No way he is a cop. Especially the one they are trying to finger. Proud boy? Definitely.

#24. That thought process it's flawed. They brought him food, but because he was white and they just love them some murderin White kids. They did it to make him more comfortable and induce a confession.

Good. The lot of them should be in jail. The one, for life.

I have a very difficult time believing anything that comes out of China. But I will be interested to read it.

I would have to find some others I read that show how and why this covid is much more closely related to MERS than the common cold, but can't right now.

I wear a mask because it's the right thing to do, especially Since I haven't had it. But I'd love to be able to not wear one. It'sa pain in the balls.

So all of the studies I am seeing show an immunity for a minimum of two weeks after symptoms subside, but the consensus is immunity lasts for up to three years in the same line as other similar covids like MERS. There just hasn't been enough time to study and conclusively prove it.

So If I got it, I would be quite comfortable not wearing a mask after recovery.

What if you had covid and recovered. Due to your antibodies, you are immune to getting it again, and incapable of spreading it to others. Do you still need to wear a mask?

Honest question.

What I want is herd immunity as soon as possible. That is only achieved through reaching a certain percentage of the population becoming immune. The faster you reach that number the better it is. We could be like Sweden and spiked our cases.... and our deaths.... early and not closed anything down. Or take our path, which is blow up the economy and still have the same volume of deaths, but spread it out over a longer period of time.

The problem here is ALL of our politicians are cowards. No one wants to be the elected official people can point to and say: "my granny died, and it's your fault!"

The sad reality is, people are going to get sick and die. There is nothing that can really be done. But you can man up and take the punch, or still lose the fight but trash the economy and ram through trillion spending bills that will ensure it stays trashed for decades.

Any comparison to H1N1 is disingenuous at best. Flu of any strain has as much in common with Covid as humans do with foxes. Sure, we're both mammals, and they're both viruses, but that's about it. Corona has higher contagion rates, deadlier to those it infects, and in general takes entirely different course of treatment.

That is in NO way an endorsement of how POTUS has handled this. It's only a repudiation of that comparison.

You are off track. The crux of the issue has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with impartiality. A rainbow flag, a black power flag, a don't tread on me flag, a religious unity flag..... none of them have any business in any court room

You skipped right over exactly how it is a problem to ask that question, Yav.

It provides an appeal Avenue to any defendant where the plaintiff is gay, regardless of whether or not the sexual orientation of the plaintiff is a foundation of the case.

Before anyone tries to say that in my above example the fact the plaintiff is Gay should never come up in court: if I was the plaintiffs attorney, and saw that flag, I would tell my client to bring his spouse/significant other to court and ensure he made it clear he was gay without even having to bring it up in open court. Ethical? Maybe, maybe not.

Excellent thread and topic. While I very much agree with the rainbow flag exhibiting equal rights, that is immaterial. Any expressions of a personal nature like that should be excluded from a courtroom. The only decorations soups be the American flag, the state flag, and blind justice. Period.

An even better example of a problem:

Two men drunk in bar get in a fight over a spilled drink. One man turns out to be gay, though no one knew it at the time, and it played no part in the fight. But the gay man sues the other for damages. Will he feel like he is going to be treated fairly? I dare say, no he wouldn't feel that way, and with good cause.

Personal expressions, and non national/state official symbols should be left out for appearance sake. It's human nature to have biases. Even judges. But, they should maintain at least the appearance of impartiality.

It's going to go much lower. Likely to the .5 to .9% range. Which still makes it 5 to 9 times deadlier than the flu. What's devastating, is it just how ravaging it is to curtain populations. If you are healthy, and under 70 you are likely to be fine. But if you have any abnormalities in your lungs, lung damage, are generally Immunocomprised, even if you don't know about the issues, the death rate can be as high as 25%. Scary. Protecting ourselves is necessary to not keep ourselves safe, protecting ourselves prevents transmissions to those that are at risk.

#90.

You're crazy. The media, as evidenced by hyping the "mortality rate"while not explaining that they are only testing a very small percentage of likely cases... estimating that up to 1.7 million only Americans are going to die but then claiming its just a "potential" range, is outrageous.

The overwhelming majority of people with this virus will have no or very mild symptoms, which means there are way more than the known cases so the mortality rate is dramatically lower than advertised, yet that is almost never mentioned.

If you don't think the media is complicit in fueling this run on toilet paper and food,I don't know how to help you. But you need help.

#62. Very true. It's ridiculous what's happening, and the spark that has turned into this inferno falls right at the feet of the media.

If everyone stopped panicking and just shopped normally, everyone would have what they need.... Like theyAlways do.....

What are you talking about Petrous? That makes very little sense.

Of course the federal government should be proactive. No one has said they shouldn't.

You are assuming that 95% of the country reads through the entire article with sober analysis, and had an iq higher than toast. They didn't, and they don't. The media knows this. Throwing around numbers like this gets them the clicks they crave and puts in people's minds these outrageous numbers. The world wide death count is under 2000. World, farging wide. Yet you dont think it's irresponsible to publish articles speculating That 1.7 million "might" die? Please. That they put those qualifying words of potential or night in, didn't relieve them of the burden of what their stories cause.

The line wouldn't be 500 deep to enter a grocery store if they reported the raw numbers now, and the best way to protect ourselves.

The media doesn't get a pass.

#48 all of which is easy to report without the "ZOMG! MILLIONS ARE GONNA DIE! EVERYBODY PANIC! (But make sure you click here every day for know panicky crap!)"

The same. Though not too the degree, Because that stupid frenzy didn't panic the stock market, and make the shelves bare in my grocery store every subtle day for a week within 3 hours of it opening.

The media are savages, And totally responsible for this.

#42

I am strenuously arguing against the panic induced by reporting the worst case scenario specifically. I do know what worst case scenario means. Just because a computer model spits out a possibility, doesn't mean that it's worthy of being reported. Panic and sensationalizing sells. The media is intentionally whipping this frenzy and it's stupid at best. Completely irresponsible at worst

When the death count in the entire world is sitting at less than 1% of what you are reporting as the LOWEST estimated range of "potential deaths" in just the US? You are fueling panic on purpose to get clicks. And directly responsible for panic in the hearts and minds of the people.

#15: the media is clearly fueling this panic and the article is a prime example. "200,000 to 1.7 million could die." Holly crap everyone panic! Never mind the fact that those kinds of numbers aren't indicative of what is happening in any country. The world wide death count of virus is literally less than 1% of the lowest estimate they are giving for this country alone.

It's irresponsible at best to be throwing those stupid kinds of numbers around. People see "up to 1.7 million" could die in the USA and freak out. That's when people rush out and buy up every item at every grocery store, and gobble up stories about it. The media is serving panic on a platter and it's disgusting.

The media... not time media. Oops.

SWAGing is irresponsible journalism and is what is fueling this stupidity. Time media is completely responsible for the panic occurring. Report that testing is coming along and the raw numbers known? Fine. But throwing numbers around pulled straight from their as$ is the direct cause of me having to shop along my way home from a pre planned spring break trip and not wait until I get home. It's unbelievable.