nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Agree totally. His "pandemic response team" were not very effective. They weren't fired either, they were transferred to the CDC. Apparently the CDC has been doing some social work and not focusing on their true mission; that of dealing with infectious diseases.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

An ugly nagging woman.

straightUp Loc: California

You defy their projections? Is that your way of saying that people are overreacting?

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Yes. Exactly. You got that exactly right!!

straightUp Loc: California

So tired of hearing this tripe from people who never actually do the research. So, you didn't like Obama... whatever. The fact is. Trump cut funding for the CDC. The fact is Trump dismantled the global health security department in the NSC. The fact is Trump ignored the warnings from the experts on biodefense and medicine when they told him as recently as last year that the potential for a pandemic was a high security risk.

All you have is "uh... it's ovomit fault because he hated the US"

This is exactly why we think Trump supporters are the most retarded people on the planet.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

You are lying, straightup and you know it!

How old are you straightup and what, if any, pre-existing conditions do you have?? Do you have asthma, emphysema, beaten cancer? If you are above 70 and have anything pre-existing such as these I have mentioned, get inside and hide. But don't make the rest of us do the same. Unless, of course, you want this to continue to hurt Trump and the economy as it certainly has. You see, I think you do.

77Reaganite Loc: Athens, GA, United States

I say they'll be less people die of this than people died of the flu every year

straightUp Loc: California

Why don't you look it up instead of just calling people liars because they mention facts you don't like?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/03/18/coronavirus-did-president-trumps-decision-disband-global-pandemic-office-hinder-response/5064881002/


Dude... just because you're not prone to die from it doesn't mean you can't spread it. WTF is wrong with you? Hasn't this been explained to you hundreds of times already?

I sure hope you're not running around spreading filthy disease to people who CAN die from it just because you happen to feel fine.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

I posted something much less partisan than your USA BS article. I am sure you didn't read it at all.

And no, I am not running around trying to expose people. I'm not exposed anyway. I'm saying that we know the population who is at risk here; elderly over 65-70- with pre-existing conditions. They should be encouraged not to go out. It is they who need to be limited. Why should 80% of the population and commerce be stopped when they can be at home safe, if they want to, that is. I am not in favor of ANY imposed restrictions, but they can be informed.For the rest of us there is no more risk of anything at all than there was before this started.

We don't need to destroy the economy when we know who is actually at real risk. Get it!!??

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

China said they've found a cure and in the last two days0 deaths 'reported.' Do we trust them? I don't

straightUp Loc: California

OK. I understand. So, let the virus runs its course and save the shelter for the sick and the old. I totally get that. I mean look at China. They reported zero new cases today. The virus ran its course. Italy will be next. So far, that is the only way any country got from any number of cases to zero. And chances are, there will be an aftershock as the sheltered are released without immunity.

It may come to that.

But the problem is we have a lot of old people in this country. Old people who are loved. We have sick people too. I have an old mother and my brother has an autoimmune disease. It would be really cool if we had more faith in science because we really do have the minds to shortcut the pandemic to immunity and save these people that we love so much. But the odds of doing that get worse by the hour because this stuff spreads... it's exponential. That's why we should all just minimize the spread to give those minds a chance to save my mom and my brother.




I agree with you regarding any kind of lock down for any kind of reason. It's a very last resort thing in my mind. But I think this is a rare occasion where it's worth considering. I'm an anti-Federalist bro... That actually makes me more Libertarian than the nationalists and their Trumpian brethren. But I'm also a Realist and a Humanist. And ALL those arrows are telling me we should keep our asses home for a bit.


Oh, I get it... It's not a question of understanding, it's a question of priority. I am not unaffected by the market but I know this virus will have to sustain much longer than it did in China for industry here to be hurt that badly. People need to calm down about the economy and worry more about the virus.

The economy has no direct correlation to the virus anyway... the people react to to the virus... the market reacts to the people. Put it this way... a virus doesn't carry American Express. And dude... people were buying up toilet paper the minute they thought OTHER people were going to buy up toilet paper. It's the same basic instinct that drives the stock market. It's like the deal we made with God when we thought we were big enough to evolve into capitalism and God said...

"ok, so you wanna to flood your village with gold... fine. Only one thing... you will be forever enslaved to the idiocy of supply and demand."

- straightUp 12:7

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

I'm not as cavalier as you might think. I simply know that we don't need to have everyone hide and have so many businesses close down. Not a bad idea to avoid a run on the hospitals by slowing the rate of transmission but we now know what we need to know. It's time to educate, protect our parents and elderly, and get back to normal life. Thing is, the "authorities" are not giving us honest information. Like the Imperial College of England saying there could be millions dead in a year, hundreds of thousands even if we take precautions, etc. Stupid and irresponsible claim and now, contradicted by evidence and raw data.

But just wait, I'm willing to bet that we get a mandatory "shelter in place" order soon, if not in the next few days. It's not like these businesses like restaurants are closed down voluntarily. The date from Italy, at the very least, dispels the need to limit gatherings. With good information given to the public, we can protect those most vulnerable.

Just say'in.

newbear Loc: New York City

Canuckus, you wrote "China treated the virus much like any other flu until they realized how dangerous it was... Certainly a mistake... And one that they have openly admitted to... And apologized for..."

This is a little far fetched claim, totally unproved. China is second richest contributor to WHO, after the U.S.A.
No apologies necessary there.

I agree, however, that our greed and corruption have caused the current tension and the mutual accusations.


Michael Pillsbury and others who warned of the Chinese ambitions way back when Bill Clinton sought to bribe China into a peaceful coexistence were largely ignored. Pillsbury himself said the other day that his Politbureau contacts ask him why no previous US Presidents tried to negotiate a better deal with them.

The bookstores in major Chinese cities have copies of "The Art of the Deal" in translation, selling well.

So the game is not entirely over yet, the prospect of open, however limited, conflict, are not appealing to either side, for the spoils of war may be dangerous for whoever might be the victor.

The chess-like movement to a position of a mutual understanding and respect appears to be a more reasonable approach than a mighty sabre rattling.

But, as someone said, 'when the goods stop crossing borders, the arms will'.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Well stated... And I agree...

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

I did some research, but my source wasn't CNN or MSNBC or NYT or any other commie propaganda machine.

Trump didn't dismantle the NSC pandemic response team.

In May 2018, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, the senior director of global health and biodefense on the National Security Council, left the administration. He was in charge of the U.S. response to pandemics.

After Ziemer’s departure, the global health team was reorganized by then-National Security Adviser John Bolton as part of an effort to streamline the response and make it more efficient. Meanwhile, Tom Bossert, a homeland security adviser who recommended strong defenses against disease, left shortly after Bolton arrived.

The White House didn’t replace either White House official or his team. Instead, Trump looked within his administration to fill roles for the coronavirus response.

In January, Trump appointed his Health and Human Services secretary, Alex Azar, to chair a coronavirus task force. On Feb. 26, he announced that Vice President Mike Pence would take charge of the U.S. response to the coronavirus.

The World Health Organization shipped coronavirus tests to nearly 60 countries at the end of February, but the U.S. was not among them.

"No discussions occurred between WHO and CDC about WHO providing COVID-19 tests to the United States," said WHO spokeswoman Margaret Harris. "This is consistent with experience since the United States does not ordinarily rely on WHO for reagents or diagnostic tests because of sufficient domestic capacity."

Instead, the U.S. decided to have the CDC develop its own testing protocol, which was published Jan. 28. This caused a lag in testing for the virus in the U.S.

The CDC’s test was different and more complicated than a test published in Germany on Jan. 17. It worked in the CDC lab, but when the materials went out to state labs, some of them got inconsistent results. The CDC had to resend packages with new chemical reagents.

State laboratories started developing their own tests and were ready to use them, but had to wait for emergency approval from the Food and Drug Administration. The combined delays resulted in fewer Americans being tested and a slower U.S. response overall compared with some other countries.