SectionC3

don’t forget the gem about the hoax, too. That was rich. Nothing says take the threat seriously like the president calling it a hoax. Agreed, for once. See above. The president also called the threat a hoax. So technically you’re correct on this one.

Fake news. I’ll rely on you for insight with respect to communist propaganda moving forward. Not my thing. But then again, I’m not on the “commie/pinko” list as you are.

I just did. Hoax.

Hoax. I’m not an idiot. (At least not all of the time.) also, since you’re on the hoax list, I think it is you who should be worried about spreading false and misleading information. Fake news, too. Everything I’ve said has been accurate.

So some weren’t screened? And were foreign nationals screened? You seemed to indicate that they were not. Fail.

Hoax. Also, why not screen travelers from Italy at the same time? And check out this picture of healthy airport social distancing: Fake news. Agree to disagree.

Hoax. I wrote it myself. also, I think might have to put you on a commie/pinko list since you’re apparently immersed in Soviet propaganda materials.

Hoax. Fake news.

Para 2. Some fair points. It’s why I called that right answer re that scenario fact-specific. Para 3. Some more fair points. But one has to keep in mind the orez’s track record of use of the dog whistle. Hoax. Misleading. Completely different contexts.

Para 1 is misleading. Nobody doubts that the virus originated in China. But the name COVID-19 accurately identifies the virus in question. The Chinese reference serves no purpose re identification and serves only to inflame and to cast blame. In point if fact, the “Chinese virus” references arguably are immaculate anyway b/c a the NYC cases appear to be traceable to a strand that came from Italy and that may have slightly mutated there. Fake news. There was an exception for chinese Nationals not meeting that criteria who were deemed not to pose a threat under then-existing CDC guidelines.

partial hoax. Most were US citizens. But the guidelines also permitted entry to certain Chinese nationals, and did not preclude flights directly from the affected Wuhan area. I learned this info at this fake news website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/

Also, I have just formed a task force to add new names to my snowflake, hoax, and fake news lists. Anyone can do that. But the task force is only meaningful if it, you know, results in timely and effective action.

We’ve been over this. There’s a litany of other measures he could have taken in a more timely manner. The fact that he did one or two things right doesn’t mean that the overall response was up to par.

Ill make it easy. Add February 1 to my prior response. Done.

Hoax. Been going to games for 35 years.

you know, this is reasonable. Most people are doing the best they can, and there is no playbook. My issue with the prez essentially lies in the fact that he minimized what was to come when we could have had an all hands on deck approach much earlier. But you’re right to say that there is no script or this and that no response would be perfect.

sounds like a candidate for a snowflake list, right??

Oops. Forgot, Deranged Rhino. One more thing. It’s hard to take anything you say seriously when you characterize yourself as deranged. So either you’re deranged, and not to be taken seriously, or you aren’t deranged and your name is just a hoax. Which explains why you’re on my hoax and fake news lists, too.

Hoax. I only have one handle. Oh, forgot. I do have more left. I forgot to remind you that you’re on my snowflake list. So I did have more!

Fake news. Hoax.

Fake news. (and completely different contexts, which I’m sure you know.) I’ll give Gary some propers. The F- thing made me laugh out loud. That was funny.

Don’t know enough about the horrible situation you described, but at first glance that characterization seems ok b/c there is a reasonable basis for the specification. The virus i see differently b/c the only reason to specify as trump (and others, to be fair) have in that context is to inflame. It’s not like there are two COVID pandemics and there is a need to distinguish b/w the viruses in that way. thinking about your point further ... I don’t know on the family situation. “Organized crime” might have worked there. I guess the best answer is that this is a fact specific issue, and the virus references fall on the wrong side of the line. Where that line is admittedly is a hard thing to specify. Kind of invokes the “I know it when I see it” principle from the US Supreme Court indecency cases. good points for thought and for debate on your end though, for sure.

Dislike it. Tremendously. I know Chinese Americans who have taken a lot of crap over that. Kids, as a matter of fact. The only reason to characterize the virus as such is to inflame. Edit:. I have to clarify. Not all references to China in this area are bad. Eg, “numbers in China are down” are perfectly fine. The context is key, and characterizing the virus as the Chinese virus is what I take significant issue with. Hoax. He should have gotten on the stick in January. Hoax. I own the snowflake list. Now you’re on the hoax list, too.

fair enough. You have your opinion, which you expressed directly. I happen to completely disagree, but we’re all entitled to opinions and that’s how America works. Cool beans.

Thanks for the gratuitous advice, third and long. Unfortunately, you have left me no choice. You’re on the snowflake list, too.