We could stop the pandemic by July 4 if the government took these steps

[SocialCircle 570]

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

Congratulations. Sounds like you made the dreaded " ignore list". 

just silly "sorority girl-like" stuff. 

No worries. Looks like a snowflake reaction. 

[I_M4_AU 7,811]

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

In defense of Brother Homer he explained the topic title on his initial page 1 response.  Agree with much he saying. "Tracing" and "isolation" sound great although a fantasy imo and given our freedoms. All will come down to personal responsibility or a vaccine.

  Who is to say there will ever be a true vaccine?  Sure doesn't work guaranteed with the flu or pneumonia. 

      

I know he did and it was a sell out then. He can’t agree he made a mistake using that word in the title.  As you say, it sounds like a great idea, but if you can’t implement the plan, the plan won’t work.

[homersapien 11,371]

20 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Read the title of this thread. You wrote it.

First, I didn't write it, I cut and pasted it from the subject article.

Secondly, the title says stopping the pandemic, not the virus.   (Like EMT said, the virus is here to stay, until there is a vaccine.)

I love how MAGAs rely on pedantic nuance when they cannot deal with the actual substance.

 

 

[homersapien 11,371]

15 hours ago, Grumps said:

So you answered what you thought I meant to ask. Got it! Thanks Nostradamus!

Stop weaseling.

You asked: Can you explain how testing people saves lives?

I responded: Controlling a pandemic - instead of simply letting it run wild - saves lives by reducing the total number of infections.

And you've been weaseling ever since.  I even gave you the opportunity by requesting you re-phrase your question into something that more accurately reflected what you really meant to ask, but no, all you do is keep weaseling with these coy responses.

So if you want to debate something, then do so, but these sort of responses are just a waste of my time.

[homersapien 11,371]

15 hours ago, SocialCircle said:

No worries. Looks like a snowflake reaction. 

Actually, it's a reasoned,  time-saving ploy. 

Some people simply aren't worth the time spent dealing with them.  Think of the old adage - never waste your time arguing with a drunk or a fool.

Other's are just flat out dishonest and will never admit to making a mistake no matter the proof.  I put those into the "fool" category - a fool with an insecurity complex.

[SocialCircle 570]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Actually, it's a reasoned,  time-saving ploy. 

Some people simply aren't worth the time spent dealing with them.  Think of the old adage - never waste your time arguing with a drunk or a fool.

Other's are just flat out dishonest and will never admit to making a mistake no matter the proof.  I put those into the "fool" category - a fool with an insecurity complex.

Let me ask your opinion. Do you think the NY gov. was dumb for putting elderly folks who tested positive back into those facilities?  

[homersapien 11,371]

17 hours ago, SocialCircle said:

Let me ask your opinion. Do you think the NY gov. was dumb for putting elderly folks who tested positive back into those facilities?  

I don't know enough about the circumstances of his decision to have a strong opinion one way or the other.

What does this have to do with ignoring posters??

[SocialCircle 570]

28 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I don't know enough about the circumstances of his decision to have a strong opinion one way or the other.

What does this have to do with ignoring posters??

I’m not a mind reader. I suggest you ask the person who did the ignoring.
 

We sure know the consequences of his decision don’t we? I would suggest the results of this action indicate it was a dumb and tragic decision. 

[homersapien 11,371]

4 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

I’m not a mind reader. I suggest you ask the person who did the ignoring.
 

We sure know the consequences of his decision don’t we? I would suggest the results of this action indicate it was a dumb and tragic decision. 

I am not asking, you were.

 

[SaltyTiger 7,795]

39 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I don't know enough about the circumstances of his decision to have a strong opinion one way or the other.

According this article his reasoning is a "mystery".  Perhaps panic and not thinking clearly? Dumb regardless.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/28/more-blood-on-gov-cuomos-hands-amid-nursing-home-coronavirus-crisis-goodwin/

 the governor’s clear understanding of the special circumstances that nursing homes face deepens the mystery about why he allowed his Department of Health to force sick patients into those same facilities.

After all, if a single infected staff member could start a “fire through dry grass” in a facility, what could 10 or 15 or 20 infected patients do to all the vulnerable people inside a nursing home? And what havoc could thousands of those infected patients cause in hundreds of nursing homes across the state?

 

[homersapien 11,371]

And for the record, I am fine with holding Cuomo - or any other governor - as well as the POTUS for mistakes made in  their response.

There will be detailed histories addressing these mistakes. I look forward to reading them.

 

https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2020/05/06/cuomo-under-fire-for-response-to-covid-19-at-nursing-homes-1282821

[homersapien 11,371]

On 5/20/2020 at 9:32 AM, SaltyTiger said:

According this article his reasoning is a "mystery".  Perhaps panic and not thinking clearly? Dumb regardless.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/28/more-blood-on-gov-cuomos-hands-amid-nursing-home-coronavirus-crisis-goodwin/

 the governor’s clear understanding of the special circumstances that nursing homes face deepens the mystery about why he allowed his Department of Health to force sick patients into those same facilities.

After all, if a single infected staff member could start a “fire through dry grass” in a facility, what could 10 or 15 or 20 infected patients do to all the vulnerable people inside a nursing home? And what havoc could thousands of those infected patients cause in hundreds of nursing homes across the state?

 

Actually, according the article I linked above, Cuomo was generally following CDC guidelines. 

The breakdown apparently occurred at the nursing home level in determining or accurately reporting their capabilities.  In other words, the CDC guidelines were not appropriate when applied to a dysfunctional nursing home system.   But of course, that in itself falls under Cuomo's responsibility.

Like I said, there have been and will continue to be mistakes made at both the state and federal level.  I would suggest that the most significant errors were made at the federal level, particularly by Trump.  We shall see who better accepts responsibility for those mistakes. (But I certainly don't think Trump will.)

[SocialCircle 570]

20 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I am not asking, you were.

 

No, I never asked why. Meanwhile, you came out of the blue and read that poster’s mind as to why. And you make a post critical of our response to Covid-19, but can’t even admit putting positive elderly residents back in those facilities was a dumb move. 

[homersapien 11,371]

7 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

No, I never asked why. Meanwhile, you came out of the blue and read that poster’s mind as to why. And you make a post critical of our response to Covid-19, but can’t even admit putting positive elderly residents back in those facilities was a dumb move. 

I explained why ignoring some posters is a sensible thing to do and you reply - quoting me - by asking a question about Governor Cuomo.

And I am the one who "came out of the blue"......??? 

[I_M4_AU 7,811]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

The breakdown apparently occurred at the nursing home level in determining or accurately reporting their capabilities.  In other words, the CDC guidelines were not appropriate when applied to a dysfunctional nursing home system.   But of course, that in itself falls under Cuomo's responsibility.

Cuomo went all-in with science and the CDC without any common sense.  The Florida Governor took the South Korean situation and protected the nursing homes early on.  It just made sense, he wasn’t a science denier, he just used a combination of science and common sense.  The CDC is myopic when it comes to their advise and Cuomo isn’t smart enough to use common sense. JMO.

[SocialCircle 570]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

I explained why ignoring some posters is a sensible thing to do and you reply - quoting me - by asking a question about Governor Cuomo.

And I am the one who "came out of the blue"......??? 

You started a topic that is critical of our governments response to Covid-19 and you really think asking you about a governors response to Covid-19 is “out of the blue?” 
 

Isn’t it ironic that you are so critical of governments response to the virus yet can’t even admit what Cuomo did in the facilities that care of our elderly was dumb? 
 

I’m simply pointing out your hypocrisy by getting your response to that action taken by the gov. of NY. 
 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

3 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

You started a topic that is critical of our governments response to Covid-19 and you really think asking you about a governors response to Covid-19 is “out of the blue?” 
 

Isn’t it ironic that you are so critical of governments response to the virus yet can’t even admit what Cuomo did in the facilities that care of our elderly was dumb? 
 

I’m simply pointing out your hypocrisy by getting your response to that action taken by the gov. of NY. 
 

But Cuomo isn’t trump....or Republican for that matter!! 

[McLoofus 35,182]

17 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

But Cuomo isn’t trump....or Republican for that matter!! 

Nor is he the governor of Georgia, so an opinion of him is irrelevant. It's a weak deflection and straw man to bring him up. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

10 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Nor is he the governor of Georgia, so an opinion of him is irrelevant. It's a weak deflection and straw man to bring him up. 

I believe they were specifically talking about Cuomo.

[McLoofus 35,182]

5 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

I believe they were specifically talking about Cuomo.

You believe incorrectly. I was part of the conversation when it started. It was only 2 pages ago.

[SocialCircle 570]

14 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Nor is he the governor of Georgia, so an opinion of him is irrelevant. It's a weak deflection and straw man to bring him up. 

The topic starter was critical of our government’s response to this virus. It is absolutely appropriate to bring into the conversation various governor’s responses. 
 

Bringing them up helps to successfully expose hypocrisy for everyone to see. 
 

However, I can certainly understand why at least a couple of posters don’t like the fact that those responses were brought into the conversation. 

[homersapien 11,371]

46 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

You started a topic that is critical of our governments response to Covid-19 and you really think asking you about a governors response to Covid-19 is “out of the blue?” 
 

Isn’t it ironic that you are so critical of governments response to the virus yet can’t even admit what Cuomo did in the facilities that care of our elderly was dumb? 
 

I’m simply pointing out your hypocrisy by getting your response to that action taken by the gov. of NY. 
 

Your response was a complete non sequitur. Period.  And your explanation for it is no better.

Yes, I am certainly critical of our federal government's response to the pandemic in several regards, particularly the ones highlighted in the subject article - testing and tracing.

You are trying to hijack the thread by diverting attention from the subject to Governor Cuomo's actions.  It is a red herring - and attempt to divert away from the subject of the thread.   It has nothing to do with the substance of the OP, which constitutes the subject of this thread. 

Nor does my introducing a topic - which I feel is very important - mean I am a hypocrite for not wanting to talk about something different.  That just illustrates the mindlessness of your position.

So, If you want to discuss Cuomo, then start a thread on it, but don't try to  hijack this one.  Hell, I might even agree with you.  (The idea that I am only critical of the federal government is a figment of your imagination.) 

So congratulations, you racked up both a "red herring" as well as a "straw man".  

[wdefromtx 3,159]

6 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

You believe incorrectly. I was part of the conversation when it started. It was only 2 pages ago.

Actually SS was talking about Cuomo if you look at his replies to Homer. 

This would be a good time for you to stay in your lane.....

[McLoofus 35,182]

Just now, wdefromtx said:

Actually SS was talking about Cuomo if you look at his replies to Homer. 

This would be a good time for you to stay in your lane.....

And if you didn't struggle so much with the written word, you'd understand what you were just told which is that the other guy brought up Cuomo to deflect away from the Kemp conversation. Nobody else has brought up Cuomo. Again, the thread is only 3 pages long. 

Stay in my lane... haha... bless your heart. 

[homersapien 11,371]

6 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

The topic starter was critical of our government’s response to this virus. It is absolutely appropriate to bring into the conversation various governor’s responses. WHY?  So you can somehow attack the thread originator for being unfair and unfair partisan??  Or is it you just cannot abide that I feel that testing/tracing is not being developed in such a way that we can open the economy safely??

 

Bringing them up helps to successfully expose hypocrisy for everyone to see. Thank God we have a trained hypocrisy hunter on the board!! 
 

However, I can certainly understand why at least a couple of posters don’t like the fact that those responses were brought into the conversation.   I am sure you can. Maybe you'd like to explain it, or did I already cover it for you?