.  We have all sorts of incentives to tell the truth here that China just does not have.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

1. Releasing it intentionally? Probably not. Releasing it negligently by failing to adequately control access to the facility and sterilization on the way in and out? Highly likely.

2. Dormant inside bats for years? Bats inside of the Wuhan virology lab, maybe. If the virus did trace back to the same bat colony that SARS does, as has been speculated, why didn't it show up long ago in either researchers that continue to study those bats, in the surrounding wildlife, or in the researchers themselves?

3. Bats were not sold at the Wuhan market. There has been very little consistency of message about that hellhole, but that's been a commonly agreed-upon statement.

4. There's a "cultural aversion" here to giving your boss bad news about [BLEEP] hitting the fan, especially if you did it. Whether they intended to release COVID-19 or not, failure to disclose the leak and, apparently, hoping it would just go away becomes malicious instantly.

Won't get too far into the WHO here because there's a lot of egg on their faces right now, but cutting funding was absolutely the wrong decision during a [BLEEP] pandemic. Afterwards, sure, cut funding until they've changed their leadership and power structure. But during it? No. How [BLEEP] stupid do you have to be to tell one of the organizations most directly addressing a pandemic that you're not funding their efforts anymore because you think they're doodyheads?

Maybe Bill Gates can cover the bill?

If the federal government can just invent two trillion dollars because Boeing and Delta and United want two trillion dollars, why can't they just keep on inventing money to fund organizations like the WHO?

---

Maybe Bill Gates can cover the bill?

If the federal government can just invent two trillion dollars because Boeing and Delta and United want two trillion dollars, why can't they just keep on inventing money to fund organizations like the WHO?

Because the airlines aren't responsible for 30,000 deaths in a month.

---

If the federal government can just invent two trillion dollars because Boeing and Delta and United want two trillion dollars, why can't they just keep on inventing money to fund organizations like the WHO?

Because the airlines aren't responsible for 30,000 deaths in a month.

I was unaware that the WHO coordinated with the Chinese government to release COVID-19 and the rest of the world's governments to not care until it was too late.

---

Because the airlines aren't responsible for 30,000 deaths in a month.

I was unaware that the WHO coordinated with the Chinese government to release COVID-19 and the rest of the world's governments to not care until it was too late.

The WHO is an extension of the Chinese government. Look at their view of Taiwan and get back to me.

---

I was unaware that the WHO coordinated with the Chinese government to release COVID-19 and the rest of the world's governments to not care until it was too late.

The WHO is an extension of the Chinese government. Look at their view of Taiwan and get back to me.

The WHO is an extension of the United Nations. Their directors are from Africa, India, Europe and Australia. Taiwan isn't even a member of the UN at this point after much lobbying from China and the rest of the communist nations 50 years ago to replace it with the PRC. That's a UN issue, not a WHO issue, and while I strongly disagree with the UN's handling of Taiwan, it's not the WHO keeping them out. You're implying that the UN itself is an extension of the PRC, which is just wrong.

---

The lab may have had something to do with it, but, releasing it definitely wasn't on purpose.
You don't release bioweapons in your own country.  Especially if the army doesn't have a vaccine.
The virus probably was dormant inside bats for years. 
Maybe a guy who sells bats for food caught it by accident.
Maybe a guy who studies bat viruses for a living caught it by accident.
Nearly everything else China did along the way is explained by the cultural aversion they have to sending bad news up the chain of command.  Not that they're innocent, but they weren't being malicious either.
Now, WHO saying "no need to shut down travel" and "no evidence of human to human transmission" is harder to explain. It's no surprise when China's unaccountable communist government looks incompetent.  But WHO are supposed to be above politics and competent.

Won't get too far into the WHO here because there's a lot of egg on their faces right now, but cutting funding was absolutely the wrong decision during a [BLEEP] pandemic. Afterwards, sure, cut funding until they've changed their leadership and power structure. But during it? No. How [BLEEP] stupid do you have to be to tell one of the organizations most directly addressing a pandemic that you're not funding their efforts anymore because you think they're doodyheads?

What has the WHO done to directly address the pandemic that deserves ANY funding? The funding that they have received to date has not just been wasted, but has resulted in more deaths worldwide than had WHO never existed.

---

The WHO is an extension of the Chinese government. Look at their view of Taiwan and get back to me.

The WHO is an extension of the United Nations. Their directors are from Africa, India, Europe and Australia. Taiwan isn't even a member of the UN at this point after much lobbying from China and the rest of the communist nations 50 years ago to replace it with the PRC. That's a UN issue, not a WHO issue, and while I strongly disagree with the UN's handling of Taiwan, it's not the WHO keeping them out. You're implying that the UN itself is an extension of the PRC, which is just wrong.

The UN is controlled by anti-American authorities. It may not be completely an extension of the PRC, but it carries their water.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Maybe Bill Gates can cover the bill?

If the federal government can just invent two trillion dollars because Boeing and Delta and United want two trillion dollars, why can't they just keep on inventing money to fund organizations like the WHO?

While I personally think Delta, Boeing, and United shouldn't receive a dime, the reasoning is that their continued existence is necessary for the national defense. WHO is not just unnecessary, but probably a detriment to US national defense.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"