Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#38,103
#38,103
DinkinFlicka said:
I don't see any correlation between left and right here. You're kind of pulling that out of your ass. More and more people are being raised outside of the cookie cutter Atomic family template from 70 years ago. I'm accused of being against the grain and I was raised in a more stable home than most people. If you can give any tangible example of left leaning philosophies I possess then I'm happy to accept or refute them. Like I said you're probably just conjuring it in your own asshoIe because you just don't like me and I don't thing Trump is the second coming of Christ.

Everyone deserves a defense. To assume that defense attorneys only represent the scum of the earth is incredibly judgmental and demonstrably false. He's exposed dirty cops and poor police work as well as fraudulent bureaucratic skulduggery. It's a shame he isn't more proud of his past work because I think he should be. He was really great and has a fantastic reputation in West TN. I personally found it more honorable than the work he's doing now as a DA.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest, i have no problem with you as a person and never have. I do think your persona is a bit exaggerated, but that's a message board poster for you. I think you, like most liberals, come from an emotional and "life isn't fair" standpoint instead of a logical or rational way of thinking.

Also, i could care less what you or anyone here thinks of Trump for the most part. I didn't vote for him (or Hillary obviously), and i think he can be petty, selfish, narcissistic and simple minded. However, i do see what most do with how the ones who hate him on this board, and the MSM in general will blame and exaggerate and try so hard to work against him to the point of their own insanity, again emotionally driven and not logical. Trump has a lot of flaws and has done some good things and done some pretty stupid things, just like most any other President.

The issue i have with liberals/Democrats is they simply try to portray EVERYONE who disagrees with their positions as some kind of evil person,
Against abortion? you want women to die!
For Voter IDs? you want black people to be in chains!
Against illegal immigration? you want kids to starve and be shot in their own countries!

it's ridiculous, because the empaths and emotionally "life isnt fair" side doesnt understand that most conservatives/libertarians agree on helping actually fixing issues, it's just they disagree on doing the same insane things we have tried that don't work.

Why do you find your Dad's work as a defense attorney more "honorable" than as a D.A.? I agree that exposing dirty cops or actually helping someone innocent is great, but again he actively worked to help guilty felons and those who rape, hurt, and steal from people free...THAT is not honorable, imagine helping a child rapist get out of jail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: allvol123
#38,105
#38,105
Rickyvol77 said:
I don't think it's petty to say taking money from drug dealers and rapists to set them free is disgusting, just because it's a "corner stone" of our legal system, doesn't make it any more noble. I am glad your stepdad "stepped up" for you, but again most liberal and left-leaning people tend to have come from certain life experiences and it shows. I am not necessarily being critical, just making clear observations. People who call themselves "rebels" or "free thinkers" and think they are edgy, because they hated their parents (or step parents). You see this in their educational values, work ethic values, religious values, and political views.
Click to expand...

Christ liberal or conservative (think about the time he lived in before answering)?
Gandhi liberal or conservative?
Hitler liberal or conservative?
Stalin liberal or conservative?
I tend to vote R the majority of the time and was just curious about your thoughts on the above questions. There is no right or wrong answer just your personal opinion. Thanks.
 
#38,106
#38,106
Stew Cook said:
You would start complaining that Trump is being unfairly picked on, if I told you the obvious answer. The second involves someone who just reaffirmed the President's assertion. The third is just ignoring the problem and hoping the authoritarian leaders don't interfere with the people's remedy.
Click to expand...


So nada ? No way ? It’s not possible ? It’s not legal ? The constitution won’t allow it ? Nancy Pelosi will impeach him ?
 
#38,109
#38,109
volfanjustin said:
So the same people who begged him to take control of their state are now bitching when he says he will take control? And it was just a statement? He didn't actually DO anything?
Besides, some of these worthless Governors (Bill Lee) need someone to tell them what to do because they are weak and have no ability to make an actual decision.
Click to expand...
this is what makes me confused. I saw the reporters start to get outraged, remembered them complaining that he isnt shutting down the whole country on an EO and was like
giphy - 2020-03-16T085300.042.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#38,113
#38,113
evillawyer said:
So the argument appears to be "Everyman for himself. But if I give you anything, you're my b**ch." Isn't that somewhere in the Constitution?

Click to expand...


We are living in some strange reality where the right wing has elected a business bankrupting, pornstar banging, anti-states rights POTUS, and seem to shrug it off, because, you know, it's all harmless anyway.

I swear, if it had been a Dem president, and he had said gun ownership should be outlawed, the right would laugh in the face of any left winger who said it doesn't matter, the second amendment is clear and he can't do it anyway. Not only would we have outrage, we would have outrage with wings from every politician, right wing media outlet, and partisan hack on this board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol and Purple Tiger
#38,114
#38,114
April 14, 2020
Corona virus, risk theory and the Black Swan
By Ron Aledo

Read more: Corona virus, risk theory and the Black Swan
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

From the perspective of Risk Theory doctrine, most of the first world (Western European Countries, the US, Canada, Japan) was ready for a flu pandemic. The issue is that the Pandemic they were ready for was modeled on recent experiences of the last 20 years: SAARS, ebola in Africa, swine flu, and bird flu.

In intelligence analysis, the Military Decision-Making Process (MDMP) and general Risk theory and gaming, we use the foundation of the most likely threat/enemy course of action/risk and the most dangerous threat/enemy course of action/ risk.

What no country in the world imagined was the size, geographic reach, and transmission/ mortality rates of this corona virus pandemic. These pandemic approaches very much what in the theoretical risk gaming is the most dangerous threat/risk and is very far away from the most likely one.

One of the most important factors in risk management gaming and preparedness is achieving the critical balance point between both the most likely one and the most dangerous one, keeping in mind the resources, budget, and human capabilities available for preventive planning. Achieving that critical balance point is the key element that might decide victory or disaster, catastrophe or success.

In many cases, the most dangerous threat/risk is also what the great mathematician, philosopher and economist Nassim Nicholas Taleb described as the Black Swan: what no one expected, and no one knows how to react to because there is no prior model to work. Additionally, the ripple effects in domino chain are beyond calculation, prior models, and risk planning.

That is why no major country in the world was ready for this pandemic: not Canada, not Spain, not Italy, not the USA, not UK, not Germany) Also, as all data coming out of the Communist Party of China is unreliable, we can also consider that China was not ready. That is the reason why powerful rich countries like Germany or the United Kingdom are fighting for ventilators and masks. That is the same reason why all big powerful countries don’t have enough ready to go hospital rooms and ICUs units, not to mention simple humble gloves nor masks. That is the reason why all major countries’ health systems were not ready. Those health systems in Spain, or Italy or France, were not ready for the most dangerous (but highly unlikely) Black Swan risk scenario.

In the case of the U.S. we were prepared kind of well for the most likely scenarios. The US Government was ready for bioterrorism and produced good stockpiles of botulism antitoxin and vaccines for anthrax and smallpox. Also, we were ready for other health emergencies as depicted on the very recent November 25, 2019 plan ¨Advancing the Global Health Security Agenda: Results and Impacts of U.S. Government Investments¨ released by the White House. Again, the issue was that this plan was based on the assumption of the most likely risk of an influenza kind of virus and not a SARS-type of virus like the COVID-19.

The risk gaming models used to prepare for a pandemic did not correspond to the current crisis, as the 2009 H1N1, or swine flu, is an influenza virus (something for which a vaccine can be done a lot easier/faster), and the Ebola virus is far less transmissible than COVID-19.

The general set of assumptions used for the planning of a pandemic response assumed the wrong strategic level model. In addition to that, the misinformation from the China did not help prepare the U.S. Even the very respected Dr. Anthony Fauci said on January 21st that while we should take the coronavirus seriously, the virus was not ¨a major threat to the people of the United States, and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.¨

The bottom-line is that the critical balance point between the most likely and the most dangerous threat was very much off target on the side of the most likely. That is a common issue in intelligence analysis, military planning, and even in corporative business models. It is very common and a flaw in general strategic level planning:

---You prepare for a small fire in your kitchen: not a meteorite falling from sky and destroying your kitchen.

---If you are a mailman, you prepare for a big dog: not for a lion that escaped the zoo.

---If city policeman, you prepare for increased gang violence: not for armed revolution/insurgency directed by Cuban intelligence operatives.

---If a medium size city hospital, you prepare for mass casualties from a large bus or train accident: not for a world pandemic with high mortality rate and transmission rates.

---If you are running to be the mayor of a large city, you campaign on reducing crime and unemployment: not in increasing the number of ventilators stashed in warehouses with no immediate use.

The lessons learned from this pandemic will be applied from now on into the risk management, security and crisis response planning for decades to come. Not only this extraordinary situation will change many aspects of the international economy, the world supply chain, and even of the geopolitical order (this might be the end of the open borders policies and of ideological globalism), but for sure it will change how governments and corporations will look into preparedness and risk reduction.

Ron Aledo is a former CIA and DIA senior intelligence analyst (Ctr), Joint Staff Intelligence and Operations officer, Intelligence Advisor to the Afghan Police in Kabul, and Director DHS Policy Office for Mexico.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DynaLo and 1972 Grad
#38,116
#38,116
watch this movie and everything will make sense
images
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#38,117
#38,117
rjd970 said:
We are living in some strange reality where the right wing has elected a business bankrupting, pornstar banging, anti-states rights POTUS, and seem to shrug it off, because, you know, it's all harmless anyway.

I swear, if it had been a Dem president, and he had said gun ownership should be outlawed, the right would laugh in the face of any left winger who said it doesn't matter, the second amendment is clear and he can't do it anyway. Not only would we have outrage, we would have outrage with wings from every politician, right wing media outlet, and partisan hack on this board.
Click to expand...
You're sounding more and more like a drama queen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#38,118
#38,118
Stew Cook said:
I'm glad you got my gist. But you agree that Trump should come out and recant his assertion, even though it might irreparably damage his ego?
Click to expand...

Sure come out and say he was wrong . Not going to change the fact either way that he is wrong and a POTUS doesn’t have absolute power ... it’s not possible . I would have loved to have seen Obama come out publicly and say he doesn’t have the power to create the dreamers act . Oh wait 🤔
 
#38,119
#38,119
allvol123 said:
Again, no one on here agreed with his statement.
Click to expand...
Your point seemed to be, who cares what he says, it makes no difference because there are people surrounding him who will keep him from acting on his comments.
My point is why not use the same perspective on Dem. candidates who comment on gun control?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#38,121
#38,121
Speaking of the pen.
Interesting read.

It's abundantly clear that governors and mayors, not the federal government, have the broadest quarantine and isolation authority. That's because the constitution leaves that kind of police power in the hands of the states.

Longstanding federal laws, and rules put in place at the end of the Obama administration, give the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention authority to quarantine people to stop disease outbreaks. The beefed-up rules were imposed after the experience of the outbreaks of Ebola and MERS six years ago.


Broadly speaking, the CDC has the power to detain people suspected of having a communicable disease, without getting approval from state and local officials. It comes under the public health laws that allow the federal government to impose restrictions either on people coming into the country or traveling from one state to another.
Click to expand...

Professor Michael Ulrich, an expert on public health law at Boston University, says any effort to apply that authority on a large scale would lead to claims that the government was exceeding its power. "You have to be able to justify that some group is a credible threat to others, and that's an easier thing to do on an individual level." He knows of no federal effort to do so for a large group.

If someone in the group sued, the government would have to demonstrate why people in an entire region were a threat to carry the disease across state lines. "That's a really hard thing to prove," Ulrich says. Even so, he said, a federal court might be reluctant to second-guess public health authorities and would instead defer to such an order in the face of a national crisis.
Click to expand...

- Pete Williams (NBC), Mar 17, 2020
 
#38,122
#38,122
utvolpj said:
I've addressed the board stance already. I'm curious about gop congressional leaders or governors
Click to expand...
Sorry about that. I thought I was responding to rjd. Things are moving so fast I guess I got confused.

I don't know if any GOP leaders will criticize. I sincerely doubt it. But I am also aware enough about politics to stop looking for the wrong people to do the right thing. They should do the right thing because of their rhetoric. But it is unlikely anyone, save a few lone wolves, will make a stink about it.
 
#38,123
#38,123
luthervol said:
Your point seemed to be, who cares what he says, it makes no difference because there are people surrounding him who will keep him from acting on his comments.
My point is why not use the same perspective on Dem. candidates who comment on gun control?
Click to expand...

Dems have handlers that will stop them from acting on gun control?

Also, some people agree with them on gun control. Which creates actions. No one agreed with him here.
 
#38,124
#38,124
0nelilreb said:
Sure come out and say he was wrong . Not going to change the fact either way that he is wrong and a POTUS doesn’t have absolute power ... it’s not possible . I would have loved to have seen Obama come out publicly and say he doesn’t have the power to create the dreamers act . Oh wait 🤔
Click to expand...

You mean executive orders which are routinely challenged by courts, is the equivalent to a POTUS declaring absolute power?

Some weak, deflective whatabout tea, bro.
 
#38,125
#38,125
DinkinFlicka said:
Ehhh, give me an example of a POTUS doing anything like that. This response is kind of lazy and getting old.
Click to expand...
Being honest, I don't believe I've seen the clip you're referencing, but I've grown accustomed to politicians throwing fits about not getting their way or getting called out over something. It's ridiculous. I'm tired of party politics and the whole party above country mentality that has engulfed DC.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top