(03-17-2020 11:16 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  First, let me start by saying when I'm pointing out your condescension in this post, it's only to make you aware of it to explain the tone of my responses since you seem unaware. I can go either way with it. We can be civil, or we can do this.

(03-17-2020 09:07 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-17-2020 08:51 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-16-2020 02:23 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Never heard of an opinion piece?

That's sort of the point though Lad. Do you think we can't find people who have worked for numerous Democrats critical of Bernie or Biden? Do you think that makes their opinion more meaningful. Do you think it makes one opinion more valid and someone else's less so? Is there something in there you think others would find enlightening, or is it just someone else saying the same things others have?

I think the obvious answer to all of those comments is 'no', so what is the point? If you're trying to simply say, here's an opinion you agree with... well... thanks

Well, Ham, when the initial point was that the article didn't have merit because of the background of the publication, then yeah, the background of the author certainly is relevant.

Did you miss that very obvious connection to the response?

This is you being a condescending prick again.

Did YOU miss the very obvious point that someone's political affiliation doesn't make them 'correct'? (that's me being condescending in response)

Now, to discuss it... I never said it had no relevance... did I. You do this sort of straw man arguing a lot. I merely suggested that nobody from either party is without detractors from within their own party. What matters to informed people not defined by their political ideology like those you are speaking to is the veracity/logic of someone's opinions... not their affiliation. I asked you if he shared any new information that would make his opinions more valid/logical. You ignored every single question I asked and instead implied I said something I didn't (that his background was irrelevant) and argued with that.

Quote:The summary of this back-and-forth is: Owl#s responded "So, a leftwing rag hates Trump. No news there." so I pointed out the author isn't leftwing. If someone/an organizations political bent doesn't matter to the meaning/weight of their articles, then why did Owl#s start off pointing out The Atlantic's political bent?

That's one way to look at it. Another is that leftwing rags (and rightwing rags) LOVE to find people who disagree with their own party... just as I suggested by my questions. In this case, the Atlantic found someone who leans right who doesn't like Trump. That's not new or news... NeverTrumpers is a meme. The question is, just as I asked... what about what he SAID do you find new/interesting/poignant?

Quote:And very regularly the experience/position/organization a person identifies with does matter with respect to how meaningful their opinion is. Are you actually trying to argue that it doesn't? Or do you just want to try and pick a meaningless fight?

More meaningless condescension.

Now to actually discuss it... your 'experience/position/organization' comment is so broad that it is difficult to agree or disagree with it. The best response I can give is, 'it depends'.

Any moron can identify with a political organization, so that has little meaning to me. The fact that many similarly prominent democrats disagree with Biden and Bernie demonstrates that opinions, even by people who share an organization... often even experience or position can vary. I don't put a lot of stock in identity politics. I don't assume that because someone is a Republican and so am I, that I'm going to agree with them.

So let's look at the substance that stood out to me... especially in light of our recent conversations... editing merely for brevity

It took until the second half of Trump’s first term, but the crisis has arrived in the form of the coronavirus pandemic, and it’s hard to name a president who has been as overwhelmed by a crisis as the coronavirus has overwhelmed Donald Trump.

Dog Whistle phrase for the left
Quote:
To be sure, the president isn’t responsible for either the coronavirus or the disease it causes, COVID-19, and he couldn’t have stopped it from hitting our shores even if he had done everything right. Nor is it the case that the president hasn’t done anything right; in fact, his decision to implement a travel ban on China was prudent. And any narrative that attempts to pin all of the blame on Trump for the coronavirus is simply unfair. The temptation among the president’s critics to use the pandemic to get back at Trump for every bad thing he’s done should be resisted, and schadenfreude is never a good look.
That said, the president and his administration are responsible for grave, costly errors, most especially the epic manufacturing failures in diagnostic testing, the decision to test too few people, the delay in expanding testing to labs outside the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and problems in the supply chain. These mistakes have left us blind and badly behind the curve, and, for a few crucial weeks, they created a false sense of security.

I couldn't disagree with this conclusion more and have expressed why. HE says it created a false sense of security to NOT have testing. As I have discussed ad nauseum, for the general population, I couldn't disagree more. False negatives are the risk here. If you're risk averse as you claim to be... you can either wait on facts, or you can follow the healthcare standard of care in the absence of those facts.

So you have a Republican whose expertise seems to be as a speechwriter... and according to Wiki, a leading conservative critic of Trump... and the primary thing he's really faulting Trump for here is something he doesn't seem to have much experience with and I completely disagree with?

Let me be clear...
I don't think Trump did anything to delay the testing, nor do I think he intentionally did what I would have suggested in my professional capacity. I believe that policies and procedures put in place over decades lead to an 'unpopular to the layman', but absolutely clinically 'best practice' outcome. I can't blame Trump for the correct outcome, but I also won't give him credit for something I honestly can't imagine he would do on his own.

Yep - I meant for the lines to be taken that way, as I was responding in kind.