Summations Only

And you believe a NY Times opinion piece is less biased than is RedState? Let's look at some comparison deaths that happen yearly in the U.S. - should be a nice little supplement to your opinion piece;35,000 deaths from antibiotic resistant bacteria35,000 alcohol induced deaths36,000 deaths from falls41,000 deaths from blood poisoning resulting from bacteria47,000 deaths from suicide56,000 from flu and pneumonia65,000 from accidental poisoning83,000 from diabetes121,000 from alzheimers160,000 from chronic lower respiratory disease170,000 all accidental deaths250,000 deaths from medical errors599,000 from cancer647,000 from heart diseaseIt's a fact that everybody dies. No matter what happens with coronavirus, its death count will get nowhere near the commonly accepted deaths that happen every year in the U.S. 99% of coronavirus victims recover from the disease. There was nothing wrong with curtailing many business for a week or two until a basic handle could be gotten on what this virus consisted of. We're far beyond that now. Now it's a dangerous political game - the fault of one political party with TDR.

Not everyone agrees that today's testing is inadequate. It seems to be better than whatever testing was going on in 1918 or 1969. Probably 2009 too - didn't seem to be much frantic reporting on the 2009 tests. Businesses weren't shut down then. But I think the best way to test is for each person to determine on their own how they feel. If they feel fine that's great, they should go out and live their lives / achieve something. If they feel sick, they should get medical attention. That's the way it's always been done in the U.S., even before it was trillions of dollars in debt, when it could more likely afford the time and money for tests. What good is it to get a test, have the results come back negative, then come down with the virus 5 hours, or 5 minutes later? Some people have the virus, some have the flu. Some of them feel fine even though they have either/both of those things. Or some are very ill with neither of those things. The symptoms and remedies are confusing. Those on the left always say "follow the science", but so far science is a long way from having much in the way of answers. Not smarter, just more passionate for the truth. I don't think the death count is important, but the best way to do it is the way it was done in 1918, 1969, or 2009. Let the hospitals compile it, and don't give them any incentives to fake anything.

That is true, but there's really no doubt that the same would be happening under any president. In these times of "blame the president for everything", it's sometimes good to insert a reminder that the virus is not Trump's fault.

And I believe the same was true in 1918, 1969, and 2009, when we had different presidents, and much lower levels of anger from one political party. That could be, largely because they don't know, (haven't had reported to them) the fact that some credentialed people have evidence that shows that mask wearing can be dangerous to the wearer's health.

quote:

---

Now that we have established that there is no scientific evidence necessitating the wearing of a face mask for prevention, are there dangers to wearing a face mask, especially for long periods? Several studies have indeed found significant problems with wearing such a mask. This can vary from headaches, to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications.

---

Much more associated reading here.You might think that when I myself go out to food stores etc. these days that are filled with people wearing masks that I proudly and defiantly go in without one, but I don't. I don't have any proper medical masks yet (though my niece has told me she'll make me some) but I have a box of dust masks in my garage, and I wear one of them, just to fit in and try to make everyone happy. The above is proof that no one person in government, or no one government agency, can claim to know what's best for each person of all variations of health. People need to have the liberty to access whatever information they see fit that applies to their life, and make their own decisions.

quote:

---

Medicare pays for inpatient hospital stays using a diagnosis-related group (DRG) payment system. The hospital assigns a code to a patient at the time of discharge, based mainly on the patient’s main diagnosis and treatment given.

​

Medicare then pays the hospital a prescribed amount of money regardless of what it actually cost the hospital to provide the care. The amount can vary in different parts of the country to account for labor costs and other factors.

---

Fact-check: Do hospitals get paid more to list patients as having coronavirus?(this is not a conservative link - most of this description tries to downplay the significance of the monetary incentives hospitals can have. How successful they were in downplaying it is up to the reader. To me, they weren't very successful.) Could an unprecedented, partisan impeachment circus in January have been one of those mistakes? Edited by Admin, : Fix first link.

No one knows, decisions have to be made day to day, by dozens of people, Trump, governors, the task force etc. You're accusing me of making things up a lot lately, but what I'm doing is stating my political point of view. When the news media launched into their Trump attacks at the beginning of all this, their sense of humanity as usual, takes a back seat to "GET TRUMP OUT OF OFFICE ASAP". At the beginning it was "oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy, maybe we can use THIS to get him, since all our past efforts have failed so miserably. WHERE DID I SAY THAT? I just double checked my previous posts, not there, not even close. Now it's clear who is making things up. In March, it still wasn't clear if this was going to spiral into something as bad as what happened in 1918, or even the bubonic plague of Europe from the 1300's and 1600's. Now we know this isn't going to be comparable. The curve has flattened since March. Back then they sent that hospital ship to New York. It left a week or two later, it wasn't needed. It's more important to open the economy now than it was in March because the length of the shutdown is having increasingly worse effects on the economy. I never said the House bill would push people towards Trump, until AFTER the U.S. was completely wrecked and turned into a communist country. I said "the House wants three more trillion to try to keep as many people idle as possible until November." To print and borrow more money, to be frittered away on drugs and beer and lottery tickets by the idle, calculated by the Democrats to be gone by about November, hoping for a depression rivaling or worse than what we had in 1934. Though they know that in the 30's, the people decided to stay the course with the same president, rather than risk a change to someone else who could mess things up even more. They no doubt think their control of the mainstream media could make a difference now. Temporary band aids can't replace the normal economic activity of the voluntary exchange of products and services. The Public Health Act of 1848 happened in England, not the U.S. Government involvement in public health has not been around for a long time in the U.S. Yes I wasn't slow and careful enough for you, your links used the common Democrat talking point from on high - "reversal", what I mainly noticed in one premier half-hour news report of the day, Muir's. Yes that's painfully obvious, that really is one of the reasons I post here, so you have at least some clue on what's going on in mainstream America, so you won't be quite so shocked at some starting points for NY Times and WaPo tirades that you do monitor. But you didn't use your words. Your own words. The forum rules make no reference to opinion pieces. Like you did in Message 3901? Okay, you're the boss. But that's the end of my argument on that. I showed a print link just for you that you didn't address, here it is again. It showed, in print form, how Attkisson described how, among other things, her boss told her not to upset their corrupt business interests. A good argument can be made that there is no unbiased news coverage anymore, it's all politicized. But there is hope, there was a movement years ago to get Limbaugh off the air, and it didn't work. Now, in addition to more and more interest in conservative talk radio shows than ever before, there seems to be more interest in conservative news show start ups, like Newsmax.

I'd be terrified to do that, since there's evidence that the awarding of Pulitzers is heavily liberally biased.

quote:

---

Would the Pulitzer committee consider a prize for a news organization bankrolled by the conservative Koch brothers? Of course not. But by recognizing ProPublica, the committee is essentially rewarding the left side of the political spectrum.

​

ProPublica’s main backers are billionaires Herbert and Marion Sandler. The couple has pledged $10 million a year to the organization. Such a big-ticket annual contribution fits right in with the Sandlers’ extensive support for Democratic candidates, left-wing advocacy campaigns, and PACs such as Moveon.org, which raises money for progressive office-seekers.

---

Credibility Of Pulitzer Prize Takes A Hit By Rewarding ProPublica’s Liberal Bias | The Daily Caller All deaths. There is a ripple effect that goes all through the economy that can hinder many things that contribute to all deaths. Unemployment / business destruction can lead to more suicides, supply chains can be disrupted that serve hospitals. It goes on and on, when the economy is even partially closed, in violation of the first amendment. It is usually stated, or implied when questionable intrusions on the Constitution happen, that the founders couldn't possibly have foreseen the complications / circumstances of this ever complex society of today. The problem is, the founders knew plenty about the possibilities of viruses and pandemics, yet nowhere in the founding documents is anything stated concerning alterations to the Constitution concerning them. That can be projected both ways, the mandated closing of some businesses for a long period of time, resulting eventually in a depression rivaling the 1930's could increase numbers of deaths in many ways, suicide, civil unrest as only two of many examples. TDR indicates a change from when most U.S. citizens, while politically divided, cared about the good of the country. Now a significant number of Democrats are much more focused on Trump than they are the good of the country. I re-read some of your opening posts of this thread from 3+ years ago, and they just don't seem nearly as vitriolic as your posts now. Now that Trump's had time to show what he can do, decrease government regulation, grow and preside over a really good economy, until recently at least.I think I remember seeing or hearing about one of the late-night clowns (Maher maybe?) saying he'd take an economic downturn / depression, to see Trump get removed from office. There's a lot of anger and despair in the Democrat party, obviously because they weren't able to come up with a JFK, Bill Clinton, or even Obama, to challenge Trump in the 2020 election. I suspect that the big money handlers of the Democrat party - Soros, Gates, Steyer, Bloomberg, etc, are very frustrated over the Biden roadblock. All their money can't buy him out, he has the desire to be the nominee, and he has the delegates. But take heart, I honestly suspect that Biden just might have an "accident" this summer. The Clintons could become advisors for this project, several people have gotten dead around them in recent decades.I could elaborate more on TDR, but I'm out of time for now. Gonna be a busy week, (I'm an essential worker) but maybe I'll be back in a week or so, if there's anything else of substance to respond to here.

The reason I throw that out there sometimes is because, in about 10 years of on and off posting here, it seems pretty clear to me (immediate replies, posting times at any time all day by many) that more than half of the regular posters here don't seem to have jobs. That's not a put-down, some might work at night, some might work part time, some might be retired, some disabled. But being busy with other things can be perceived as weakness, and it seems to me that a person who is heavily involved in working and paying taxes and not drawing any kind of assistance would have a perspective of how the world works that would be noted by those who are more idle for whatever reason. Thanks for reading. My conservative views are very mainstream, from James 'I-cannot-undertake-to-lay-my-finger' Madison, to John 'Ask-not-what-your-country-can-do-for-you' Kennedy, all the way to Ronald Reagan and countless congressmen, senators, and opinion commentators of today - the belief of the benefits of the text of the constitution and the intent of the framers, with the traditional U.S. blend of Judeo-Christian values and morals. What makes posting here interesting is the way most liberals here act like they've never heard my views before. They're either dishonest, or live in a tiny liberal bubble.Liberalism? Grow the government. Re-distribute earnings, "get even" with successful people. Jealousy, and that's an important term. So much compassion for the lower middle class in the U.S. today, but it's seldom mentioned that practically all U.S. citizens live like kings today compared to average people of 100 years ago. Those people didn't have jealousy problems, because the lifestyles of others weren't thrown in their faces like it is in today's technological age.The reason Trump, (and to a lesser extent, Reagan) are hated so much today is because they've proven that limiting government unleashes prosperity for most citizens, whether they're well off or not.

So by sending out hundreds of tweets in January, many in response to the impeachment circus, that means he wasn't distracted at all? Not very good logic. Well, you have to give me credit for providing two links to back up my claims without making bare assertions, like the forum rule states. Whereas, you made bare assertions contradicting them with no supporting evidence.

But those with a sense of Democrat loyalty, mostly atheists, mostly Trump haters, know that keeping the country as restricted as possible keeps churches closed, and many churches are on thin financial ground. These restrictions also keep Trump from holding his (very successful) political rallies. This pandemic has been politicized much more by Democrats than Republicans. So you're accusing Republicans of "increasing division and hatred" more than Democrats? I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one, but that has never worked for me before. "NO, I"M RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG", is what I always get from those on the left. It's well documented that a huge percentage of mainstream journalists are very liberal, and vote for very liberal candidates. Here's a link from your beloved Washington Post;https://www.washingtonpost.com/...ess-than-even-a-decade-ago Meanwhile, the economy is (was) good, and that's what people who work and pay taxes care most about. Putting so much emphasis on Trump's words and personality is a clear sign that there is little knowledge or appreciation for the effort required to sustain the current U.S. society. Those on the left just seem to think the U.S. economy just coasts along, with no real effort involved. Though I've seen little indication of it, I hope those on the left learned at least a little something recently - that it doesn't take much of a glitch, a little hoarding and panic buying, to leave some of the aisles in food stores bare of things like bath tissue for weeks on end, until suppliers can get a handle on it. The things so many take for granted don't happen automatically. As it worked out, yes. Trump, like most people, had no idea that the left would use it as a political attack. That they would make every effort to keep it closed as long as possible to get the country to 1930's levels of depression or worse, to help achieve their political goals. Many liberals are passionate about keeping the economy closed as long as possible.COVID-related arson believed cause of church fire in Mississippi - ABC News

quote:

---

Bet you stay at home now you hypokrits.

---

That's what a sign left at the scene of the fire. Not a representative of all liberals of course, but it is an indicator of strong feelings from the left concerning the re-opening of the economy, and churches. All you need to do is replace "right wing outlet", with "left wing outlet", and you've described the left very well. That all makes perfect sense, because there is evidence for it. It goes along perfectly with growing the government at all costs. During February, exactly when De Blasio and many other Democrats were downplaying the threat, ready to pounce if Trump took any action on it?De Blasio, NYC Officials Downplayed COVID-19 Threat After Trump Restricted Travel To China. Here Are 5 Examples | The Daily Caller Calling it the China Virus is important, since that's where it came from. It's a good basic truth to work with, in helping determine how to keep something like it from happening again. Also important to be optimistic about how things will turn out, similar to optimism that the news media projects during a Democrat administration. I don't consider the government "helping", when all it is doing is REDISTRIBUTING. "Help" involves giving from the "helper", not taking from others and redistributing. U.S. foundings and supporting quotes from its founders shows that they understood this. But what doesn't go way back is today's desire by the left to involve the government in unprecedented ways, like free health care for all, the destruction of some businesses in the name of health care, etc. We're having a political discussion. If you miss daily half hour headline news reports, you're missing what millions of only casually interested people around the country are seeing. It's very important, politically. Again, if you choose not to recognize the liberal bias in today's mainstream news reporting, I have nothing more to say on it.

Like the NY Times and Washington Post? Known by whom? "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."I've bolded the relevant phrase. Interesting to me how we don't see much reference to "separation of church and state" these days, now that we have "state" issuing orders that churches have to close. There was the black death of 1348, the great plague of 1665, as only two examples. The founders seemed to think they knew enough about history and human nature to set up a new type of government for a society. It's claimed by historians that they were educated men, I think it's safe to say they knew plenty about contagious diseases, and it's clear they made no provisions for special government takeovers if they happen. When it takes away a clearly defined constitutional right, (to peaceably assemble), when it drastically re-distributes earnings, closes businesses, yes I think it's unconstitutional. It could be argued very successfully if all the other death potential, including more than just suicide, is taken into consideration.

quote:

---

These are facts based on past experience, not models. If unemployment hits 32 percent, some 77,000 Americans are likely to die from suicide and drug overdoses as a result of layoffs. Deaths of despair.

​

Then add the predictable deaths from alcohol abuse caused by unemployment. Health economist Michael French from the University of Miami found a significant association between job loss and binge drinking and alcoholism.

​

The impact of layoffs goes beyond suicide, drug overdosing and drinking, however. Overall, the death rate for an unemployed person is 63 percent higher than for someone with a job, according to findings in the journal Social Science & Medicine.

---

We must count the deaths from shutdowns as well as from coronavirus The Obama economy wasn't in the same league as the Trump economy. The Obama GDP growth rate was much weaker than Trumps - 1.5 to 2.1 as opposed to Trump's 2.9 to 3.1. Obama's "those jobs aren't coming back", and "you didn't build that", are a stark contrast to what Trump has said and done. Trump Derangement Syndrome, best defined as simply a knee-jerk opposition to ANYTHING he says or does, no matter how the country could be affected by that opposition.