jakee

There's that dishonesty thing happening again.

Yes, what you do is rank hypocrisy. This disussion is different, in that someone in it is defending the enforcement of fairly unique sanctions against Iran for doing things which are not unique.

I'd imagine the point is that there aren't any leaders in Europe (or anywhere else for that matter) who claimed to have stopped the spread of Covid when their country only had ten cases, or that they would soon have no cases at all, or that it would magically disappear on its own in April anyway.

Sorry, that doesn't wash. Regardless of how much weight you were putting on it you posted the raw numbers for a reason, and that reason was not for them to add zero meaning to the conversation. Right - so do you not also feel that there are geographical factors at play vs smaller and more densely populated countries that would naturally slow the spread of Covid-19 in the US and skew the infection rate comparison at this stage of the game?

I don't see your reasoning. It's been known from the start that a lot of people will be infected and asymptomatic, but we're still in the position we're in regarding the sheer quantity of people requiring critical care. You also don't know the demographic breakdown of the asymptomatic positives. Are they proprotionately dominated by people who aren't in 'at risk' categories, and would therefore be unlikely to require hospitalisation if they were ill? If that was the case it'd be better overall if they were all ill because they'd be easier to identify and quarantine.

Except it was big enough that you kept pressing your point for several more posts - that point being that rates are misleading and raw numbers are important. As I said - high horse, you, not good.

I'm sorry, did you not in another thread just try and compare absolute numbers between the US and Iceland? You might wanna drop yourself down off that high horse for now matey.

Luckily for us your point of view on this doesn't seem to have much to do with reality.

No they wouldn't. They'd kill you.

Actually, you said it was about sovereign citiens versus subjects. Don't know about you but I'd prefer to be a free subject than an unfairly incarcerated sovereign. So, yeah. Score 1 for Canada.

Jordan Peterson is lying to you.

They still would not have been legally considered. Kansas had no hate crime legislation allowing for either extra charges or extended sentencing in the year 2000. I personally don't see any reason for the courts to go above and beyond the extent of the law when prosecuting blacks who kill whites, so I'm not really sure what your point is.

Except there is no rule that says what you find in the middle ground between two opposing opinions is the truth. It doesn't take a spine to do what you do and excuse the worst excesses of Trump's lies and narcissism by saying Pelosi or Clinton or Obama would be worse, it takes bias and intellectual dishonesty.

No, that's what I'm saying. Even retrospective investigation so far shows that the 'something new not yet identified' started happening in December. The timeline doesn't show that there were any unexplained clusters of respiratory disease in Wuhan in early November.

That doesn't seem right. Even with retrospective investigations the first cluster of unexplained pneumonia cases in Wuhan that turned out to be Covid-19 happened in December. A claim that there were warnings being issued in early November makes no sense.

It's been pointed out many times to Ron that his beliefs are anti-constitutional, but it's all just water off a fascist's back.

First, you can disagree with someone and still defend them from unfair criticism - like you trying to tie them to two unrelated murderers for example (an accusation I believe you are yet to withdraw). Sure, some of them may not be nice people, but that doesn't mean you should be able to make up stuff about them and get away with it unchallenged. Second, you defend Trump all the time by pointing out that you think someone else, Obama or Clinton or Pelosi or whoever, is as bad or worse. Why do you do that, when it never makes anything Trump has done any less bad?

Which would also be in contravention of the Michigan stay at home order and extremely hypocritical. I am therefore entirely unsurprised the suggestion comes from you.

I thought the post was saying that the 'Armor of God' patriots were pure evil. By far the closest anything that Ron's reposted has come to making any sense.

You played that record 3 years ago. Got any newer tunes?

30 years later - which you said was important. The question still stands, if it's shame on the Dems for not doing it again in that intervening time period, why is it not shame on the Reps for never doing it before then? And not that it's a competition but when this election runs through the Dems will be up 2-1 for Veep candidates and 1-0 for Pres, so again it's an odd direction to be throwing the only shame. Turtle admits he'll just post against the left no matter what, but what's your excuse?

Again, false dichotomy. There are many examples out there from other countries of how to test large numbers of people without just packing them into local clinics. Come on dude, didn't you just say this wasn't a pissing contest? Stop pissing.

Turtle - before you disappear completely into the fog of your own smug condescencion and dishonesty lets just recap the solid facts. This is the direct line of your conversation with Kallend. It is a completely linear procession of post and response with no outside intervention or deviation. Kallend: I can only think of one person who fits every category I mentioned. You: Yes, yes, yes, we all know that Trump is all you can think of. Kallend: Suggest another. You: [Corruption Index] Take your pick Kallend: What part of "every" is it that you find hard to comprehend? You: In reference to what? You asked for another example. I’m pretty sure “every” was not part of your request. Kallend: You don't actually READ, do you? You: Sure. What “every” were referring to in your quoted response? Now, you see it, right? You see how weak, transparent and utterly pointless it is for you to keep insisting that you're the only one genuinely responding to what was said? Do you think you could for at least this one time stop lying, stop trolling, stop picking stupid fights for no reason and just give an honest answer to an honest question like a normal grownup person?

It seems to me that Baksteen is currently presenting a false dichotomy - either only test healthcare and key workers, or attempt to test everyone indiscriminately. The countries that had the best early success in stopping the spread used contact tracing and targeted testing. Some amount of randomised screening, but mostly testing the people known to have been exposed to the infected, and as you say creating the opportunities to fully quarantine those found to be infected. A much better return per test than just throwing it out there at everyone.