Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
Author Message
LSU04_08 Offline
Deo Vindice
*

Posts: 18,020
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 234
I Root For: The Deplorables
Location: Bon Temps, La
Post: #201
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 10:38 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  no i'd say the slandering an entire demographic is an accurate statement. anyone who doesn't look at all the evidence and says there is a connection is engaging in slander. there simply is nothing of merit to that claim at this point in time.

The burden of proof lies with the accuser.

(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  LOL. if conservatives applied that to this scenario then this thread would never have been necessary.


Slander
1. (noun) the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

2. verb make false and damaging statements about (someone).

Again, this is a very simple request. Quote my slanderous statement.




Burden of Proof
1. the obligation to prove one's assertion.

Burden of Proof

You have repeated asserted that it is racist to ask the question of whether or not the influx of illegal immigrants is related to the outbreak of EV-D68. The burden of proof lies with you to prove that it is racist.

You have also accused me of slandering illegal immigrants. Again, the burden of proof lies with you. Simply cite my slanderous statement to prove your accusation, otherwise withdraw your accusation.

It's nearly impossible to have a serious discussion with someone when one person repeatedly uses words and concepts that they do not understand. In this case you fail to understand the concept of 'burden of proof' and the definition of slander. Come back when you wrap your head around those concepts.

05-bump
10-17-2014 12:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #202
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 10:38 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  no i'd say the slandering an entire demographic is an accurate statement. anyone who doesn't look at all the evidence and says there is a connection is engaging in slander. there simply is nothing of merit to that claim at this point in time.

The burden of proof lies with the accuser.

(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  LOL. if conservatives applied that to this scenario then this thread would never have been necessary.


Slander
1. (noun) the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

2. verb make false and damaging statements about (someone).

Again, this is a very simple request. Quote my slanderous statement.




Burden of Proof
1. the obligation to prove one's assertion.

Burden of Proof

You have repeated asserted that it is racist to ask the question of whether or not the influx of illegal immigrants is related to the outbreak of EV-D68. The burden of proof lies with you to prove that it is racist.

You have also accused me of slandering illegal immigrants. Again, the burden of proof lies with you. Simply cite my slanderous statement to prove your accusation, otherwise withdraw your accusation.

It's nearly impossible to have a serious discussion with someone when one person repeatedly uses words and concepts that they do not understand. In this case you fail to understand the concept of 'burden of proof' and the definition of slander. Come back when you wrap your head around those concepts.

by your own actions you have chosen to link D68 to them despite there being no evidence of that. that's slander

and while we are at it, why don't you look up the word liar. because you have repeated stated:

"You have repeated asserted that it is racist to ask the question of whether or not the influx of illegal immigrants is related to the outbreak of EV-D68."

again it's not racist to ask the question, the issue that there is no basis for that claim and the only reason why so many are making it is because of a racist stigma against them. <== if you refuse to actually acknowledge what my argument is then it's no point in my wasting my time on you.
10-17-2014 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 15,328
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 767
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #203
Re: RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-15-2014 02:58 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:53 PM)VA49er Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:11 PM)john01992 Wrote:  it is a talking point that a number of conservative poster on CSN & numerous conservative websites have mentioned. The only problem is that I have yet to find any evidence from a legitimate source to back this claim up. For those who don't know the talking point is basically stating illegal immigrants brought the disease to the United States, specifically the recent wave of children.

No, it isn't racist. It's just dumb and unproven by any scientific fact. It's just a talking point. Why does everything have to be racist?

I don't think everything has to be racist, [bold] but I think this is one of the few major talking points that is indeed racist. [/bold] it's unproven claims being used to slander an entire demographic.

this talking point doesn't just blame illegals, it blames people from latin america in general regardless if they live there or in the US of being associated with a disease that affects/kills children.

ODU's talking point is also incorrect because he fails to think about it in this manner.

Note the bolded part. You said it is racist to ask the question.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 01:08 PM by 200yrs2late.)
10-17-2014 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #204
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 12:58 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:58 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:53 PM)VA49er Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:11 PM)john01992 Wrote:  it is a talking point that a number of conservative poster on CSN & numerous conservative websites have mentioned. The only problem is that I have yet to find any evidence from a legitimate source to back this claim up. For those who don't know the talking point is basically stating illegal immigrants brought the disease to the United States, specifically the recent wave of children.

No, it isn't racist. It's just dumb and unproven by any scientific fact. It's just a talking point. Why does everything have to be racist?

I don't think everything has to be racist, [bold]but I think this is one of the few major talking points that is indeed racist. [/bold]it's unproven claims being used to slander an entire demographic.

this talking point doesn't just blame illegals, it blames people from latin america in general regardless if they live there or in the US of being associated with a disease that affects/kills children.

ODU's talking point is also incorrect because he fails to think about it in this manner.

Note the bolded part. You said it is racist to ask the question.

I was referring to the talking point of people specifically stating "illegals brought this disease over" not people asking the question of whether or not it is true.
10-17-2014 01:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 15,328
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 767
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #205
Re: RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 12:27 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 10:38 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  no i'd say the slandering an entire demographic is an accurate statement. anyone who doesn't look at all the evidence and says there is a connection is engaging in slander. there simply is nothing of merit to that claim at this point in time.

The burden of proof lies with the accuser.

(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  LOL. if conservatives applied that to this scenario then this thread would never have been necessary.


Slander
1. (noun) the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

2. verb make false and damaging statements about (someone).

Again, this is a very simple request. Quote my slanderous statement.




Burden of Proof
1. the obligation to prove one's assertion.

Burden of Proof

You have repeated asserted that it is racist to ask the question of whether or not the influx of illegal immigrants is related to the outbreak of EV-D68. The burden of proof lies with you to prove that it is racist.

You have also accused me of slandering illegal immigrants. Again, the burden of proof lies with you. Simply cite my slanderous statement to prove your accusation, otherwise withdraw your accusation.

It's nearly impossible to have a serious discussion with someone when one person repeatedly uses words and concepts that they do not understand. In this case you fail to understand the concept of 'burden of proof' and the definition of slander. Come back when you wrap your head around those concepts.

by your own actions you have chosen to link D68 to them despite there being no evidence of that. that's slander

and while we are at it, why don't you look up the word liar. because you have repeated stated:

"You have repeated asserted that it is racist to ask the question of whether or not the influx of illegal immigrants is related to the outbreak of EV-D68."

again it's not racist to ask the question, the issue that there is no basis for that claim and the only reason why so many are making it is because of a [bold]racist stigma against them.[/bold] <== if you refuse to actually acknowledge what my argument is then it's no point in my wasting my time on you.
The only stigma anybody here has acknowledged against illegal immigrants is due to then being here criminally, not due to their race.

You asked the question. We answered in a way you didn't like and have since then tried to deflect and change your argument instead of simply saying you disagree. To go further, you claim we have slandered an entire group of people by asking a question, when we have not actually accused them of anything. To go even further you have now called me a liar, following the liberal playbook step by step.

Again i will simply ask you to cite my slanderous statement, and to give any proof that my asking if the influx of illegal immigrants could be related to the current EV-D68 outbreak is in fact racist.
10-17-2014 01:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 15,328
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 767
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #206
Re: RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 01:05 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 12:58 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:58 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:53 PM)VA49er Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:11 PM)john01992 Wrote:  it is a talking point that a number of conservative poster on CSN & numerous conservative websites have mentioned. The only problem is that I have yet to find any evidence from a legitimate source to back this claim up. For those who don't know the talking point is basically stating illegal immigrants brought the disease to the United States, specifically the recent wave of children.

No, it isn't racist. It's just dumb and unproven by any scientific fact. It's just a talking point. Why does everything have to be racist?

I don't think everything has to be racist, [bold]but I think this is one of the few major talking points that is indeed racist. [/bold]it's unproven claims being used to slander an entire demographic.

this talking point doesn't just blame illegals, it blames people from latin america in general regardless if they live there or in the US of being associated with a disease that affects/kills children.

ODU's talking point is also incorrect because he fails to think about it in this manner.

Note the bolded part. You said it is racist to ask the question.

I was referring to the talking point of people specifically stating "illegals brought this disease over" not people asking the question of whether or not it is true.

But thats not what this thread was about. It was about asking the question, which is what we have all been discussing here.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App
10-17-2014 01:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #207
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 01:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:05 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 12:58 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:58 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:53 PM)VA49er Wrote:  No, it isn't racist. It's just dumb and unproven by any scientific fact. It's just a talking point. Why does everything have to be racist?

I don't think everything has to be racist, [bold]but I think this is one of the few major talking points that is indeed racist. [/bold]it's unproven claims being used to slander an entire demographic.

this talking point doesn't just blame illegals, it blames people from latin america in general regardless if they live there or in the US of being associated with a disease that affects/kills children.

ODU's talking point is also incorrect because he fails to think about it in this manner.

Note the bolded part. You said it is racist to ask the question.

I was referring to the talking point of people specifically stating "illegals brought this disease over" not people asking the question of whether or not it is true.

But thats not what this thread was about. It was about asking the question, which is what we have all been discussing here.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

thread title: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?

it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 01:25 PM by john01992.)
10-17-2014 01:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #208
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
Not true, John. There IS a basis for the claim and it lies with statements made by the NIH... It may not be compelling, but it is not without basis.... but you've continually contrived and selectively quoted and responded to people who obviously aren't clinical researchers or experts in infectious disease who sometimes mis-speak or misinterpret data... focusing on minute portions of their comments rather than the 'substance' of it... creating the impression where if you can somehow prove that ever single detail they said was in fact not 100% accurate, that this somehow 'proves' your position.

Intellectual dishonesty, and something you accused others of trying to do to you.

You started the thread essentially calling people whom you don't know racists... No, you didn't do it that obviously in the OP, but when you posted the OP, you already thought that was the case and have essentially asked people to prove your opinion wrong.

Now you're arguing the immaterial minutia about whether a specific strain can be PROVEN to be directly linked to illegal immigrants...

You know full well that as this topic never even came up until someone entered this country under false pretenses, circumventing procedures that were in place to protect us and placing our population at SOME level of risk. We have already amended our national policies about 'legal' travel in response, and yet the minute people start talking about amending our national policies on 'illegal' travel, suddenly you cry racism.

So it's NOT racism to place more restrictive travel requirements on people from West Africa, before ascertaining whether or not they actually pose a risk, who come through legal ports of entry, but it IS racism to want to place more restrictive travel requirements on those from Central and SOuth America who enter the country illegally, BECAUSE we can't ascertain whether or not they actually pose a risk?

Illegal immigration DOES increase the risk of communicable infection to our population. Whether it specifically increases the risk of d68 or not is immaterial to that fact. The fact is that when diseases cross significant thresholds of space and time, they morph... meaning the d68 discovered in 1962 may be the same strain, but won't respond the same way as the d68 currently in Latin America... or in China or anywhere else. It's why every year, the flu shot mixture here changes.

It may not be TRUE that illegal immigrants 'brought' this strain, but it is not racist to be concerned about it.

The CDC and the NIH certainly felt strongly enough about it to investigate it, and I'm confident that it was because they are epidemiologists and not racists. You are no less guilty of misinterpreting their legitimate concerns to imply racism without direct evidence than those who misinterpret them to imply causality without direct evidence.

The difference is, those who mistakenly imply causality don't place anyone at additional risk... but those who mistakenly imply racism run the risk that we don't investigate something for fear of being labeled racists.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 01:33 PM by Hambone10.)
10-17-2014 01:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 15,328
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 767
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #209
Re: RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 01:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:05 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 12:58 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-15-2014 02:58 PM)john01992 Wrote:  I don't think everything has to be racist, [bold]but I think this is one of the few major talking points that is indeed racist. [/bold]it's unproven claims being used to slander an entire demographic.

this talking point doesn't just blame illegals, it blames people from latin america in general regardless if they live there or in the US of being associated with a disease that affects/kills children.

ODU's talking point is also incorrect because he fails to think about it in this manner.

Note the bolded part. You said it is racist to ask the question.

I was referring to the talking point of people specifically stating "illegals brought this disease over" not people asking the question of whether or not it is true.

But thats not what this thread was about. It was about asking the question, which is what we have all been discussing here.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

thread title: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?

it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

And numerous individuals have explained how it is a legitimate concern and therefore not racist. From the you proceded to tell us all we were racist for asking if the two were related and slandering an entire demographic even though i have seen no slanderous statements made against central americans, illegal immigrants or children.

Ill ask again, please cite my slanderous statement.
10-17-2014 01:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #210
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 01:28 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Not true, John. There IS a basis for the claim and it lies with statements made by the NIH... It may not be compelling, but it is not without basis.... but you've continually contrived and selectively quoted and responded to people who obviously aren't clinical researchers or experts in infectious disease who sometimes mis-speak or misinterpret data... focusing on minute portions of their comments rather than the 'substance' of it... creating the impression where if you can somehow prove that ever single detail they said was in fact not 100% accurate, that this somehow 'proves' your position.

Intellectual dishonesty, and something you accused others of trying to do to you.

You started the thread essentially calling people whom you don't know racists... No, you didn't do it that obviously in the OP, but when you posted the OP, you already thought that was the case and have essentially asked people to prove your opinion wrong.

Now you're arguing the immaterial minutia about whether a specific strain can be PROVEN to be directly linked to illegal immigrants...

You know full well that as this topic never even came up until someone entered this country under false pretenses, circumventing procedures that were in place to protect us and placing our population at SOME level of risk. We have already amended our national policies about 'legal' travel in response, and yet the minute people start talking about amending our national policies on 'illegal' travel, suddenly you cry racism.

So it's NOT racism to place more restrictive travel requirements on people from West Africa, before ascertaining whether or not they actually pose a risk, who come through legal ports of entry, but it IS racism to want to place more restrictive travel requirements on those from Central and SOuth America who enter the country illegally, BECAUSE we can't ascertain whether or not they actually pose a risk?

Illegal immigration DOES increase the risk of communicable infection to our population. Whether it specifically increases the risk of d68 or not is immaterial to that fact. The fact is that when diseases cross significant thresholds of space and time, they morph... meaning the d68 discovered in 1962 may be the same strain, but won't respond the same way as the d68 currently in Latin America... or in China or anywhere else. It's why every year, the flu shot mixture here changes.

It may not be TRUE that illegal immigrants 'brought' this strain, but it is not racist to be concerned about it.

The CDC and the NIH certainly felt strongly enough about it to investigate it, and I'm confident that it was because they are epidemiologists and not racists. You are no less guilty of misinterpreting their legitimate concerns to imply racism without direct evidence than those who misinterpret them to imply causality without direct evidence.

The difference is, those who mistakenly imply causality don't place anyone at additional risk... but those who mistakenly imply racism run the risk that we don't investigate something for fear of being labeled racists.

there is no basis for this at all. you quoted an incorrect link from an FNC columnist.

there was an NIH study that found low amounts of the virus in central america. it shows no connection at all to the current outbreak. it just shows the virus is present there as it is present in other parts of the world. and you can't say "well that shows some basis" because there are a number of questions about the way this current outbreak spread that point away from the illegal immigration connection as well.

there is no basis for it and some have a very hard time admitting that, and my takeaway is that pre existing stigma's against illegals is the cause for that.
10-17-2014 02:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #211
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 01:51 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:05 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 12:58 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Note the bolded part. You said it is racist to ask the question.

I was referring to the talking point of people specifically stating "illegals brought this disease over" not people asking the question of whether or not it is true.

But thats not what this thread was about. It was about asking the question, which is what we have all been discussing here.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

thread title: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?

it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

And numerous individuals have explained how it is a legitimate concern* and therefore not racist. From the you proceded to tell us all we were racist for asking if the two were related and slandering an entire demographic even though i have seen no slanderous statements made against central americans, illegal immigrants or children.

Ill ask again, please cite my slanderous statement.

*not supported by legitimate talking points

FIFY
10-17-2014 02:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #212
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 02:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  there is no basis for this at all. you quoted an incorrect link from an FNC columnist.

I quoted the link I did at that time because YOU said it was a fox talking point, so I looked up the Fox talking point you were referencing, because YOU didn't link it. I work in healthcare and unlike you, I don't take things at face value so I read the actual NIH study. The fact that they thought enough about it to do the study at all is telling to someone who deals with them regularly. Their job is health and safety, not politics.

Quote:there is no basis for it and some have a very hard time admitting that, and my takeaway is that pre existing stigma's against illegals is the cause for that.
Exactly as I said. You came into the conversation with that opinion, not only about the situation but about the responders. You have chosen not to be convinced in part by whom you have chosen to engage and how. You won't engage with me on the fact that being concerned about illegal immigration in regard to communicable diseases, INCLUDING d68 is legitimate,,, because that would show that it wasn't racist... and instead have only engaged with people who either over-state the reality or don't know enough about epidemiology to make you change your mind. Is it likely that this strain came from Latin America? No. Is it 'proof positive' that it didn't? Also No. SHOULD there be other clusters? Probably. MUST there be? No. If you believe it, there is reason to believe it. It IS possible. If you don't believe it, there is no proof it is.

The concern about communicable diseases, including enteroviruses crossing our borders illegally is legitimate and not racist.... whether or not they yet have.

(10-17-2014 02:03 PM)john01992 Wrote:  it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

Not really. You have the authority to say what you meant, but not how readers took it. It seems pretty clear to me that you came into the discussion with an unstated preconception (you admit this, I believe) and have challenged people to prove your preconception wrong... which is a virtually impossible barrier, especially when you seem to have a reason to NOT be proven wrong (because the response comes from people whom you believe (again, your preconception) to all be racists simply because they have a different political persuasion than you)

Preconceptions are at their heart, examples of bigotry. That doesn't mean you can't have them, but it does mean that you need to be aware of them if you are actually seeking 'serious discussion'... which is why I pointed yours out... and rather than 'adjust' to them (try and see things from another perspective) you have essentially doubled-down on them.

Just my opinion, but one that certainly seems easily supported by the facts.


Perfect example... the term 'talking point' doesn't refer to a fact... and the word 'legitimate' is a matter of perspective. If you don't think it is legitimate, then why did the NIH investigate it? Why was it brought up in conjunction with/on the heels of the transportation of a disease for which the person was accused of a crime for doing, but you refused to call it 'illegal'?
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 02:26 PM by Hambone10.)
10-17-2014 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #213
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 02:18 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 02:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  there is no basis for this at all. you quoted an incorrect link from an FNC columnist.

I quoted the link I did at that time because YOU said it was a fox talking point, so I looked up the Fox talking point you were referencing, because YOU didn't link it. I work in healthcare and unlike you, I don't take things at face value so I read the actual NIH study. The fact that they thought enough about it to do the study at all is telling to someone who deals with them regularly. Their job is health and safety, not politics.

Quote:there is no basis for it and some have a very hard time admitting that, and my takeaway is that pre existing stigma's against illegals is the cause for that.
Exactly as I said. You came into the conversation with that opinion, not only about the situation but about the responders. You have chosen not to be convinced in part by whom you have chosen to engage and how. You won't engage with me on the fact that being concerned about illegal immigration in regard to communicable diseases, INCLUDING d68 is legitimate,,, because that would show that it wasn't racist... and instead have only engaged with people who either over-state the reality or don't know enough about epidemiology to make you change your mind. Is it likely that this strain came from Latin America? No. Is it 'proof positive' that it didn't? Also No. SHOULD there be other clusters? Probably. MUST there be? No. If you believe it, there is reason to believe it. It IS possible. If you don't believe it, there is no proof it is.

The concern about communicable diseases, including enteroviruses crossing our borders illegally is legitimate and not racist.... whether or not they yet have.

(10-17-2014 02:03 PM)john01992 Wrote:  it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

Not really. You have the authority to say what you meant, but not how readers took it. It seems pretty clear to me that you came into the discussion with an unstated preconception (you admit this, I believe) and have challenged people to prove your preconception wrong... which is a virtually impossible barrier, especially when you seem to have a reason to NOT be proven wrong (because the response comes from people whom you believe (again, your preconception) to all be racists simply because they have a different political persuasion than you)

Preconceptions are at their heart, examples of bigotry. That doesn't mean you can't have them, but it does mean that you need to be aware of them if you are actually seeking 'serious discussion'... which is why I pointed yours out... and rather than 'adjust' to them (try and see things from another perspective) you have essentially doubled-down on them.

Just my opinion, but one that certainly seems easily supported by the facts.


Perfect example... the term 'talking point' doesn't refer to a fact... and the word 'legitimate' is a matter of perspective. If you don't think it is legitimate, then why did the NIH investigate it? Why was it brought up in conjunction with/on the heels of the transportation of a disease for which the person was accused of a crime for doing, but you refused to call it 'illegal'?

you denied that it was a major talking point, I only raised the FNC talking point because that shows the opinion is popular enough that someone thought it needed to be addressed.

there being no basis for it is not an opinion. it is a fact based on the information we have available. guess what, I read the study on VJ as well. 10 cases out of 3,300 patients. the text has only 3 references to D68 and it specifically states that they found it in "low amounts." the study wasn't about D68, they tested patients for HRVs.
10-17-2014 02:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #214
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
because the response comes from people whom you believe (again, your preconception) to all be racists simply because they have a different political persuasion than you)

just because you say so doesn't make it true. but that seems to be a reoccurring theme in this thread. the CDC's official position is that those kids pose "little risk" of spreading disease but you appear to think otherwise.
10-17-2014 02:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #215
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 02:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 02:18 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 02:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  there is no basis for this at all. you quoted an incorrect link from an FNC columnist.

I quoted the link I did at that time because YOU said it was a fox talking point, so I looked up the Fox talking point you were referencing, because YOU didn't link it. I work in healthcare and unlike you, I don't take things at face value so I read the actual NIH study. The fact that they thought enough about it to do the study at all is telling to someone who deals with them regularly. Their job is health and safety, not politics.

Quote:there is no basis for it and some have a very hard time admitting that, and my takeaway is that pre existing stigma's against illegals is the cause for that.
Exactly as I said. You came into the conversation with that opinion, not only about the situation but about the responders. You have chosen not to be convinced in part by whom you have chosen to engage and how. You won't engage with me on the fact that being concerned about illegal immigration in regard to communicable diseases, INCLUDING d68 is legitimate,,, because that would show that it wasn't racist... and instead have only engaged with people who either over-state the reality or don't know enough about epidemiology to make you change your mind. Is it likely that this strain came from Latin America? No. Is it 'proof positive' that it didn't? Also No. SHOULD there be other clusters? Probably. MUST there be? No. If you believe it, there is reason to believe it. It IS possible. If you don't believe it, there is no proof it is.

The concern about communicable diseases, including enteroviruses crossing our borders illegally is legitimate and not racist.... whether or not they yet have.

(10-17-2014 02:03 PM)john01992 Wrote:  it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

Not really. You have the authority to say what you meant, but not how readers took it. It seems pretty clear to me that you came into the discussion with an unstated preconception (you admit this, I believe) and have challenged people to prove your preconception wrong... which is a virtually impossible barrier, especially when you seem to have a reason to NOT be proven wrong (because the response comes from people whom you believe (again, your preconception) to all be racists simply because they have a different political persuasion than you)

Preconceptions are at their heart, examples of bigotry. That doesn't mean you can't have them, but it does mean that you need to be aware of them if you are actually seeking 'serious discussion'... which is why I pointed yours out... and rather than 'adjust' to them (try and see things from another perspective) you have essentially doubled-down on them.

Just my opinion, but one that certainly seems easily supported by the facts.


Perfect example... the term 'talking point' doesn't refer to a fact... and the word 'legitimate' is a matter of perspective. If you don't think it is legitimate, then why did the NIH investigate it? Why was it brought up in conjunction with/on the heels of the transportation of a disease for which the person was accused of a crime for doing, but you refused to call it 'illegal'?

you denied that it was a major talking point, I only raised the FNC talking point because that shows the opinion is popular enough that someone thought it needed to be addressed.

And contrary to your assertions, they didn't 'hype' it.

What difference does this make to the point? More of your circuitous arguing. YOU raised the FNC talking point and claim it is important... so I quoted it. THEN you dismissed it as a columnists opinion

So which is it? Is it something that Fox and the right obviously feels strongly about or is it some meaningless (and not particularly dramatic) opinion of a columnist? You can't have it both ways.

Quote:there being no basis for it is not an opinion. it is a fact based on the information we have available. guess what, I read the study on VJ as well. 10 cases out of 3,300 patients. the text has only 3 references to D68 and it specifically states that they found it in "low amounts." the study wasn't about D68, they tested patients for HRVs.

You are not in healthcare and know nothing about infectious disease. Consider that Ebola has only infected about 10,000 and killed about 5,000 people of a population numbering well into the numerous millions. It isn't the total number of cases that creates concern within the medical community. I'm not asking you to be more concerned than you are... I am TELLING you that your rationale for your lack of concern is not an informed one. There ARE informed reasons for not being concerned (mostly having to do with the R0 rate or method of transmission) but looking at sheer numbers is not it. If it were, the CDC wouldn't have been looking into Ebola either.

You're right that they looked for HRV's not specifically d68, but that is because there are numerous HRVs that are as or more infectious than d68 (like HFMD) or more dangerous (lead to things like meningitis)

You continually focus on one disease in one area... and ignore that we couldn't stop ANY disease from getting to ANY area because of a porous border. I'd ask you what you think the countries surrounding Liberia and Sierra Leone have done about THEIR borders... and they already weren't particularly 'inviting'.

(10-17-2014 02:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  because the response comes from people whom you believe (again, your preconception) to all be racists simply because they have a different political persuasion than you)

just because you say so doesn't make it true. but that seems to be a reoccurring theme in this thread. the CDC's official position is that those kids pose "little risk" of spreading disease but you appear to think otherwise.


Really? Show me where I think otherwise?

More to the point, what does the CDC's position have to do with your preconception about racism? I understand your excuse, but just as you know what you meant when you started the post, we know why we disagree with you on the issue. MIGHT a racist use something like this as an excuse? SUre... but that doesn't mean that ANY expression of concern about it is racist in nature.,.. and that is what you imply.

FTR, The whole reason we're talking about illegal immigrants is because the CDC is seeking ways to control the spread of infectious disease... and securing the area is essentially step one in any such protocol. This is yet another bastardization by you of the reality.

The ACTUAL risk of contracting Ebola in the US is 'virtually' nil, but the CDC has recommended some pretty extensive changes to 'how we do things' nonetheless. In other words, because of the nature of infectious diseases, 'little risk' doesn't mean 'not worthy of concern'. The actions of the CDC in regard to one single person with Ebola out of 350mm in our population prove this
10-17-2014 03:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 15,328
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 767
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #216
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 02:03 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:51 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:05 PM)john01992 Wrote:  I was referring to the talking point of people specifically stating "illegals brought this disease over" not people asking the question of whether or not it is true.

But thats not what this thread was about. It was about asking the question, which is what we have all been discussing here.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

thread title: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?

it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

And numerous individuals have explained how it is a legitimate concern* and therefore not racist. From the you proceded to tell us all we were racist for asking if the two were related and slandering an entire demographic even though i have seen no slanderous statements made against central americans, illegal immigrants or children.

Ill ask again, please cite my slanderous statement.

*not supported by legitimate talking points

FIFY

and you are the final verdict on what is legitimate and isn't? The concern about illegal immigrant children carrying respiratory illnesses including EV's was voiced in a Department of Health and Human Services memo cited earlier in this thread. Are you saying the DHHS isn't legitimate?

Despite what you consider legitimate or illegitimate, concerns over EV-D68 and or other illnesses coming from illegal immigrants is not inherently racist. You have still the entirety of this thread failed to produce one single shred of evidence suggesting that it is. About all you have managed to do is call the majority of posters here racists, personally accuse me of being a lair, and of slandering an entire demographic. Still waiting on you to quote my slanderous statement by the way.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 04:30 PM by 200yrs2late.)
10-17-2014 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMUDunk Online
Rootin' fer Dukes, bud
*

Posts: 29,499
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 1721
I Root For: Freedom
Location: Shmocation
Post: #217
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 04:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 02:03 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:51 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 01:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  But thats not what this thread was about. It was about asking the question, which is what we have all been discussing here.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

thread title: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?

it's pretty clear this thread is aimed at those who take this talking point as fact and not a call out on those who simply ask whether or not it is possible. and since I am the OP (last I checked unless the voices in my head say otherwise) I think I have the authority to say what the purpose of this thread was & was not intended to point to.

And numerous individuals have explained how it is a legitimate concern* and therefore not racist. From the you proceded to tell us all we were racist for asking if the two were related and slandering an entire demographic even though i have seen no slanderous statements made against central americans, illegal immigrants or children.

Ill ask again, please cite my slanderous statement.

*not supported by legitimate talking points

FIFY

and you are the final verdict on what is legitimate and isn't? The concern about illegal immigrant children carrying respiratory illnesses including EV's was voiced in a Department of Health and Human Services memo cited earlier in this thread. Are you saying the DHHS isn't legitimate?

Despite what you consider legitimate or illegitimate, concerns over EV-D68 and or other illnesses coming from illegal immigrants is not inherently racist. You have still the entirety of this thread failed to produce one single shred of evidence suggesting that it is. About all you have managed to do is call the majority of posters here racists, personally accuse me of being a lair, and of slandering an entire demographic. Still waiting on you to quote my slanderous statement by the way.

That's pretty much his par for this course. Jonny's SOP- make an erroneous statement not backed up by example, common sense or any kind of evidence. Refuse to provide any said supporting information. Dismiss out of hand evidence or opposing viewpoints as "illegitimate" cause, you know, he said so. Call anyone not in agreement a liar.

Create long-winded, circuitous posts that start at A. never get to B. and return to A. Call THAT, "evidence"- see canadian stuff 03-lmfao then pretend that anyone that can't see his idiotic "point" is (depending on his fave word of the day) either naive, uneducated, unintelligent or some other sophomoric "insult". Lather rinse repeat.

When that all fails, eventually, like all failures of leftist propaganda do, run away and hide, accuse anyone still asking for something, anything to back up his ridiculous "talking points" (he doesn't understand what that means either) as being a meany butt and finally taking his ball and going home.

It's the same thing over and over, I wouldn't expect anything more.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 05:21 PM by JMUDunk.)
10-17-2014 05:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
QuestionSocratic Offline
Banned

Posts: 8,276
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: Buffalo
Location:
Post: #218
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
Quote:Human society in general has a long standing history of blaming minorities, immigrants, etc. of causing diseases. Some back in the day argued that Jim Crow was necessary for disease control. I see this talking point which I personally think is disturbing how frequently people are using it as a modern day version of past racist attitudes.

And some folks, led by liberal progressives such as Margaret Sanger, believed eugenics was a valid reason to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit". Sanger's writings echoed ideas about inferiority and loose morals of particular races that were widespread in the contemporary United States. So wouldn't any award named in her honor be racist?

Annual Margaret Sanger Award 2014
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2014 05:38 PM by QuestionSocratic.)
10-17-2014 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #219
RE: Serious Discussion: Is blaming D-68 on illegal immigrants racist?
(10-17-2014 12:27 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(10-17-2014 10:38 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  
(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  no i'd say the slandering an entire demographic is an accurate statement. anyone who doesn't look at all the evidence and says there is a connection is engaging in slander. there simply is nothing of merit to that claim at this point in time.

The burden of proof lies with the accuser.

(10-16-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  LOL. if conservatives applied that to this scenario then this thread would never have been necessary.


Slander
1. (noun) the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

2. verb make false and damaging statements about (someone).

Again, this is a very simple request. Quote my slanderous statement.




Burden of Proof
1. the obligation to prove one's assertion.

Burden of Proof

You have repeated asserted that it is racist to ask the question of whether or not the influx of illegal immigrants is related to the outbreak of EV-D68. The burden of proof lies with you to prove that it is racist.

You have also accused me of slandering illegal immigrants. Again, the burden of proof lies with you. Simply cite my slanderous statement to prove your accusation, otherwise withdraw your accusation.

It's nearly impossible to have a serious discussion with someone when one person repeatedly uses words and concepts that they do not understand. In this case you fail to understand the concept of 'burden of proof' and the definition of slander. Come back when you wrap your head around those concepts.

by your own actions you have chosen to link D68 to them despite there being no evidence of that. that's slander

and while we are at it, why don't you look up the word liar.

http://floppingaces.net/2014/10/13/more-...n-imports/

Evidence. When you looked up the words slander and liar, you must have decided to use them. Or a subject like this is just too hard for you to understand. That's quite possible.
10-18-2014 10:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.