It's Trump's fault, not China. I mean how sick are these Dems? Unreal....The Dems would love a United States of China here it seems. They sure hate America.

Quote:Senator Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) said Tuesday that the blame for coronavirus “is not because of anything that China did” and instead rests squarely with President Trump.

Speaking to CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Murphy laid out the case that Trump “didn’t take this virus seriously” and that he “viewed this as a hoax” — in an apparent nod to a Democratic attack ad that misrepresents Trump’s “hoax” comments.
.......
China’s failures to halt the spread of the virus from its epicenter in Wuhan are well documented, with Chinese President Xi Jinping only publicly commenting on the virus six days after his officials privately warned local leaders that they “must prepare for and respond to a pandemic.”

Murphy went on to criticize Trump’s Tuesday decision to halt funding to the World Health Organization, telling Cooper that “pulling money out of the WHO has nothing to do with keeping America safe, it’s all about the president’s attempt to find scapegoats.” He pointed to positive public comments the president made about China in the buildup to the pandemic, saying “there was no bigger cheerleader for China and their response to coronavirus than President Donald J. Trump.” On March 27, Trump tweeted to say he was “working closely together” with Xi on stopping the virus, after defending his calling the outbreak the “Chinese virus” and criticizing China for attempting to claim coronavirus originated in the U.S.

76
While Vice President Mike Pence claimed earlier this month that Trump never “belittled the threat of the coronavirus,” the administration’s response, while praised at points by governors, has also drawn criticism from some Democrats and some questions from Republicans. Senator Susan Collins said Tuesday that Trump’s coronavirus response has been “very uneven.”

“Let’s be honest, there is effectively no response to coronavirus from the administration. All the president does is hold press conferences, everything that has been done to effectively control this virus has been done by governors,” Murphy argued. “ . . . The president talks in these press conferences, but all the of the response has been left to governors. And so if the president had had a more effective national plan from the beginning, we would be in a very different position than we are today.”

Link

If we truly knew how many of our elected officials were getting paid under the table to shill for China, we would probably be shocked. It has become obvious that those in charge of WHO are getting something in return for their complicity. Defunding that sham organization is one of the better things Trump has done.

Some would be shocked. Most wouldn’t care or pay attention, the View is coming on!

Others of us would simply say “Yea, same as it ever was”. Their aim and view is 100 years down the road, this is all by design. The dots are all there for connecting.

We’ll be island hopping again by 2030. Harken back to why the Japs took the first shot, now look for the similarities and motivations.

We best tighten up and get off the couch. We’re in very poor shape nationally, save a scant 1 or 2%.

We are in it because of China, failure of the past decade to ready ourselves, and getting rid of the PREDICT program back in September.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Another idiot lib. Color me shocked.

(04-16-2020 07:39 AM)fsquid Wrote:  We are in it because of China, failure of the past decade to ready ourselves,

Longer than the past decade. We just aren't set up systemically to deal with anything more than a minor, localized crisis. Locals respond, states direct, and federales support simply can't put boots on the ground at the start, so we always start slowly.

Quote:and getting rid of the PREDICT program back in September.

I'm curious about this one. How so?

isn’t he the same idiot that was sticking up for Iran and undermining the president by meeting with their officials during the flare up a few months ago, then it turns out he’s a regular at the NIAC too?

(04-16-2020 01:10 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  It's Trump's fault, not China. I mean how sick are these Dems? Unreal....The Dems would love a United States of China here it seems. They sure hate America.

Quote:Senator Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) said Tuesday that the blame for coronavirus “is not because of anything that China did” and instead rests squarely with President Trump.

Speaking to CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Murphy laid out the case that Trump “didn’t take this virus seriously” and that he “viewed this as a hoax” — in an apparent nod to a Democratic attack ad that misrepresents Trump’s “hoax” comments.
.......
China’s failures to halt the spread of the virus from its epicenter in Wuhan are well documented, with Chinese President Xi Jinping only publicly commenting on the virus six days after his officials privately warned local leaders that they “must prepare for and respond to a pandemic.”

Murphy went on to criticize Trump’s Tuesday decision to halt funding to the World Health Organization, telling Cooper that “pulling money out of the WHO has nothing to do with keeping America safe, it’s all about the president’s attempt to find scapegoats.” He pointed to positive public comments the president made about China in the buildup to the pandemic, saying “there was no bigger cheerleader for China and their response to coronavirus than President Donald J. Trump.” On March 27, Trump tweeted to say he was “working closely together” with Xi on stopping the virus, after defending his calling the outbreak the “Chinese virus” and criticizing China for attempting to claim coronavirus originated in the U.S.

76
While Vice President Mike Pence claimed earlier this month that Trump never “belittled the threat of the coronavirus,” the administration’s response, while praised at points by governors, has also drawn criticism from some Democrats and some questions from Republicans. Senator Susan Collins said Tuesday that Trump’s coronavirus response has been “very uneven.”

“Let’s be honest, there is effectively no response to coronavirus from the administration. All the president does is hold press conferences, everything that has been done to effectively control this virus has been done by governors,” Murphy argued. “ . . . The president talks in these press conferences, but all the of the response has been left to governors. And so if the president had had a more effective national plan from the beginning, we would be in a very different position than we are today.”

Link

What a fvcking idiot. Turds like this partisan hack hate our MOB more than they hate China.

(04-16-2020 07:39 AM)fsquid Wrote:  We are in it because of China, failure of the past decade to ready ourselves, and getting rid of the PREDICT program back in September.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So, exactly how was the PREDICT program supposed to predict that chinese incompetence would release this virus? And, if they could predict it, why the hell didnt they? Its not a great prediction program if they didnt see this coming 3 months out.

I really hate the Dems. I have no idea where I'm moving politically going forward, but these corrupt idiots aren't receiving my vote.

Well BJ, just knowing how corrupt and vile these Demoncraps are tells me you're on the right path. Too bad the rest of the national Democrats don't see past their nose.

(04-16-2020 09:07 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-16-2020 07:39 AM)fsquid Wrote:  We are in it because of China, failure of the past decade to ready ourselves, and getting rid of the PREDICT program back in September.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So, exactly how was the PREDICT program supposed to predict that chinese incompetence would release this virus? And, if they could predict it, why the hell didnt they? Its not a great prediction program if they didnt see this coming 3 months out.

The program had scientists in that lab according to reports

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Who cares what anybody from Connecticut says - they are a reststop between Boston and NYC......... Other than Fairfield County which is really just a suburb of NYC.

(04-16-2020 09:15 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I really hate the Dems. I have no idea where I'm moving politically going forward, but these corrupt idiots aren't receiving my vote.

There was a time when I voted more on the candidate than their gang affiliation..but..I have to say there is not a single one today I would vote for. Sad that the lines now have been drawn so rigidly by both gangs. There is very little bipartisanship now in politics.

(04-16-2020 02:15 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  Well BJ, just knowing how corrupt and vile these Demoncraps are tells me you're on the right path. Too bad the rest of the national Democrats don't see past their nose.

Yeah, here's the problem I think they are corrupt and evil but the ideas they pretend to stand for I'm either in partial agreement or agreement with. I think they GOP is actually a far more fair and democratically run party but I'm fundamentally disgusted with almost every policy position of the entire party. Now I do see some switching on the right, like Hawley's stimulus plan towards maybe some social democratic Scandinavian ideas, but if that whole switch happened that would be for me a personal nightmare. A party who's fiscal ideology I agree with but social ideology I find morally repugnant and the other who's fiscal ideology I find morally repugnant but who I generally agree with on social ideology. Right now both parties fiscally are the party of corporate interests, but the GOP seems to be shifting more towards peoples interests and the Dems even harder toward corporate interests.

(04-17-2020 09:12 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  A party who's fiscal ideology I agree with but social ideology I find morally repugnant and the other who's fiscal ideology I find morally repugnant but who I generally agree with on social ideology.

That's where I am right now. Two considerations. One, fiscal policy is far more important to me because I am not gay or a drug user or an illegal alien, so the social policies are more conceptual than real to me. But two, on the other hand, the R's really haven't done a very good job of advancing those fiscal policies that they claim to support.

I suppose I could be best described as a Main Street, strong economic growth, free-market capitalism with a safety net, strong defense, non-interventionist foreign policy, socially liberal pragmatic, more libertarian than anything else. Not the extreme anarchist libertarian, more of a pragmatic one, kind of a Milton Friedman classical liberal. There used to be a lot of those among the R's, and even a few D's that came close, but I look at Washington, and aside from a very few, like Rand, there's nobody even close to that. Amash has been, but I don't understand his last year or so.

Policy positions I support.
-People who work should live better than people who don't work.
--Bismarck universal private health care and a universal basic income (UBI) based on the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund, paid for by a national consumption tax (the only way that the numbers work).
--Reform unemployment into workfare with assignment to jobs doing infrastructure work and other things that benefit society. Incorporate German kurzarbeit to prevent or minimize worker layoffs during and economic downturn.
--Tiered minimum wage with reductions for those under 21 or lacking experience. With those changes, some sort of indexing would be reasonable. With the UBI and Bismarck, today's minimum wage would be a "living wage."
--Legalize marijuana and tax it, and decriminalize other drugs.
--Balance the federal budget and keep it balanced.
-Never fight a war that you don't intend to win.
--Spend more on combat and combat support functions of the military, but overall reduce defense spending by reducing or eliminating overhead and waste.
--Get out of the Middle East ASAP and don't ever get into another "limited" war. Let the world know that if you piss us off, we are coming at you with everything we have, and our rules of engagement will be gloves off.
-Treat your friends better than you treat your enemies.
--I would bring UK into NAFTA/USMCA as soon as possible. This could be a huge boon for UK, because they could become the waypoint between the EU and the USA, and in particular a huge boon for Irealand and NI, becuase they could become the interface between the EU and UK. Once you had UK, you would have two of the biggest Commonwealth economies, UK and Canada, and look to expand to the entire Commonwealth. The other idea that really interests me is that there has been some talk of a combined Commonwealth military force. That would be no worse than the 4th strongest military in the world, and probably the #2 navy. That is a force to which we could pass some of our current "world policeman" roles. Kind of a reverse of the Bretton Woods deal--we give you free access to our markets, and in return we get the same to yours and you pick up some of our global security duties. UK could help a lot in Europe, and India could be a match for China in the IO for starters, and India could replace China as our low-cost source for cheap consumer goods.
--If we got some assistance with our world-wide security chores, we could focus more on domestic defense--things like cybersecurity and terrorism. We could also work toward better relations with Latin America. I could see economic development there as a major prevention against illegal immigration and illegal drugs. I would reopen relations with Cuba; that's one (of the very few) issues where I agreed with Obama.

That got longer than I meant it to be. But that's pretty much where I am. I don't see either major party going there.

Quote:Right now both parties fiscally are the party of corporate interests, but the GOP seems to be shifting more towards peoples interests and the Dems even harder toward corporate interests.

That's the way it is always going to be as long as government is so heavily involved in picking winners and losers. The only way to get money out of politics is to get politics out of money--or, more particularly, out of the business of deciding who gets what money.

The really huge growth of government came under FDR. Think back, for many of his cabinet positions and czars, he picked leaders of US industry. That's not a coincidence. Those guys had the power, and they stacked the deck in favor of corporate America.

(04-17-2020 11:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-17-2020 09:12 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  A party who's fiscal ideology I agree with but social ideology I find morally repugnant and the other who's fiscal ideology I find morally repugnant but who I generally agree with on social ideology.

That's where I am right now. Two considerations. One, fiscal policy is far more important to me because I am not gay or a drug user or an illegal alien, so the social policies are more conceptual than real to me. But two, on the other hand, the R's really haven't done a very good job of advancing those fiscal policies that they claim to support.

I suppose I could be best described as a Main Street, strong economic growth, free-market capitalism with a safety net, strong defense, non-interventionist foreign policy, socially liberal pragmatic, more libertarian than anything else. Not the extreme anarchist libertarian, more of a pragmatic one, kind of a Milton Friedman classical liberal. There used to be a lot of those among the R's, and even a few D's that came close, but I look at Washington, and aside from a very few, like Rand, there's nobody even close to that. Amash has been, but I don't understand his last year or so.

Policy positions I support.
-People who work should live better than people who don't work.
--Bismarck universal private health care and a universal basic income (UBI) based on the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund, paid for by a national consumption tax (the only way that the numbers work).
--Reform unemployment into workfare with assignment to jobs doing infrastructure work and other things that benefit society. Incorporate German kurzarbeit to prevent or minimize worker layoffs during and economic downturn.
--Tiered minimum wage with reductions for those under 21 or lacking experience. With those changes, some sort of indexing would be reasonable. With the UBI and Bismarck, today's minimum wage would be a "living wage."
--Legalize marijuana and tax it, and decriminalize other drugs.
--Balance the federal budget and keep it balanced.
-Never fight a war that you don't intend to win.
--Spend more on combat and combat support functions of the military, but overall reduce defense spending by reducing or eliminating overhead and waste.
--Get out of the Middle East ASAP and don't ever get into another "limited" war. Let the world know that if you piss us off, we are coming at you with everything we have, and our rules of engagement will be gloves off.
-Treat your friends better than you treat your enemies.
--I would bring UK into NAFTA/USMCA as soon as possible. This could be a huge boon for UK, because they could become the waypoint between the EU and the USA, and in particular a huge boon for Irealand and NI, becuase they could become the interface between the EU and UK. Once you had UK, you would have two of the biggest Commonwealth economies, UK and Canada, and look to expand to the entire Commonwealth. The other idea that really interests me is that there has been some talk of a combined Commonwealth military force. That would be no worse than the 4th strongest military in the world, and probably the #2 navy. That is a force to which we could pass some of our current "world policeman" roles. Kind of a reverse of the Bretton Woods deal--we give you free access to our markets, and in return we get the same to yours and you pick up some of our global security duties. UK could help a lot in Europe, and India could be a match for China in the IO for starters, and India could replace China as our low-cost source for cheap consumer goods.
--If we got some assistance with our world-wide security chores, we could focus more on domestic defense--things like cybersecurity and terrorism. We could also work toward better relations with Latin America. I could see economic development there as a major prevention against illegal immigration and illegal drugs. I would reopen relations with Cuba; that's one (of the very few) issues where I agreed with Obama.

That got longer than I meant it to be. But that's pretty much where I am. I don't see either major party going there.

Quote:Right now both parties fiscally are the party of corporate interests, but the GOP seems to be shifting more towards peoples interests and the Dems even harder toward corporate interests.

That's the way it is always going to be as long as government is so heavily involved in picking winners and losers. The only way to get money out of politics is to get politics out of money--or, more particularly, out of the business of deciding who gets what money.

The really huge growth of government came under FDR. Think back, for many of his cabinet positions and czars, he picked leaders of US industry. That's not a coincidence. Those guys had the power, and they stacked the deck in favor of corporate America.

Despite us having very different classifications for our ideology I have very few quibbles with what you want from a policy perspective (and any are so minor I'd hardly bother arguing about them), and since I am a straight white man if the parties actually did break in a way where it was voting my fiscal issues vs social I'd pick fiscal and just feel bad about it.

My major social issues are always going to relate to my girlfriend, who is a native born Nigerian. Trump's travel ban to Nigeria is a big issue for me right now. We are seriously having to consider if he gets re-elected and we end up getting married during his second term will we have to fly there for a second wedding ceremony? I simply do not understand the ban with them in any way. You are talking about a country that is majority christian and puts as high a value on education as any in the world. Every member of her family that are here are either Doctor's, NP's, PA's, and a few were Lawyers and decided to switch and become doctors. You are talking about a group of people that make me question my work ethic every single day and this ban makes me angry.

Dems love them some China

With him and Blumenthal, we easily have the worst Senator duo in America. Yes, worse than both CA and NY.

Seems like Murphy earned the same B.S. in Cuckology that his mentor, Schiff earned.