Sunday, March 22, 2020
Just the facts, ma'am
At a time when we need facts the most, we have a President who has yet to affirm three indisputable facts: 1) that he did not get the turnout for his inauguration that his predecessor Obama did when he was elected, 2) that Hillary beat him fair and square in the Popular Vote (even if you think the Electoral College is just great, claiming that Hillary only won the popular vote because of illegals voting is a refusal to come to terms with indisputable facts), and 3) am that illegal Russian interference in the US election took place, and was aimed at enhancing his election prospects against Hillary in hopes of either putting him in office or undermining the legitimacy of a Hillary Clinton presidency. Facts matter, and they matter now more than ever. And having a President who is not on speaking terms with facts is one of the most devastating features of the present crisis.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
106 comments:
1. I can't imagine anyone actually caring about inauguration turnout four years after the fact. Politicians lie constantly. I don't see any posts here about Pelosi or Schumer or Biden or Schiff when they lie, and those lies are frequent and harmful, so this just comes across as petty hypocrisy. Are we going to start seeing posts about Democrats lying, or is that not a problem since they belong to the correct party? Do you know how refreshing it is to see someone with the integrity to call out his own party? Our discourse needs more of that.
2. Hillary lost because she was an idiot. Your apparent disdain for the Electoral College aside, that's how you win. Trump won, Hillary lost.
3. Trump's waffling on this issue is certainly a problem, though I don't think Russia wanted Trump in office specifically (Trump being a Putin agent is one of the dumbest political conspiracy theories I've ever heard) so much as they wanted as much chaos and strife in our political system as possible, and Democrats have predictably stepped up to the plate to deliver from their end. We have very few adults in Washington, and for some reason people listen to the children.
Was the punch line about the coronavirus? I couldn't tell you anything Trump has said about it beyond part of one press conference where he and his team were addressing the government's response a week or so ago, because Trump himself does not have any sway over my opinion. The actions the government is taking seem pretty good to me, but the most effective response is not from the government, but the people and private sector stepping up to the plate. Trump does rent out more space in some people's heads than others, so maybe that's just me.
Trump lied repeatedly about Covid-19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxG241bExqY&feature=youtu.be
As he was pressed on the subject his responses were so bumbling, absurd, incompetent, and dishonest that he crashed the stock market and worsened the problem by failing to act early.
Here is a man who is facing a real problem head on with strength, honesty, determination, intelligence, and leadership. Unfortunately we have to wait another 10 months to get a real leader in office instead of the bumbling incompetent criminal we have now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3LMVLE8TNM
"I can't imagine anyone actually caring about inauguration turnout four years after the fact."
Trump does. He brings it up all the time.
LOL
"2. Hillary lost because she was an idiot"
No, your red state brethren do not get off that easy.
Clinton lost because ignorant people in the small states allowed themselves to be conned by a career criminal who they voted for.
Every person who voted for Trump is personally responsible for the destruction he has visited upon this country because it was foreseeable.
Every person other than the small state rural minority ignorant voters worried that if we ever had a crisis we would have a big problem if we had a narcissistic ignorant incompetent criminal as president.
That concern has now come to pass.
Leadership matters, and Trump voters are to blame.
This situation is much worse than Nixon. At least Nixon was an experienced statesman, whatever his relatively petty criminal tendencies. Nixon could shrewdly play off China and USSR to our advantage. Trump is just an ignorant career criminal that ignorant people voted for to the extreme detriment of our nation.
The “popular vote”. A bit like saying you lost checkers but if the rules were more like chess you would have won for sure! Except that if the rules were different people would vote differently - particularly in a “popular vote” system with no such thing as safe states.
Trump's refusal to admit the facts on COVID-19, or rather, his refusal to even acknowledge the existence of uncomfortable facts, is the issue that will now haunt him.
Victor,
This is a time in which all Americans should unite for the common cause to save human lives. It is beneath honorable people to whine about politics at this moment and is actually harmful. If you are suffering from a disease, then you should isolate yourself from others. That includes your foaming case of TDS.
This is why grocery stores are overwhelmed right now.
Half of all food was eaten away from home. Now that people aren't eating a work or at restaurants, they are purchasing food from grocery chains and sucking that supply chain dry. Meanwhile the alternate supply chain used by restaurants, cafeterias is being underused. It all happening to fast for companies to make adjustments.
So, buy what you need, but don't buy more than that so others can buy food too. And look after and help your older neighbors and relatives.
Whenever I hear anyone say that all Americans must "unite" for the common cause and that "politics" should not be considered at times like this, what I hear is "All of you shut up and bow to your masters." Bmiller, why don't YOU unite behind the Democratic proposals being offered in congress for the stimulus package? That would be one way of uniting and abandoning your politics. Or does that only apply to those you disagree with?
Bmiller, why don't YOU unite behind the Democratic proposals being offered in congress for the stimulus package?
Because we all have the same president. When Obama came into office I didn't kvetch about the action he took wrt the financial crisis he faced and I don't expect my fellow (sane) citizens to block economic relief for people who've lost their jobs and face eviction. Those who do want to hold up relief are just tools of the Chinese Communist Party.
But perhaps the CCP is your master too.
Bmiller, why don't YOU unite behind the Democratic proposals being offered in congress for the stimulus package?
It's perfectly reasonable to argue over where money for coronavirus relief is best spent. So the argument can be made that either side holding up such a bill is playing politics.
Democrats are trying to include completely unrelated crap like green energy tax credits and airline emissions standards, and even diversity on corporate boards. THAT sort of sabotage is unacceptable, and it should be condemned by every single person who thinks a relief package is a good idea.
I eagerly await the condemnation from my fellow Americans on the left, and I hope I can sustain my eagerness indefinitely.
"But perhaps the CCP is your master too."
Well,I do have a signed (by Lin Piao) second English language edition copy of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung (a.k.a., "The Little Red Book") in my library.
I eagerly await the condemnation from my fellow Americans on the left, and I hope I can sustain my eagerness indefinitely.
Nice segue into a discussion of eternity Legion.
The left at the very least think they must punish people for their own benefit but most likely they just enjoy punishing (ordinary) people.
"The left at the very least think they must punish people"
Just as the Gates of Hell are locked from the inside, being a "rightist" is its own punishment. Any additional punishment would be superfluous.
Must be a quote from your "Little Red Book".
From TLRB:
To Be Attacked by the Enemy Is Not a Bad Thing but a Good Thing (May 26, 1939), first pocket ed., p. two. #
"We should support whatever the enemy opposes and oppose whatever the enemy supports."
In other words, "Orange Man Bad".
For the record, as I peruse my bookshelves, in addition to The Little Red Book I also see:
Revolution for the Hell of it by Abbie Hoffman
Do it! by Jerry Rubin
Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler
Time, Forward! by Valentine Kataev and The Tanker Derbent by Yuri Krymov (2 novels written to glorify Stalinism)
The Trial of the Catonsville Nine by Daniel Berrigan
Heretics, Mystics, and Misfits by John Mabry
Etc., etc.
So as you can see, I do not live in a "bubble", but consider all sides of an issue.
"but consider all sides of an issue"
Or at the least, I expose myself to them.
"but consider all sides of an issue"
Or at the least, I expose myself to them.
Your all inclusive list doesn't look all that diverse to me.
That's the point. They are all viewpoints I disagree with.
If my library contained only volumes that matched my own viewpoints, none of those works would have been on it. It would consist entirely of books like The Great Partnership by Rabbi Johnathan Sacks, God's Canvas by Fr. James Kurzynski, The GULAG Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn, The Seven Storey Mountain by Thomas Merton, Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict XVI, and Laudato Si' by Pope Francis. Oh, wait... those are all on my bookshelf.
The left at the very least think they must punish people for their own benefit but most likely they just enjoy punishing (ordinary) people.
I just long for a system of discourse in which people have the intellectual and moral integrity to police their own side with as much zeal as they attack the other. If anything, we should hold our own side to higher standards.
It is false outrage when people gripe that the other side lied, yet don't blink when their own side does. Obviously lying is not the crime, but rather political disagreement demanding any and every excuse to denounce how bad the other side is.
That's the point. They are all viewpoints I disagree with.
Since you mostly agree with socialist viewpoints I presume your only disagreement is in how those authors sought to implement socialism. Too bad that every time socialists try a "new and better" way to implement utopia, it ends up in misery ever single time.
I doubt you've even heard the arguments for capitalism and against socialism. You've certainly displayed no familiarity with them. For instance, do you have "The Road to Serfdom" on your bookshelf?
I just long for a system of discourse in which people have the intellectual and moral integrity to police their own side with as much zeal as they attack the other. If anything, we should hold our own side to higher standards.
I don't think you will see that system this side of eternity. People are moved more by rhetorical arguments than by dialectical arguments. You can present a flawlessly logical argument to someone and if you don't win his emotions over you will fail to persuade.
That's why appeals to emotion, although logically fallacious, end up persuading people. That's also why American conservatives have historically won the debate and ended up having failed miserably winning the argument. They need to get better at rhetoric if they hope to persuade the people who can be persuaded.
"American conservatives have historically won the debate"
I do not agree with that statement at all, and not because I believe progressives have won the debate, but because the debate is intrinsically unwinnable. Neither "side" has a monopoly on the truth. Both conservatism and progressivism draw on deep wells of wisdom and libraries of fact.
Ultimately, the only way to win this debate is to embrace the good in both philosophies. But anyone who condemns all "leftists" as tools of Satan, or who thinks everyone on the right is a disciple of Hitler, has essentially sawed off one leg from his three legged stool (conservatism, progressivism, and pragmatism).
A few points.
1) I have some problems with conservatism, but I respect it. I have big problems with Trump, whom deserves no respect from me, and who has problems that Mitt Romney and John McCain would not have had had the been elected, and which George W. Bush, despite many faults, did not have. If I were a full-blown conservative, like David French of National Review and Jeff Flake, our former Senator, I would still be vehemently opposed to Trump.
2) I am not concerned about crowd sizes except as a symptom of a predilection for alternative facts as opposed to facts. Trump could admit all these facts and be recognized as the duly elected President.
3) Trump WAS duly elected, because we do have the Electoral College, and it's here to stay. But he says he won the popular vote too if we had eliminated voting by illegals. Again, and example of predilection for alternative facts that is dangerous in the current crisis.
More later.
It is not dishonorable to object to a leader who can't take facts seriously and won't listen to scientific evidence. We are in a health crisis, but we are also in an election year. It is no Trump Derangement Syndrome to point out that we can't trust this President to follow the evidence where it leads. It is Trump Denial Syndrome (the other TDS that no one talks about) to fail to notice that every action this man has taken with respect to the coronavirus has been put politics ahead of people. When he visited the CDC to talk about the virus, he went there wearing a red KAG campaign hat. No joke. And he talked in the early stages about not wanting to let people off the cruise ship because that would increase the numbers on American coronavirus cases, forgetting that for anyone who is not a malignant narcissist, people, not numbers, matter. I know he wanted to go into the general election campaign against the Democratic nominee boasting about the great economy he has created, and it bothers him that coronavirus will probably cost him that. My point was that if we can't trust him not to make up crowd size numbers, if we can't trust him to admit that Hillary at least got more of the popular vote than he did and not keep talking about a cock and bull story about illegal immigrant voting, if we can't trust him to face the fact that the Russians illegally interfered in our election to promote his election and/or undermine a Hillary Presidency, then we have good prima facie reason to expect to provide bad leadership in dealing with a pandemic, because he thinks he's entitled to his own facts. And sure enough, he has to open up his mouth about wanting the country back to normal by Easter, when he should be leaving judgments like that to people who know what on Earth they are talking about. He is also talking about a drug that two of my immediate family members use on a daily basis to deal with their rheumatoid arthritis, and as a result it may be difficult for them to get this medication for what they need because he's touting this, without hard scientific evidence, as a miracle cure for COVID-19.
And no, this is not partisan politics. Our own governor, Doug Ducey is a conservative Republican. I don't agree with everything he has done with respect to the COVID-19 crisis, but he has been doing a million times better (and more honest) job of confronting it than has our beloved President.
For a couple of reasons, I am in a high risk group for severe problems should I contract COVID-19. My family cares about this situation, and our governor does, which is why we are social distancing. I can't escape the conclusion that our President doesn't care what the death toll is except as far as it affects the stock market and his re-election chances.
One thing that separates me from Trump supporters is that Trump says things that make him sound like a psychopath and a malignant narcissist, and I cannot dismiss such remarks as "locker room talk" or "Trump being Trump," or "hyperbole." For example, when he says that Article 2 of the Constitution means he can do whatever he wants to, I think he means exactly what he says. And that terrifies me.
Victor,
You are indeed exhibiting symptoms of TDS.
I don't care that you are "vehemently opposed to Trump" when the reasons you list almost all are wrt his real or perceived exaggerations. It's like you never heard a politician do that before. When you "vehemently oppose Biden" for the whoppers he tells, I'll start to listen. If you're frightened of politicians that fib, then God help you.
Do you have any real complaints? Other than thinking that sending infected cruise line passengers loose in the general population is a better idea than keeping them isolated?
And sure enough, he has to open up his mouth about wanting the country back to normal by Easter, when he should be leaving judgments like that to people who know what on Earth they are talking about.
Good grief. Do you think that you and your fellow teachers at ASU are better informed about the economic vs pandemic trade-offs than the person who speaks daily to the CDC and the best experts in the country? A crashed economy will kill more people than the virus and the President has the best info and experts advising him. You don't and I don't. Like I said, I think Obama was wrong on almost everything, but he was well informed by the best experts during the 2009 economic crisis so I don't blame him for the steps he took then. No ODS.
He is also talking about a drug that two of my immediate family members use on a daily basis to deal with their rheumatoid arthritis, and as a result it may be difficult for them to get this medication for what they need because he's touting this, without hard scientific evidence, as a miracle cure for COVID-19.
You mean he should keep the public in the dark about the steps the CDC is taking to investigate possible medications that may be immediately available for COVID-19 sufferers? You want the people frightened of contracting COVID-19 to be without hope because it may affect the supply for your relatives? Not a good look.
I can't escape the conclusion that our President doesn't care what the death toll is except as far as it affects the stock market and his re-election chances.
If you have committed yourself to think everything Trump does is evil, then you've created your own mental prison that you can't escape. TDS
For example, when he says that Article 2 of the Constitution means he can do whatever he wants to, I think he means exactly what he says. And that terrifies me.
It terrifies you that he correctly stated that Article 2 would have allowed him to fire Mueller if he chose to do so? Because that was the context. Google is your friend (sometimes).
Wow, just wow. I'd really like to check on bmiller's cupboard, because I'm pretty sure it's stocked to the rafters with Kool Aid. Despite the tanking stock market, I would gladly buy stock in chiropractors right now, because all the Trump supporters are bending themselves into friggin' pretzels in their efforts to justify the insanity coming out of our White House right now. They're gonna need some serious physical therapy when all this is done.
I just watched a press conference on the government's response and plans, and had no complaints. What should they currently be doing that they aren't?
There is nothing wrong with wanting the country to be back to work by Easter, so long as it isn't the intention to make it so. I would like that, too. Trump flat-out said it was a desire but he would defer to his medical experts on it. This criticism seems more like what I alluded to earlier, that no matter what Trump said it would be wrong because it's Trump. You guys would be cheering Obama or Hillary or Biden for doing the exact same thing, and you all know it.
Starhopper,
I've never suffered from any presidential derangement syndrome of either party. Too bad you're a carrier.
Like I mentioned, most of Victor's complaints are the same rantings TDS sufferers rant about daily. It's all background noise now to normal people now who lived through the Mueller investigation exoneration and the groundless "impeachment". Nothing to do with the present crisis. You know, the one that we should all be supporting our leadership to guide us through.
So you have more info and a better plan than the CDC and the presidential economic advisors? Let's hear it then.
But it better not involve more reliance on the federal government, because that seems to be exactly what you and Victor are ranting against.
But anyone who condemns all "leftists" as tools of Satan, or who thinks everyone on the right is a disciple of Hitler, has essentially sawed off one leg from his three legged stool (conservatism, progressivism, and pragmatism).
Well Hitler was a Socialist (NAZI=National Socialism), so technically leftists are both tools of Satan and disciples of Hitler. Just saying.
BTW. My workplace has this blog listed as a forbidden site for me to access while at work. I suspect it's because of the TDS infection here.
Lucky for you guys they aren't letting me into work for a while so I get to post from home.
Here is Dr. Fauci's response to a question about the media attempting to establish distance between him and Trump:
"That is really unfortunate. I would wish that would stop because we have a much bigger problem here than trying to point out differences. They really, fundamentally, at the core when you look at it, there are not differences. The president has listened to what I’ve said with the other people on the task force have said. When I’ve made recommendations, he’s taken them. He’s never countered and overridden me. The idea of pitting one against the other is just not helpful and I’d wish that would stop so we can look ahead at the challenge we have together to get over this thing."
Maybe we should all do the same.
Maybe we should all do the same.
Well so much for Dr. Fauci. He apparently found my Kool Aid supply.
Now if there were only a cure for TDS.
Let's see who is actually responsible for this mess:
The Chinese COVID-19 outbreak started Nov 19th
The CCP knew of the outbreak and covered up evidence as early as December 17th and let is spread worldwide
Now that they let it spread they are trying to blame the US.
It raises the question of whether the CCP decided to attempt to crash the US economy by purposely spreading the virus. Trump has been pretty successful undoing their unfair trade practices and has been driving US firms to de-couple from China.
Trump mostly deserves that his credibility is doubted. However, he does not deserve all of it. Trump's critics often amplify his statements beyond the clear meaning of his words. In this, others create dark motivations, racism or xenophobia. Sensationalism sells so when Trump fails to provide it, it is created for him.
All politicians mostly deserve that their credibility is doubted.
Some critics of the both parties imagine almost cartoon levels of evil intent from the president of the opposition party. We saw that with Obama from some fringe Republicans, but the level of looney Trump-ophobia is off the charts for even mainstream Dems.
Dems routinely accuse Republicans of suppressing votes and Republicans routinely accuse of Dems of cheating at the ballot box. Been going on for years. Obama accuses Republicans of suppressing votes. No big deal. Trump opinions that Dems cheated and Dems soil themselves. You have to laugh.
I watched Trump's press conference Tuesday night on NBC in its entirety. It was amazing when it was over and NBC's headlines "summarizing" the Trump administration were blatant mischaracterizations of what he and his team said.
The media also deserves its lack of trust.
The media also deserves its lack of trust.
Kinda reminds me of how Pravda reported the news in the former Soviet Union. You can trust them all right. To report the Party's spin.
This story kind of sounds like that Kavanaugh thing. Anyone remember that?
Well, it sounds like it except for the lack of MSM reporting on it.
They're too busy arranging to not cover Trump's coronavirus press conferences so they can lie about what he said like NBC did. If we can watch it for ourselves, their spin is immediately obvious.
Biden won't be hammered over this allegation until they come up with a suitable replacement candidate to fight Trump. With these allegations it is always politics over principles.
With these allegations it is always politics over principles.
I'm certain you're wrong. I expect a full-throated denouncement of this spawn of Satan. He's a jerk isn't he?
Biden won't be hammered over this allegation until they come up with a suitable replacement candidate to fight Trump.
They're starting to talk about Cuomo.
Trump lied repeatedly about Covid-19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxG241bExqY&feature=youtu.be
The pro-trump minority lives in a parallel universe, variously of profound ignorance or profound greed.
Trump panicked the stock market with his repeated idiotic lies about Covid-19, and he is responsible for many American deaths and the depth of our present situation due to his delay and his delusional dishonest ignorant denials, as well as his asinine false statements that require continual corrections by his own health officials.
That's a great video, Stardusty. The only problem with it is it's already out of date. US cases of COVID-19, or as I like to call it - the Trump Virus, are now over 100,000 (and still climbing exponentially). At the rate things are going, they'll have to update it every 24 hours to stay current.
I heard a terrific suggestion the other day. Just like they seized Robert E. Lee's plantation and turned it into a graveyard for the Civil War dead (today it's Arlington Cemetery), we ought to seize Trump's golf courses by eminent domain and use them as cemeteries for the projected 2 million casualties of the Trump Virus.
The Trump Virus.
Well, that's officially all the lunacy I can stand. I have disengaged with every other leftist due to how unhinged they've become, and now I'm done with this blog too. Absolutely unhinged.
Have fun bmiller, they're all yours!
Legion,
You are a coward stuck in fantasy land.
The video I posted is of actual Trump statements, they are on tape, you can watch them yourself.
Here are more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku5C9vpaG4k
It doesn't matter if you do not like the host of the show, the clips are real.
Trump is an ignorant con man, a criminal, just like former Republican candidate for the office of president of the USA said.
You just do not have the intellectual honesty and personal courage, yet, to face the reality of how disastrously wrong you and your minority red state brethren have been about the most destructive man ever to hold the office of the POTUS.
You found the intellectual courage to face up to the absurdity of your former YEC views.
You once offered me sincere concern as to my absence from posting and I know enough of a person's words to realize you were entirely sincere in your hopes that nothing bad had happened to me.
In that regard, I very much hope you follow Anthony Scaramucci and break the spell of this con man criminal.
"and now I'm done with this blog too. [...] Have fun bmiller, they're all yours!"
One down, one to go.
I see it clearly now Starhopper = Stardusty.
I've often wondered about that myself, except we have some pretty serious theological differences.
It's easy to explain in 3 words:
Dissociative Identity Disorder.
Well, that's officially all the lunacy I can stand. I have disengaged with every other leftist due to how unhinged they've become, and now I'm done with this blog too. Absolutely unhinged.
I think you take things too seriously. Sure they're unhinged, but engaging them exposes the comically irrational positions they take and makes for a good laugh.
For instance, the deafening sound of the crickets regarding the Tara Reade story actually hurts my ears. So much pearl clutching during the Kavanaugh accusations and now we have the sounds of silence. Now that's funny. I don't care who you are.
Legion,
"The Trump Virus.
Well, that's officially all the lunacy I can stand"
Trump's lies and delays have killed and will kill Americans. If it was your mother or father who died having listened to the lies of Trump you could well call it the Trump virus.
"Lunacy" is a term to apply to Trump voters who somehow think Trump is anything other than an incompetent criminal liar.
The videos I posted prove me right.
The below article proves me right.
Trump voters are the unhinged lunatic minority who put an unhinged lunatic in the office of the POTUS and now the whole world is suffering from that act of stupidity, voting for Trump.
Coronavirus Fact Check: Analyzing the Patterns in Trump's Falsehoods
Linda Qiu
Hours after the United States became the nation with the largest number of reported coronavirus cases on Thursday, President Trump appeared on Fox News and expressed doubt about shortages of medical supplies, boasted about the country’s testing capacity, and criticized his predecessor’s response to an earlier outbreak of a different disease.
President Donald Trump has had distant relationship with facts in his responses about the coronavirus pandemic.© Erin Schaff/The New York Times President Donald Trump has had distant relationship with facts in his responses about the coronavirus pandemic.
“I don’t believe you need 40,000 or 30,000 ventilators,” he said, alluding to a request by Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York. . The president made the statement in spite of government reports predicting shortages in a severe pandemic — and he reversed course on Friday morning, calling for urgent steps to produce more ventilators.
Speaking on Fox on Thursday, Mr. Trump suggested wrongly that because of his early travel restrictions on China, “a lot of the people decided to go to Italy instead” — though Italy had issued a more wide-ranging ban on travel from China and done so earlier than the United States. And at a White House briefing on Friday, he wrongly said he was the “first one” to impose restrictions on China. North Korea, for one, imposed restrictions 10 days before the United States.
He misleadingly claimed again on Friday that “we’ve tested now more than anybody.” In terms of raw numbers, the United States has tested more people for the coronavirus than Italy and South Korea but still lags behind in tests per capita.
And he continued to falsely claim that the Obama administration “acted very, very late” during the H1N1 epidemic in 2009 and 2010.
These falsehoods, like dozens of others from the president since January, demonstrate some core tenets of how Mr. Trump has tried to spin his response to the coronavirus epidemic to his advantage. Here’s an overview.
"Sure they're unhinged, but engaging them exposes the comically irrational positions they take and makes for a good laugh."
Interesting. I feel the same way about comments from Trump cultists.
"the deafening sound of the crickets"
Not worth my time to respond, just as I ignore people who think we faked the moon landing, or the 911 "truthers". To acknowledge them is to give them credibility.
Playing down the severity of the pandemic
When the first case of the virus was reported in the United States in January, Mr. Trump dismissed it as “one person coming in from China.” He said the situation was “under control” and “it’s going to be just fine” — despite a top official from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention telling the public to “expect more cases.”
No matter how much the count of cases has grown, Mr. Trump has characterized it as low.
“We have very little problem in this country” with five cases, he said in late January.
He maintained the same dismissive tone on March 5, as the number of cases had grown by a factor of 25. “Only 129 cases,” he wrote on Twitter.
A day later, he falsely claimed that this was “lower than just about” any other country. (A number of developed countries like Australia, Britain and Canada as well as populous India had fewer reported cases at that point.)
By March 12, when the tally had again increased tenfold to over 1,200, the president argued that too was “very few cases” compared to other countries.
He has also misleadingly suggested numerous times that the coronavirus is no worse than the flu, saying on Friday, “You call it germ, you can call it a flu. You can call it a virus. You can call it many different names. I’m not sure anybody knows what it is.”
The mortality rate for coronavirus, however, is 10 times that of the flu and no vaccine or cure exists yet for the coronavirus.
In conflating the flu and the coronavirus, Mr. Trump repeatedly emphasized the annual number of deaths from the flu, and occasionally inflated his estimates. When he first made the comparison in February, he talked of flu deaths from “25,000 to 69,000.” In March, he cited a figure “as high as 100,000” in 1990.
The actual figure for the 1990 flu season was 33,000, and in the past decade, the flu has killed an estimated 12,000 to 61,000 thousand people each flu season in the United States. That’s so far higher than the death count for the virus in the United States, but below projections from the Centers for Disease and Prevention, which estimated that deaths from Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, could range from 200,000 to 1.7 million. As of Friday evening, more than 1,200 deaths in the United States have been linked to the coronavirus.
On the flip side, Mr. Trump inflated the mortality and infection rates of other deadly diseases as if to emphasize that the coronavirus pales in comparison. “The level of death with Ebola,” according to Mr. Trump, “was a virtual 100 percent.” (The average fatality rate is around 50 percent.) During the 1918 flu pandemic, “you had a 50/50 chance or very close of dying,” he said on Tuesday. (Estimates for the fatality rate for the 1918 flu are far below that.)
This week, as cities and states began locking down, stock markets tumbled and jobless claims hit record levels, Mr. Trump again played down the impact of the pandemic and said, with no evidence and contrary to available research, that a recession would be deadlier than the coronavirus.
Overstating potential treatments and policies
The president has also dispensed a steady stream of optimism when discussing countermeasures against the virus.
From later February to early March, Mr. Trump repeatedly promised that a vaccine would be available “relatively soon” despite being told by public health officials and pharmaceutical executives that the process would take 12 to 18 months. Later, he promoted treatments that were still unproven against the virus, and suggested that they were “approved” and available though they were not.
Outside of medical interventions, Mr. Trump has exaggerated his own policies and the contributions of the private sector in fighting the outbreak. For example, he imprecisely described a website developed by a company affiliated with Google, wrongly said that insurers were covering the cost of treatment for Covid-19 when they only agreed to waive co-payments for testing, and prematurely declared that automakers were making ventilators “right now.”
Often, he has touted his complete “shut down” or “closing” of the United States to visitors from affected countries (in some cases leading to confusion and chaos). But the restrictions he has imposed on travel from China, Iran and 26 countries in Europe do not amount to a ban or closure of the borders. Those restrictions do not apply to American citizens, permanent residents, their immediate families, or flight crews.
Not only were these restrictions total and absolute in Mr. Trump’s telling, they were also imposed on China “against the advice of a lot of professionals, and we turned out to be right.” His health and human services secretary, however, has previously said that the restrictions were imposed on the recommendations of career health officials. The Times has also reported that Mr. Trump was skeptical before deciding to back the restrictions at the urging of some aides.
Blaming others
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent test kits to states in February, some of which were flawed and produced inconclusive readings. Problems continued to grow as scientists and state officials warned about restrictions on who could be tested and the availability of tests overall. Facing criticism over testing and medical supplies, Mr. Trump instead shifted responsibility to a variety of others.
It was the Obama administration that “made a decision on testing that turned out to be very detrimental to what we’re doing,” he said on March 4. This was a misleading reference to draft guidance issued in 2014 on regulating laboratory-developed tests, one that was never finalized or enforceable. A law enacted in 2004 created the process and requirements for receiving authorization to use unapproved testing products in health emergencies.
The test distributed by the World Health Organization was never offered to the United States and was “a bad test,” according to Mr. Trump. It’s true that the United States typically designs and manufactures its own diagnostics, but there is no evidence that the W.H.O. test was unreliable.
As for the shortage of ventilators cited by Mr. Cuomo, Mr. Trump has misleadingly said that the governor declined to address the issue in 2015 when he “had the chance to buy, in 2015, 16,000 ventilators at a very low price and he turned it down.”
A 2015 report establishing New York’s guidelines on ventilator allocation estimated that, in the event of a pandemic on the scale of the 1918 flu, the state would “likely have a shortfall of 15,783 ventilators during peak demand.” But the report did not actually recommend increasing the stockpile and noted that purchasing more was not a cure-all solution as there would not be enough trained health care workers to operate them.
Rewriting history
Since the severity of the pandemic became apparent, the president has defended his earlier claims through false statements and revisionism.
He has denied saying things he said. Pressed on Tuesday about his pronouncements in March that testing was “perfect,” Mr. Trump said he had been simply referring to the conversation he had in July with the president of Ukraine that ultimately led to the House impeaching him. In fact, he had said “the tests are all perfect” like the phone call.
He has compared his government’s response to the current coronavirus pandemic (“one of the best”) favorably to the Obama administration’s response to the H1N1 epidemic of 2009 to 2010 (“a full scale disaster”). In doing so, Mr. Trump has falsely claimed that former President Barack Obama did not declare the epidemic an emergency until thousands had died (a public health emergency was declared days before the first reported death in the United States) and falsely said the previous administration “didn’t do testing” (they did).
At times, Mr. Trump has marveled at the scale of the pandemic, arguing that “nobody would ever believe a thing like that’s possible” and that it “snuck up on us.”
There have been a number of warnings about both a generic worldwide pandemic and the coronavirus specifically. A 2019 government report said that “the United States and the world will remain vulnerable to the next flu pandemic or large scale outbreak of a contagious disease.” A simulation conducted last year by the Department of Health and Human Services modeled an outbreak of a rapidly spreading virus. And top government officials began sounding the alarms about the coronavirus in early January.
Despite his history of false and misleading remarks, Mr. Trump has also asserted, “I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.”
Legion,
How many more Trump lies and Trump crimes will have to be pointed out to you before you realize your minority made a disastrous mistake voting for Trump?
“You call it germ, you can call it a flu. You can call it a virus. You can call it many different names. I’m not sure anybody knows what it is.”
I think "Trump Virus" will do just fine.
Interesting. I feel the same way about comments from Trump cultists.
Thanks. It confirms my assessment that leftists don't actually think about things, they feel about things. So since "Orange Man Bad" there is no room for facts and reasoning.
Not worth my time to respond, just as I ignore people who think we faked the moon landing, or the 911 "truthers". To acknowledge them is to give them credibility.
Thanks again.
A good example of the reflexive blocking of information that makes you feel bad. I don't know if Tara Reade thinks we faked the moon landings or is a 911 truther but I guess, since she is accusing Biden, she must be in your imagination.
I get why Legion decided to leave. He actually thinks leftists are trying to make sense and that can be disorienting.
"that can be disorienting"
Yes, reality can be disorienting when you believe in alternative facts.
Thanks again for the confession.
Sometimes being right all the time gets boring.
bmiller
"Thanks. It confirms my assessment that leftists don't actually think about things, they feel about things"
Feeling is thinking. Where do you suppose feelings come from if not brain activity?
Like when you walk up to the top edge of a cliff, look down, and feel scared. That is the brain analyzing and comparing the present visual data input with information stored in the brain. The feeling of being scared in dangerous situations is a correlation score signal sent from one of the brain's processing networks and received by other processing networks in the brain.
The brain is a massively parallel network of subnetworks. All brain activity is thinking of one sort or another.
In a very real sense we are in competition with ourselves, with the various networks in our brains often at odds with each other. Sometimes one is better off heeding feelings above rational analysis, and sometimes one is better off using rational analysis to override feelings.
Learning how to balance out the whole set of thinking processes available to maximize well being is the process of learning how to think.
You are right about being right all the time like Trump was right about all the lies he told detailed extensively above in text and videos.
You are both truly legends in your own minds.
I wonder how leftists feel about the Kennedy Center laying off their union workers right after Nancy held up the relief bill to get the center $25 million.
Will Nancy demand they not get the money now? Or naw?
OK. Don't know about anyone else, but I think this woman's famous story is more than a little fishy.
I think there's a good bet she wanted her husband to sleep with the fishes.
Well leftists are now attacking a man that has dedicated 75% of his company's manufacturing to producing 50,000 face masks a day and asked the country to pray.
This and the fact they seem disappointed that physicians are prescribing chloroquine that seems to be working makes it look like leftists want even more people to die without hope.
I'd like to believe they don't intend evil but it's hard to ignore the evidence.
Well leftists are now attacking a man that has dedicated 75% of his company's manufacturing to producing 50,000 face masks a day and asked the country to pray.
Link?
This and the fact they seem disappointed that physicians are prescribing chloroquine that seems to be working makes it look like leftists want even more people to die without hope.
I'd also be disappointed if the doctors were prescribing lisinopril and montelukast for COVID19, since there is no reliable evidence any of the three work, and no reason to think they would work.
bmiller
"Well leftists are now attacking a man that has dedicated 75% of his company's manufacturing to producing 50,000 face masks a day"
He lied and lied and lied while scientists and doctors around the world were pleading with him to act immediately.
When he saw the body bags stacked up like cordwood he finally got his lazy stupid dishonest criminal ass in gear, too late because his failure already killed many of the people he lied to about it.
That's why is is correct to call it the Trump Virus.
" and asked the country to pray."
So if we have a drought perhaps we should all pray for rain?
Churches and mosques and synagogues are killing people because they stupidly go there in groups to pray and only end up infected with the thing they were praying not to get.
The idiocy of prayer in this situation is truly mind boggling. What, is god going to change his mind if we beg him enough?
And how much money will Trump make by manufacturing products he helped create the need for. Talk about profiting from the misery he created, how disgusting.
Dear bubble dwellers. I realize this news didn't get through your filter.
The "My Pillow" guy is the one making the masks.
But none the less. Thanks for demonstrating my point.
Regarding hydroxychloroquine and Dr Fauci last week:
And, on AM 990 in Philadelphia, he talked with Townhall columnist and morning host Chris Stigall about the very real hope in the hydroxychloroquine drug that has been the buzz recently.
"If you're a doctor listening to me right now and a patient with coronavirus feels like they want to try that," Stigall asked, "and you're their doctor, you're not Anthony Fauci the guy running the coronavirus task force, would you say 'alright, we'll give it a whirl'?"
"Yeah, of course, particularly if people have no other option," Fauci said. "These drugs are approved drugs for other reasons. They're anti-malaria drugs, and they're drugs against certain autoimmune diseases like lupus. Physicians throughout the country can prescribe that in an off-label way. Which means they can write it for something it was not approved for."
bmiller said...
Dear bubble dwellers. I realize this news didn't get through your filter.
The "My Pillow" guy is the one making the masks.
That I knew. I was not aware of some massive campaign against him for suggesting prayer.
Regarding hydroxychloroquine and Dr Fauci last week:
Thank you for demonstrating my point.
I guess the other 2 remaining Christians tacitly approve of the leftist attacks on the guy producing life saving masks and calling for prayer. Nothing but crickets.
I personally had no objection to his calling the nation to prayer, but I practically vomited at his equating the 2016 election outcome to the will of God (I don't recall his exact words). I never realized that Our Lord was a hyperpartisan Republican.
Thus proving you are a hyperpartisan leftist first, foremost and only.
Like saying:
"I personally object to Christian persecution and normally am in favor of saving lives. But not when a guy supports the *wrong* candidate"
That's funny, because I don't even consider myself a "leftist" (and believe me, I know a few, so I know what I'm not), let alone a hyperpartisan one.
Oh, I don't expect you to be self-aware.
I'm just hoping others will reflect on their own priorities and see how ugly and evil putting politics first really is.
"how ugly and evil putting politics first really is"
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! That's the only thing you and legion ever do. I never see you commenting on a thread which isn't political in nature. It's the only thing you're interested in (indeed, passionate about). And you make ridiculous and totally unfounded assumptions about people you've never met (such as incorrectly labeling me a "leftist", which I am most definitely not). If anyone is in desperate need of some self-awareness, I'd say it's you two. (If indeed you are really two people, and one of you is not a sock puppet.)
I regularly attend meetings of Peace Action Baltimore, and the people there probably suspect me of being a rightist stooge. And I have friends who criticize me for giving Peace Action the time of day, because they aren't radical enough(!), thus proving that I am quite the moderate.
I never see you commenting on a thread which isn't political in nature.
That's because, to you, everything is political in nature even when it isn't. The current topic is an excellent example.
"My Pillow" guy makes a sacrifice to save lives, calls for the nation to pray and is attacked. A normal Christian would thank him for volunteering to save lives in a time of crisis and for his concern for his fellow citizens' spiritual renewal regardless of who the guy votes for. So apparently, to you, it's better that more people die and die in their sins if the person offering that help doesn't vote the way you want. If that is your position, it is simply evil.
I regularly attend meetings of Peace Action Baltimore, and the people there probably suspect me of being a rightist stooge. And I have friends who criticize me for giving Peace Action the time of day, because they aren't radical enough(!), thus proving that I am quite the moderate.
Such is the predicament of a leftist. One day you're the most radical one and cutting off heads, the next day, your head is on the block. I'll bet you tell your confessor that, well yes, you sinned, but not as bad as Hitler.
BTW, Legion if you're still reading.
You're a sock puppet! Tee Hee :-)
Or maybe you are. It's so hard to tell with most right wingers. They all sound exactly alike. No individuality whatsoever.
Starhopper,
Legion of Logic was partisan, but you could have a genuine conversation with him without it descending in judgementalism. He never sounded like bmiller to me. The comment section is worse for his absence.
bmiller said...
I'm just hoping others will reflect on their own priorities and see how ugly and evil putting politics first really is.
Because equating the outcome of an election to the will of God is not elevating politics?
You've got a point, one brow. If you do a bit of JEPD style analysis of the comments here, I'd have to agree that legion is more respectful of opinions other than his own, whereas bmiller is quite judgmental (witness his frequent calling others to the confessional, as though disagreeing with him was somehow a sin).
So I take back my comment that there is no difference between them - there is, just as there is a difference between the flu and COVID-19.
Or maybe you are. It's so hard to tell with most right wingers. They all sound exactly alike. No individuality whatsoever.
Sure they all sound the same when you stick your fingers in your ears. You drove Legion away and rejoiced so I guess you want an echo chamber. Think that sounds like individuality?
People with TDS sound the same to me as people with Obama Derangement Syndrome not because I don't listen to what they're saying, but because I do. People with TDS will attack anyone that has a single good thing to say about Trump. People with ODS will attack anyone who has a single good thing to say about Obama.
I can think Obama should be praised for his charitable giving even though I disliked almost all of his policies.
The "My Pillow" guy story looks like a test for TDS as well as a chance for people to show their humanity and solidarity in a time of crisis. You can disagree with a person's politics and still tell your fellow partisans to knock off attacking someone who is saving lives and souls. Too bad, there are none of those leftists remaining on this blog.
You appear to have overlooked my comment. "I personally had no objection to [Pillow guy's] calling the nation to prayer." What I did (and do) find extremely objectionable was his equating Trump's election victory in the Electoral College to God's will. Borderline blasphemy. (And as to which side of the border such comments belong, they are What we call "over the line".)
You appear to have overlooked my comment. "I personally had no objection to [Pillow guy's] calling the nation to prayer."
I didn't overlook it. Here's what I just posted:
You can disagree with a person's politics and still tell your fellow partisans to knock off attacking someone who is saving lives and souls.
Your statement is neutral wrt to the leftists that attacked him, which was what I was calling attention to. No advice to knock it off, even to your fellow partisans on this blog. Also, instead of defending him, you're now accusing him of "Borderline blasphemy" immediately after complaining I'm "judgmental". Where are the Irony Police in this time of need?
But let's discuss "judgmentalism" so as to avoid politics.
Is it a sin?
If it's a sin, then is judging that someone is guilty of "judgmentalism" also a sin since that is in itself an act of judgment?
Atheists don't believe in sin, so they cannot claim "judgmentalism" is a sin. It's just something they do not like in other people, something that the other people have no choice in but to be judgmental. Complaining about people with a big nose while having one yourself.
bmiller said...
Atheists don't believe in sin, so they cannot claim "judgmentalism" is a sin. It's just something they do not like in other people, something that the other people have no choice in but to be judgmental. Complaining about people with a big nose while having one yourself.
I don't know you well enough to like or dislike you, or your being judgmental. I do have experience with how it means conversations are likely to proceed. When I exchange ideas with Legion of Logic, it can proceed like most conversations we have, but it can also proceed differently. Conversations with you have less variety.
bmiller said...
The "My Pillow" guy story looks like a test for TDS as well as a chance for people to show their humanity and solidarity in a time of crisis.
I would not want to presume I knew which stories you felt were inappropriate. Would you link to an example, please?
"Your statement is neutral wrt to the leftists that attacked him, which was what I was calling attention to."
I had heard rumors that some people (of unknown political persuasion) were attacking him, but was unaware of the substance of their complaint, which explains my "neutrality". However, if anyone is attacking him for equating Trump's Electoral College victory with the will of God, I will gladly join them.
In fact, why aren't YOU attacking him for that? Are you on board with such astonishing presumption? After all, most of the prophets condemned in the strongest possible language those who conflated the policies of Israel's kings with the will of God.
One Brow,
Conversations with you have less variety.
I agree. Which is why I rarely respond to you and told you so a while ago. No matter what the topic you're gonna call me a misogynist and I've given up pointing out how fallacious that accusation is even if it were true.
Starhopper,
I had heard rumors that some people (of unknown political persuasion) were attacking him, but was unaware of the substance of their complaint, which explains my "neutrality".
He called the nation to prayer and is producing live-saving masks. You do not object. What a withering rebuke to the critics! Yes, they'll never do that again and risk the wrath of the Starhopper!
In fact, why aren't YOU attacking him for that?
Because I'm not judgmental. :-)
There is nothing in Catholic teaching that supports your claims and I'm not into proof-texting the Bible and considering my interpretation inerrant. The "My Pillow" guy reads the Bible and there's is a list of passages that plausibly support his position:
Proverbs 8:15
By me kings reign, and rulers enact just laws;
Proverbs 24:21
My son, fear the LORD and the king, and do not associate with the rebellious.
Daniel 2:21
He changes the times and seasons; He removes kings and establishes them. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning.
Daniel 4:17
This decision is the decree of the watchers, the verdict declared by the holy ones, so that the living will know that the Most High is ruler over the kingdom of mankind, and gives it to whom He wishes, setting over it the lowliest of men.'
John 19:11
Jesus answered, "You would have no authority over Me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed Me over to you is guilty of greater sin."
Romans 13:2
Consequently, the one who resists authority is opposing what God has set in place, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
1 Timothy 2:2
for kings and all those in authority, so that we may lead tranquil and quiet lives in all godliness and dignity.
Titus 3:1
Remind the believers to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient and ready for every good work,
1 Peter 2:13
Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to the king as the supreme authority,
So don't be judgmental and condemn an Evangelical Protestant for not accepting your own personal interpretation.
But, I'm trying to steer the discussion away from politics.
Is "judgmentalism" a sin?
Good question. I'm afraid my answer will sound like the old "Hate the sin and love the sinner" but there you have it. A failure to call evil evil could be as bad as participating in the evil yourself.
"Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me. If I say to the wicked, `You shall surely die,' and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand." (Ezekiel 3:17-18)
So is God telling Ezekiel to be judgmental? Yes and no. Yes, concerning the "wicked way" and no concerning the "wicked man".
In fact, you could go so far as saying that far from being a sin, (a certain kind of) judgementalism might be an obligation.
(By the way, what's wrong with spellcheck? It keeps insisting that judgementalism is not a word.)
(By the way, what's wrong with spellcheck? It keeps insisting that judgementalism is not a word.)
Because spellcheck is judgmental?
I think that Ezekiel passage is more about Ezekiel obeying God to warn sinners than about Ezekiel judging the sinners. God is warning Ezekiel to carry out his orders even though Ezekiel may not want to give the sinners a chance to repent.
But I pretty much agree that we have an obligation to point out evil but also to be fair.
Matthew 7:1 “Judge not lest ye be judged”
But what about this? Doesn't this mean judging others is a sin?
bmiller said...
I agree. Which is why I rarely respond to you and told you so a while ago. No matter what the topic you're gonna call me a misogynist and I've given up pointing out how fallacious that accusation is even if it were true.
I think that mostly only happens in the abortion threads, and only when you discount the rights of the women involved.
One Brow,
"discount the rights of the women involved."
Does a woman have the right to kill her child?
StardustyPsyche said...
Does a woman have the right to kill her child?
Does "child" include those in the womb?
One Brow,
You have asked an oversimplified question, but you are the right track.
A better question to ask is:
"When does a human being become a person with a right to life?"
Consider the complimentary question:
"When does a human being, a person with a right to life, cease being a living person?"
For the end of life the answer is fairly clear in law, medical ethics, and medical practice. A person ceases to live when brain function falls below a threshold, typically a very low threshold.
To bracket the question for the beginning of life consider brain function 1 day after conception and brain function 1 day prior to a normal term birth.
I hope we can agree that without a brain there is no brain function.
Further, there is no significant developmental change in brain function in the last day of gestation.
So, abortion 1 day after conception (actually not technically an abortion because the zygote has not yet implanted) does not kill a person with a right to life.
Similarly, abortion at 279 days of gestation does kill a person, and is justifiable only by maternal self defense.
So, which day of gestation does one stop being a mere collection of human tissue and start to live a life as a person with a right to life? Nobody knows for sure, but it is an extremely important question that gets far too little consideration. It is the prime question that every other decision regarding abortion rightly flows from as a consequence.
StardustyPsyche,
For a while, my position has been that those fetuses that are viable are entitled to a live extraction, and that are entitled to have a fetus removed at any time, regardless of viability.
One Brow,
So you have no concern whatever for when a human being becomes a human being?
If the fetus is a person, and is "extracted", but then dies, just tough luck, eh?
I call that murder by depraved indifference.
Supposing the fetus is a person, and is "viable", meaning he or she can survive with the aid of neonatal intensive care, but that premature "extraction" results in severe birth defects for which that person suffers for the rest of his or her life, defects that would have been avoided if the child had been carried to term.
So, just tough luck again for an avoidably crippled body, eh? Really? Do you consider yourself to be a humanistic or moral person at all? On what basis?
StardustyPsyche said...
So you have no concern whatever for when a human being becomes a human being?
I don't judge the quality of the lives of humans. A cancer cell is human, and a being.
If the fetus is a person, and is "extracted", but then dies, just tough luck, eh?
As opposed to the fetus being able, through the rest of society, to force itself upon a female? No person has the right to use the body of another person as a source of life.
Supposing the fetus is a person, and is "viable", meaning he or she can survive with the aid of neonatal intensive care, but that premature "extraction" results in severe birth defects for which that person suffers for the rest of his or her life, defects that would have been avoided if the child had been carried to term.
So, just tough luck again for an avoidably crippled body, eh? Really? Do you consider yourself to be a humanistic or moral person at all? On what basis?
What do you consider the more humane alternative?
One Brow,
"I don't judge the quality of the lives of humans. A cancer cell is human, and a being."
How idiotic. You equate the life of a human being, a person, with the life of a single cell.
I suggest you revisit the maxim "engage brain before pressing key".
StardustyPsyche said...
How idiotic. You equate the life of a human being, a person, with the life of a single cell.
I suggest you revisit the maxim "engage brain before pressing key".
I am unimpressed with your insult. When you have an argument, try it.
"When you have an argument, try it."
Equating a cancer cell with a person, a human life, does not deserve an argument.
Go away and learn how to think.
StardustyPsyche said...
Equating a cancer cell with a person, a human life, does not deserve an argument.
Then it should be easy to refute the idea. You could start by defining "human life" in some fashion that goes beyond "human" and "alive".
Go away and learn how to think.
I have, carefully. Let me know when you can manage a rebuttal.
Post a Comment