Trump wasn't the only one downplaying Coronavirus

Odd though, MSM and progressive commentators don't seem to care. How aware were you of what this video highlights?

 

I was aware of some of that, particularly Pelosi pushing tourism in Chinatown San Francisco and DeBlasio pushing for tourism in NYC, both late in the game.

Europe has gone civet cat crazy.

 

Oh stop it!!! Liberals want to believe ONLY Trump was downplaying things back in the beginning. TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP. HATE HATE HATE. Bad bad bad.

More revisionist history from Leftists who are too out of touch with realty or blinded by TDS. It’s quite sad. Then again. How would they know if they only watch the MSM? It’s not like they have any responsibility to report reality to us....like revealing their own hypocrisy while claiming Trump didn do nuttin.

 

While I think it is undeniable that there are plenty of politicians from different political stripe who will end up regretting some of their early reactions to the Coronavirus and the kind of activities they were promoting, and even though the video in the OP here is fine to make that point, there is a difference that shouldn't be overlooked either. Even when the evidence in favor of social distancing became overwhelming, and when the virus had already begun spreading in large numbers in the US, it was predominately the right wing mouthpieces including their supporters here on PF that were going about criticizing even the modest measures being taken to promote social distancing. The arguments that the spread of the virus was being 'sensationalized', the repeated (and continuing) attempts to discount the likely toll from the virus and liken it to the flu, the argument about the cure costing more than the ailment in light of the economic costs of the measures taken, were the kind of arguments which continued to be pushed most clearly and vehemently by the uber partisans from one side of the aisle. Often, even long after Trump had himself changed his tune!

 

Those economic costs are very much real, especially considering the suspension of the economy is not a US-only experience, but the entire world economy has been de-facto suspended. The reason these concerns(aka: "arguments") continue to be had, is that this is the reality of the situation, regardless of the presidency.

In fact, draconian methods continue to increase as deemed "necessary" as we have now jailed Americans. The Framers would be appalled at the circumstances. If in fact the time comes where opposition or concern over these methods is censored, or punished we would have become a new China and a new Soviet Union.

And at that point, those who wish for the Republic or even Democracy will note that the opportunity for it was lost long ago. It's true that I wanted to create an American Empire, but I wanted to do so on consensual majority and thus on a unity policy. Force on the population is not a long term solution, nor is it suitable in the least to either the Republic or Democratic forms.

 

First, let me be clear: my message wasn't directed at you, as to your credit, you admitted early enough to having discounted the threat from the new Coronavirus. But let me address your points as follows:

Without paying the costs you are referring to, not just the US, but the entire world economy would take a much stronger hit. This isn't even about 'lives' versus 'costs'. The economic costs would be unavoidable regardless of what any government does if tens of millions of people are falling ill and millions are dying. If that were to happen (and it would, without the modest measures now in place), 'social distancing' (and a lot of other things much worse for society and the economy) would be done by people on their own.

You would become much worse than you imagine if these measures weren't taken. In fact, the measures taken in the US (like the measures taken in Iran) are comparatively light and should be strengthened.

You lost me there! "American Empire"? For me, the best thing the US could do for itself and for the rest of the world, is to give up its quest for "empire" and to go back and find its best principles (and it has some good principles buried under a lot of really terrible ones) and do what it can to be a model that everyone would like to emulate on their own. To be that 'shining city on the hill', not by virtue of its propaganda prowess, but the reality of things.

And, in the meantime, to let others experience with other models, and not try to predetermine the results from those other models by waging economic, political and other forms of warfare against them, because ultimately whatever works best, works best and everyone can learn from it and adopt as well. Politicizing all the answers produces wrong answers, even if the 'wrong' answers may even appear to be the 'right' ones by default given the enormous influence and ability of the US to ruin any other form of experiment anywhere else.

 

Let me take the time to just address the form of the American Empire. An Empire is a unified State, as Persia once was to give you an at home example for you. I didn't reference to military strength. Secondly, American military missions disgustingly have not been for the interest of the country or our common defense, but for oil contractors. I'm disgusted by our use of the military, as is most of the country. It's why Donald Trump was elected to begin with. And for the most part, he's done a decent job. Though he aligned in many ways with neoconservatism.

Other than the neoconservative war mongering for oil and contractors, it's actually that "shining beacon" that began the warmongering days. The belief that we could 'export' our 'way of life'(supposedly superior) by way of military fiat. That's the HRC belief of government.

I reject this view for the most part. If Russia for example wants Crimea, it's not the interest of the Nation to be even remotely concerned. Does Crimea have history of being a US land or US territory? No? Then we have no legitimacy to being concerned about it.

Likewise, Ukraine is basically a de-facto split country and is going to split apart eventually. One side wants to join the European Union, the other wants to reunify with "mother Russia". Anyone still hoping for a unified Ukrainian state would be deluded.

Empire, in my view is to secure our supremacy in the Western Hemisphere. We have wasted far too much blood and treasure I promise you in your part of the world. As long as you don't proliferate weapons of mass destruction, I could care less.

The second element, is that a nation state doesn't pose a militaristic threat to the US State. Basically, the US has adopted the British Policy of containment. And if we were not deluded in the war for contractors, and the use of muhajeeden fighters, our containment would have been far simpler and more effective.

If a country does not pose a threat, either in its statements(which means no more 'death to America') or in its geopolitical actions, then I don't care at all. We will secure the well being of our allies such as Japan, etc. But what we won't do, is attempt to tilt the balance of power in every situation in the world.

Then as far as our domestic civil rights situation, I don't want to live in a country where said rights are nonexistent. So we must, as long as the first amendment exists keep giving our due concerns and warnings on not setting America on a course where she loses her soul to keep bleeding.

 

I like to have this discussion with you, but some other time. While I agree with your 'general' non-interventionist posture, I disagree with you on a lot of other things and find some of the 'exceptions' you mention big enough for any propaganda outfit tied with any seriously funded special interest group to be able to drive a truck through it.

p.s.
"Persia" was never the correct name of IRAN. It was the name used for Iran in the West. Persia is to Iran, somewhat like what England is to the UK, except IRAN has always been ruled in the name of more than one of its regions. Even if that region was the seat of Iran's first of many empires.

 

Trump Was Right: Coronavirus Death Rate Much Lower Than Previous Estimates, Study Says.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/us/politics/coronavirus-conservative-media.html

 

Imo those rw mouth pieces dont rrepresent that many right wing people .
Msm spins it so as use big blankets .