calumnus said:

---

tthompson993 said:

---

Just sticking to the facts here. Colin was a 4.0 student in High School and at Nevada. He is no dummy or person seeking attention as has been reported here. I think that he deserves all the praise that has been sent his way as the initiator of what has become Black Lives Matter.

---

Also, it is not really possible to be both a Marxist and a Muslim.

However, it is also not really possible to be both a Christian and an Ayn Rand devotee but most who are the later also claim to be the former....

---

I believe you are wrong about Marxists and Muslims. As far back as the 1960s, I worked in a UC Laboratory, and came to know a student from Iran who was Muslim, and believed fervently in Marxism. Here is a good article from Wiki, which gives the history of the Islamic Socialist movement, and their beliefs in great detail, along with the names of the various Islamic Socialist political parties, and prominent Islamic Socialists like Ghaddafy, Najibullah, Sukarno, and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism

The liberal morons are coming out ofn the woodwork. That is why California is headed over the cliff. Leading state in welfare recipients, homelessness, COL, housing prices, taxation and now poop in the streets.

SFCityBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

tthompson993 said:

---

Just sticking to the facts here. Colin was a 4.0 student in High School and at Nevada. He is no dummy or person seeking attention as has been reported here. I think that he deserves all the praise that has been sent his way as the initiator of what has become Black Lives Matter.

---

Also, it is not really possible to be both a Marxist and a Muslim.

However, it is also not really possible to be both a Christian and an Ayn Rand devotee but most who are the later also claim to be the former....

---

I believe you are wrong about Marxists and Muslims. As far back as the 1960s, I worked in a UC Laboratory, and came to know a student from Iran who was Muslim, and believed fervently in Marxism. Here is a good article from Wiki, which gives the history of the Islamic Socialist movement, and their beliefs in great detail, along with the names of the various Islamic Socialist political parties, and prominent Islamic Socialists like Ghaddafy, Najibullah, Sukarno, and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism

---

The article you cited has no mention of Marx. There are socialist ideas from the beginning of Islam, just like early Christianity had many socialist precepts. In the 19th century there was a Christian Socialist movement that also predated Marx. In both cases the communalism is centered on religion and devotion to God.

Marxism is centered on atheism and dialectical materialism that predicts the breakdown of capitalism with communism as the result. It is simply not correct to call all socialist movements "Marxist." Many predated Karl Marx by centuries.

calumnus said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

tthompson993 said:

---

Just sticking to the facts here. Colin was a 4.0 student in High School and at Nevada. He is no dummy or person seeking attention as has been reported here. I think that he deserves all the praise that has been sent his way as the initiator of what has become Black Lives Matter.

---

Also, it is not really possible to be both a Marxist and a Muslim.

However, it is also not really possible to be both a Christian and an Ayn Rand devotee but most who are the later also claim to be the former....

---

I believe you are wrong about Marxists and Muslims. As far back as the 1960s, I worked in a UC Laboratory, and came to know a student from Iran who was Muslim, and believed fervently in Marxism. Here is a good article from Wiki, which gives the history of the Islamic Socialist movement, and their beliefs in great detail, along with the names of the various Islamic Socialist political parties, and prominent Islamic Socialists like Ghaddafy, Najibullah, Sukarno, and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism

---

The article you cited has no mention of Marx. There are socialist ideas from the beginning of Islam, just like early Christianity had many socialist precepts. In the 19th century there was a Christian Socialist movement that also predated Marx. In both cases the communalism is centered on religion and devotion to God.

Marxism is centered on atheism and dialectical materialism that predicts the breakdown of capitalism with communism as the result. It is simply not correct to call all socialist movements "Marxist." Many predated Karl Marx by centuries.

---

Good post calumnus. Lots of mislabeling and poor semantics these days that have lost all context (i.e. theology vs economy vs government structure vs class struggle). Furthermore the context of 'Marxism' in the 20th century (which, I believe you are referring to) grew out of much of Marx and Engels and others, but was really developed by others decades later. Today, the term seems meaningless along with terms like liberal, conservative, right/left, radical, progressive, patriot, democracy and socialism.

I'm confident that I could devise two separate surveys for today's American electorate. One would end with a result that 75% identify as socialist. The other would result in 75% claiming socialism is America's doom.

caltagjohnson said:

---

The liberal morons are coming out ofn the woodwork. That is why California is headed over the cliff. Leading state in welfare recipients, homelessness, COL, housing prices, taxation and now poop in the streets.

---

Who you callin' a liberal JOHNSON?!?!?! As a member of the CCMM* I resent that!

*Card Carryin' 'Murican Morons. Its our mission to weed out the woodworkers and properly assign blame and call names to unidentified boogeymen that are scary. Our motto is: "Fear is always the best way to form an opinion and science is too hard".

Seriously, - the response to conservative morons seems to be to out-moron them. I guess that helps with fundraising. I'm dumbfounded by the amount of the war chests both parties are building up. Who is giving them these amounts of money and why???

SFCityBear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

agree on most points:

The anthem should ONLY be played at international events like the Olympics

It's not a very good song (I can't think of another country's anthem that glorifies war).

If it has to be played, I vote for Jimi Hendrix's version.

---

Don't disagree that it should only be played at international sporting events.

It is not a great tune, but I don't agree it is not a very good song. It is an incredibly meaningful song if people will learn its meaning. It is not a glorification of war. It is about a pivotal moment in our history where our country was being attacked and its very existence was at stake. It is a metaphor. It is not about the battle. It is about the moment that the continued existence of the republic and our freedom is proved. Sitting in the harbor, knowing the country was about to suffer a ferocious attack, as night falls the American flag is flying and disappears from view. He has to contemplate whether he will ever see that flag fly again. The lines about rockets and bombs are not glorifying war. They are referring to the British rockets and bombs. The only point of the rockets and bombs is that they light up the sky giving him brief glimpses during the battle that the flag still flies and we are still free. By the dawn, he knows the battle is over, but he does not know the outcome. The light of dawn shows him the flag and he knows we are still free. None of the song is about the fight. It is all about our continued liberty being proved to him by the existence of the flag. The song is about freedom. To the extent later stanzas that we do not sing are "about war", to the contrary they are about defending ourselves against war when we must to protect our freedom from invaders who attack it. it is not glorifying war at all but villifying those that would wage war to take our freedom.

We do a poor job of teaching the War of 1812. The fact that it doesn't seem to be a key moment in our history is exactly what is key about it. Had things gone a different way, it would have been a very key moment, though it would have been British history, not American history.

There was much talk when I was younger about replacing the Star Spangled Banner with America the Beautiful. I wholeheartedly disagreed. America the Beautiful is a very nice song. It is about landscape. The Star Spangled Banner is about something. It is about freedom and how it will always stand as long as we are willing to defend it physically or metaphorically. Frankly, it is about who we are. The "its a song about war" bit is a result of a too cursory interpretation of the actual meaning of the words.

As for not thinking of another country's anthem glorifying war, um...lots of them do. Here is a translation of France's national anthem (I sang the first part every day in my French language classes in 7th and 8th grade - in French of course):

Arise, children of the Fatherland,
The day of glory has arrived!
Against us, tyranny's
Bloody standard is raised, (repeat)
Do you hear, in the countryside,
The roar of those ferocious soldiers?
They're coming right into your arms
To cut the throats of your sons, your women!

To arms, citizens,
Form your battalions,
Let's march, let's march!
Let an impure blood
Water our furrows!

What does this horde of slaves,
Of traitors and conspiring kings want?
For whom have these vile chains,
These irons, been long prepared? (repeat)
Frenchmen, for us, ah! What outrage
What furious action it must arouse!
It is to us they dare plan
A return to the old slavery!

To arms, citizens...

What! Foreign cohorts
Would make the law in our homes!
What! These mercenary phalanxes
Would strike down our proud warriors! (repeat)
Great God! By chained hands
Our brows would yield under the yoke!
Vile despots would themselves become
The masters of our destinies!

To arms, citizens...

Tremble, tyrants and you traitors
The shame of all parties,
Tremble! Your parricidal schemes
Will finally receive their prize! (repeat)
Everyone is a soldier to combat you,
If they fall, our young heroes,
Will be produced anew from the ground,
Ready to fight against you!

To arms, citizens...

Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors,
Bear or hold back your blows!
Spare those sorry victims,
For regretfully arming against us. (repeat)
But these bloodthirsty despots,
These accomplices of Bouill,
All these tigers who mercilessly
Tear apart their mother's breast!

To arms, citizens...

Sacred love of the Fatherland,
Lead, support our avenging arms
Liberty, cherished Liberty,
Fight with thy defenders! (repeat)
Under our flags may victory
Hurry to thy manly accents,
So that thy expiring enemies
See thy triumph and our glory!

To arms, citizens...

---

Oaktown, this is a beautiful post, your best one ever. I am grateful you wrote it, and grateful I was around to read it.

I like that the anthem is played before American sporting events, as it gives us all a moment to pause and be thankful if we wish, for this incredible nation, with all its warts and wounds, and for all it has given us. The greatest gift being that we are the only nation, or at least the first one which was founded on the principle of individual rights and freedom. Yes, it took us several years and several thousand of our citizens dying in a Civil War to free many of us, but that is one of the drawbacks to democracy, and that is that change comes slowly.

The anthem also reminds me that if we had lost that war of 1812, or the Revolutionary War, or either of the World Wars, we would not still have this great nation and the great American Dream. We would likely be speaking another language not American English, and have developed another culture, decidedly un-American, and with far less freedom than we all have today. I don't mind that others don't sing the anthem, or that others don't want it played before athletic contests. I'm just glad I was able to hear it sung, and sing it myself (even if I butcher it - it is not easy to sing) and hear it played a lot in my lifetime. I feel I owe this country my allegiance and my respect, and I'll pay them every chance I get.

Thanks Oaktown.

---

SFCity
As you know, I disagree about the anthem at sporting events. Regardless of your political persuasion, I think this routine event and the reaction of many trivializes it.

A minor correction to your "history," however. Had we lost WWI, it would have had little effect on our great nation (other than destroying Wilson's legacy). Had the Central Powers won, there would have been some adjustment to the German-French border, the Austro=Hungarian empire might have survived, and Serbia would likely been absorbed by A-H. There would undoubtedly have been rage here about wasting large sums of money and thousands of lives over nothing, but you would not be forced to speak German. Despite "losing" Vietnam, no one is forced to speak Vietnamese here...

Oaktown: Great post.

BeachedBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

tthompson993 said:

---

Just sticking to the facts here. Colin was a 4.0 student in High School and at Nevada. He is no dummy or person seeking attention as has been reported here. I think that he deserves all the praise that has been sent his way as the initiator of what has become Black Lives Matter.

---

Also, it is not really possible to be both a Marxist and a Muslim.

However, it is also not really possible to be both a Christian and an Ayn Rand devotee but most who are the later also claim to be the former....

---

I believe you are wrong about Marxists and Muslims. As far back as the 1960s, I worked in a UC Laboratory, and came to know a student from Iran who was Muslim, and believed fervently in Marxism. Here is a good article from Wiki, which gives the history of the Islamic Socialist movement, and their beliefs in great detail, along with the names of the various Islamic Socialist political parties, and prominent Islamic Socialists like Ghaddafy, Najibullah, Sukarno, and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism

---

The article you cited has no mention of Marx. There are socialist ideas from the beginning of Islam, just like early Christianity had many socialist precepts. In the 19th century there was a Christian Socialist movement that also predated Marx. In both cases the communalism is centered on religion and devotion to God.

Marxism is centered on atheism and dialectical materialism that predicts the breakdown of capitalism with communism as the result. It is simply not correct to call all socialist movements "Marxist." Many predated Karl Marx by centuries.

---

Good post calumnus. Lots of mislabeling and poor semantics these days that have lost all context (i.e. theology vs economy vs government structure vs class struggle). Furthermore the context of 'Marxism' in the 20th century (which, I believe you are referring to) grew out of much of Marx and Engels and others, but was really developed by others decades later. Today, the term seems meaningless along with terms like liberal, conservative, right/left, radical, progressive, patriot, democracy and socialism.

I'm confident that I could devise two separate surveys for today's American electorate. One would end with a result that 75% identify as socialist. The other would result in 75% claiming socialism is America's doom.

---

Yes, surveys like that have been done in the past.

Similarly, when shown a quote like "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need" most Americans attribute it to Jesus. When shown one of the many quotes from the Bible against the rich and in favor of the justice for the poor and "foreigners living among you" many Americans labeled it "Godless communism" (but only if it was in modern English, if it was in Elizabethan English, then they knew it was the Bible. This appears to be why so many Americans misattribute Shakespeare quotes to the Bible).

calumnus said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

tthompson993 said:

---

Just sticking to the facts here. Colin was a 4.0 student in High School and at Nevada. He is no dummy or person seeking attention as has been reported here. I think that he deserves all the praise that has been sent his way as the initiator of what has become Black Lives Matter.

---

Also, it is not really possible to be both a Marxist and a Muslim.

However, it is also not really possible to be both a Christian and an Ayn Rand devotee but most who are the later also claim to be the former....

---

I believe you are wrong about Marxists and Muslims. As far back as the 1960s, I worked in a UC Laboratory, and came to know a student from Iran who was Muslim, and believed fervently in Marxism. Here is a good article from Wiki, which gives the history of the Islamic Socialist movement, and their beliefs in great detail, along with the names of the various Islamic Socialist political parties, and prominent Islamic Socialists like Ghaddafy, Najibullah, Sukarno, and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism

---

The article you cited has no mention of Marx. There are socialist ideas from the beginning of Islam, just like early Christianity had many socialist precepts. In the 19th century there was a Christian Socialist movement that also predated Marx. In both cases the communalism is centered on religion and devotion to God.

Marxism is centered on atheism and dialectical materialism that predicts the breakdown of capitalism with communism as the result. It is simply not correct to call all socialist movements "Marxist." Many predated Karl Marx by centuries.

---

Good post calumnus. Lots of mislabeling and poor semantics these days that have lost all context (i.e. theology vs economy vs government structure vs class struggle). Furthermore the context of 'Marxism' in the 20th century (which, I believe you are referring to) grew out of much of Marx and Engels and others, but was really developed by others decades later. Today, the term seems meaningless along with terms like liberal, conservative, right/left, radical, progressive, patriot, democracy and socialism.

I'm confident that I could devise two separate surveys for today's American electorate. One would end with a result that 75% identify as socialist. The other would result in 75% claiming socialism is America's doom.

---

Yes, surveys like that have been done in the past.

Similarly, when shown a quote like "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need" most Americans attribute it to Jesus. When shown one of the many quotes from the Bible against the rich and in favor of the justice for the poor and "foreigners living among you" many Americans labeled it "Godless communism" (but only if it was in modern English, if it was in Elizabethan English, then they knew it was the Bible. This appears to be why so many Americans misattribute Shakespeare quotes to the Bible).

---

Likewise, most Americans who oppose Obamacare support the Affordable Care Act.

dimitrig said:

---

Likewise, most Americans who oppose Obamacare support the Affordable Care Act.

---

Was that an MSNBC poll or a CNN poll?

Civil Bear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Likewise, most Americans who oppose Obamacare support the Affordable Care Act.

---

Was that an MSNBC poll or a CNN poll?

---

I exaggerated for effect but it was a Morning Consult poll published in the NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/upshot/one-third-dont-know-obamacare-and-affordable-care-act-are-the-same.html

dimitrig said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Likewise, most Americans who oppose Obamacare support the Affordable Care Act.

---

Was that an MSNBC poll or a CNN poll?

---

I exaggerated for effect but it was a Morning Consult poll published in the NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/upshot/one-third-dont-know-obamacare-and-affordable-care-act-are-the-same.html

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes.

Civil Bear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Likewise, most Americans who oppose Obamacare support the Affordable Care Act.

---

Was that an MSNBC poll or a CNN poll?

---

I exaggerated for effect but it was a Morning Consult poll published in the NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/upshot/one-third-dont-know-obamacare-and-affordable-care-act-are-the-same.html

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes.

---

Regarding this poll:

"About two thirds of Americans did say, in fact, that, you know, they were the same policy. One thing that we separately tested - we ran an experiment where we asked half of people, do you approve or disapprove of the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare? A few things stand out. Mentioning Obamacare polarizes people in a way that the Affordable Care Act does not. So for instance, 80 percent of Republicans strongly disapprove of Obamacare. Only about 60 percent strongly disapprove of the Affordable Care Act."

https://www.npr.org/2017/02/11/514732211/obamacare-and-affordable-care-act-are-the-same-but-americans-still-dont-know-tha

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

dimitrig said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Likewise, most Americans who oppose Obamacare support the Affordable Care Act.

---

Was that an MSNBC poll or a CNN poll?

---

I exaggerated for effect but it was a Morning Consult poll published in the NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/upshot/one-third-dont-know-obamacare-and-affordable-care-act-are-the-same.html

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes.

---

Regarding this poll:

"About two thirds of Americans did say, in fact, that, you know, they were the same policy. One thing that we separately tested - we ran an experiment where we asked half of people, do you approve or disapprove of the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare? A few things stand out. Mentioning Obamacare polarizes people in a way that the Affordable Care Act does not. So for instance, 80 percent of Republicans strongly disapprove of Obamacare. Only about 60 percent strongly disapprove of the Affordable Care Act."

https://www.npr.org/2017/02/11/514732211/obamacare-and-affordable-care-act-are-the-same-but-americans-still-dont-know-tha

---

That sounds much more realistic, even coming from a left-leaning online polster on a left-leaning radio station. 20% of self-identified repubs equates to about 5% of the US population. That's about 3 times less than the population that isn't sure if the earth is a globe.

smh said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

---

Yes, yes, if only the US had the UK's death rate of those infected with COVID-19 (15.3%) or even Canada's (7.9%) as opposed to our own (3.5%). Traffic would flow much better.

Civil Bear said:

---

smh said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

---

Yes, yes, if only the US had the UK's death rate of those infected with COVID-19 (15.3%) or even Canada's (7.9%) as opposed to our own (3.5%). Traffic would flow much better.

---

numbers are funny things. happens i've got none, so congrats / you win, or don't. but lets just wait'n see how many good old boys/girls end up bankrupt, begging from the side of the road (or worse) after medical bills come due, slash many.
# kiss kiss ..counts heads... kiss kiss

The New York Times????Ever since Sulzberger the younger ( radical Cal grad) took over from his Dad, the paper has been about 12 feet to the left off Pravda. There are 50 editorial writers at the NYT. Not a single conservative. How's that for diversity??Liberals bore you to tears about "diversity", but they do not tolerate diversity of thought. Say or do the "wrong thing" and you are fired, or worse. Any conservatives left in Hollywood???Nope--any late-night comics who are conservative???Nope---get the point--

helltopay1 said:

---

The New York Times????Ever since Sulzberger the younger ( radical Cal grad) took over from his Dad, the paper has been about 12 feet to the left off Pravda.

---

When I was a kid Eisenhower was a conservative. More recently I would call John McCain a conservative, as he called himself. Current conservatives loathed McCain. So I'd say the NYT hasn't gone to the left so much as the conservatives have gone to the right.

helltopay1 said:

---

Any conservatives left in Hollywood???Nope--any late-night comics who are conservative???Nope---get the point--

---

The point is angry conservatives aren't entertaining or funny?

The ad nauseum playing/singing of the anthem before every pro and college sporting event, Little League game, and soapbox derby trivializes the song. It is basically "Jingle Bells" with fireworks. Everyone knows the tune, and at least some of the words, and tries to sing along.

But it really has lost all meaning, except to the faux patriot gun rack crowd. And this puffed up outrage that taking a knee disrespects Veterans? Ask a few - you might be surprised at the answers you get.

And - it's a bad poem set to the tune of a 18th century drinking song of a London men's social club. We can do better. Even Uber Conservative and Trump Buddy Vince McMahon thinks so. He hates the anthem. Every Wrestle Mania starts with a live performance of "America the Beautiful" - a far better song by every measure. I'd have no problem with playing Aretha Franklin's performance before every sporting event.



Or Ray Charles

Brett Stephens, David Brooks, and Ross Duthat consider themselves conservatives and are Republicans. Just how right-wing are you, if you consider them "left of Pravda...?"

UrsaMajor said:

---

Brett Stephens, David Brooks, and Ross Duthat consider themselves conservatives and are Republicans. Just how right-wing are you, if you consider them "left of Pravda...?"

---

He is just right of Atilla the Hun.

stu said:

---

helltopay1 said:

---

The New York Times????Ever since Sulzberger the younger ( radical Cal grad) took over from his Dad, the paper has been about 12 feet to the left off Pravda.

---

When I was a kid Eisenhower was a conservative. More recently I would call John McCain a conservative, as he called himself. Current conservatives loathed McCain. So I'd say the NYT hasn't gone to the left so much as the conservatives have gone to the right.

helltopay1 said:

---

Any conservatives left in Hollywood???Nope--any late-night comics who are conservative???Nope---get the point--

---

The point is angry conservatives aren't entertaining or funny?

---

I demurrer, Sir:

bearister said:

---

I demurrer, Sir:

---

I like both the Lincoln Project and Lincoln himself but I doubt the OP would characterize either as conservative.

Civil Bear said:

---

smh said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

---

Yes, yes, if only the US had the UK's death rate of those infected with COVID-19 (15.3%) or even Canada's (7.9%) as opposed to our own (3.5%). Traffic would flow much better.

---

I will not get into the inactions of Boris Johnson which mirror Donald Trump's but with less local control.

Deaths lag new cases and spike when they hit nursing homes and/or when concentrated in one location and ICUs get overwhelmed. Canada's new cases peaked on May 3 with 2,760 new cases. However deaths peaked 4 weeks later on May 31 at 222 deaths even though new cases had already dropped to 757. Most of the deaths were tied to outbreaks in nursing homes in and around Montreal. Since then the virus has been brought under control and deaths have dropped:

Yesterday, July 24, Canada recorded 533 new cases and 7 deaths.

Meanwhile on July 24 the US recorded 74,360 new cases and 1,150 deaths.

The geometric increase in new cases in the US mathematically reduces the "deaths per infected" metric due to the lag. As a somewhat extreme example, if new cases are doubling every week and 10% of infected will die in 4 weeks, the "death per infected" will appear to be only 1.25% when it is really 10%.

However, the bigger problem with the current boom in new cases in the US is we are just now seeing ICUs reach capacity in places like Texas and Florida so the underlying death rate is almost inevitably going to ramp up.

There is a reason Canada closed the border with the US. 7 deaths compared to 1,150 deaths? Really not a great argument against Canada.

Oh, and after someone recovers from COVID-19 in Canada there is no medical bill. In the US medical debt was out of control before the pandemic and now...https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/16/coronavirus-hospital-bill-healthcare-america

Really not great to compare the US with Canada on this one.

The next Canadian Prime Minister is already thinking about his hot-button issue: "I'm going to build a wall... and make America pay for it!"

Big C said:

---

The next Canadian Prime Minister is already thinking about his hot-button issue: "I'm going to build a wall... and make America pay for it!"

---

We're dumb enough to do it, too!

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

smh said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

---

Yes, yes, if only the US had the UK's death rate of those infected with COVID-19 (15.3%) or even Canada's (7.9%) as opposed to our own (3.5%). Traffic would flow much better.

---

I will not get into the inactions of Boris Johnson which mirror Donald Trump's but with less local control.

Deaths lag new cases and spike when they hit nursing homes and/or when concentrated in one location and ICUs get overwhelmed. Canada's new cases peaked on May 3 with 2,760 new cases. However deaths peaked 4 weeks later on May 31 at 222 deaths even though new cases had already dropped to 757. Most of the deaths were tied to outbreaks in nursing homes in and around Montreal. Since then the virus has been brought under control and deaths have dropped:

Yesterday, July 24, Canada recorded 533 new cases and 7 deaths.

Meanwhile on July 24 the US recorded 74,360 new cases and 1,150 deaths.

The geometric increase in new cases in the US mathematically reduces the "deaths per infected" metric due to the lag. As a somewhat extreme example, if new cases are doubling every week and 10% of infected will die in 4 weeks, the "death per infected" will appear to be only 1.25% when it is really 10%.

However, the bigger problem with the current boom in new cases in the US is we are just now seeing ICUs reach capacity in places like Texas and Florida so the underlying death rate is almost inevitably going to ramp up.

There is a reason Canada closed the border with the US. 7 deaths compared to 1,150 deaths? Really not a great argument against Canada.

Oh, and after someone recovers from COVID-19 in Canada there is no medical bill. In the US medical debt was out of control before the pandemic and now...https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/16/coronavirus-hospital-bill-healthcare-america

Really not great to compare the US with Canada on this one.

---

Nice spin. You found a date where the death rate was statistically similar. Yet the overall figures say you are twice as likely to die if you catch COVID-19 in Canada. As for your nursing home excuse, over 40% of the US COVID deaths are linked to them. Had our Mayors opted to use facilities provided by the feds instead of putting COVID positive seniors in nursing homes the US death rate would be even less.

As a green-card carrying Canadian I can assure you the medical care in the US is far superior. Anyone in Canada with a serious illness comes to the US to get treated if they can afford it (please don't make me give out my own family's record in the US v.s Canada). Personally, I'd rather be stuck with a bill than be dead, but that's just me.

ursa: for petes sake, you are way too old to be a hard-core lefty. Praising the NYT???Good Lord. If you were under 45 or so, I could understand---those poor kids have been taught by lefties, socialists and communists all their lives, and, don't know any better---but you??You are what---77 or 78??Good grief!!

helltopay1 said:

---

ursa: for petes sake, you are way too old to be a hard-core lefty. Praising the NYT???Good Lord. If you were under 45 or so, I could understand---those poor kids have been taught by lefties, socialists and communists all their lives, and, don't know any better---but you??You are what---77 or 78??Good grief!!

---

What's age got to do with anything?

Civil Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

smh said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

---

Yes, yes, if only the US had the UK's death rate of those infected with COVID-19 (15.3%) or even Canada's (7.9%) as opposed to our own (3.5%). Traffic would flow much better.

---

I will not get into the inactions of Boris Johnson which mirror Donald Trump's but with less local control.

Deaths lag new cases and spike when they hit nursing homes and/or when concentrated in one location and ICUs get overwhelmed. Canada's new cases peaked on May 3 with 2,760 new cases. However deaths peaked 4 weeks later on May 31 at 222 deaths even though new cases had already dropped to 757. Most of the deaths were tied to outbreaks in nursing homes in and around Montreal. Since then the virus has been brought under control and deaths have dropped:

Yesterday, July 24, Canada recorded 533 new cases and 7 deaths.

Meanwhile on July 24 the US recorded 74,360 new cases and 1,150 deaths.

The geometric increase in new cases in the US mathematically reduces the "deaths per infected" metric due to the lag. As a somewhat extreme example, if new cases are doubling every week and 10% of infected will die in 4 weeks, the "death per infected" will appear to be only 1.25% when it is really 10%.

However, the bigger problem with the current boom in new cases in the US is we are just now seeing ICUs reach capacity in places like Texas and Florida so the underlying death rate is almost inevitably going to ramp up.

There is a reason Canada closed the border with the US. 7 deaths compared to 1,150 deaths? Really not a great argument against Canada.

Oh, and after someone recovers from COVID-19 in Canada there is no medical bill. In the US medical debt was out of control before the pandemic and now...https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/16/coronavirus-hospital-bill-healthcare-america

Really not great to compare the US with Canada on this one.

---

Nice spin. You found a date where the death rate was statistically similar. Yet the overall figures say you are twice as likely to die if you catch COVID-19 in Canada. As for your nursing home excuse, over 40% of the US COVID deaths are linked to them. Had our Mayors opted to use facilities provided by the feds instead of putting COVID positive seniors in nursing homes the US death rate would be even less.

As a green-card carrying Canadian I can assure you the medical care in the US is far superior. Anyone in Canada with a serious illness comes to the US to get treated if they can afford it (please don't make me give out my own family's record in the US v.s Canada). Personally, I'd rather be stuck with a bill than be dead, but that's just me.

---

I did not cherry pick anything. Deaths lag new cases by a month. A country where the new cases are declining rapidly is going to have a higher ratio of deaths over new cases than a country where new cases are climbing rapidly. That is just math.

The virus is the virus. There is no cure. The US does not have any technology for treating it that Canada does not have. Yes, if you can afford it, the US generally has better medical care, especially at the top end. I don't doubt your experience or that of your friends. I have heard the same from my wealthy Canadian relatives. They always get their procedures done when they are at their winter homes in Palm Springs.

However, in the US if you do not have insurance, and cannot prove you can pay, hospitals can turn you away.

Again, 7 people died in Canada yesterday versus 1,150 in the US and it is getting worse:

Houston
https://www.texastribune.org/2020/07/10/houston-coronavirus-emergency-rooms/

Mississippi
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/coronavirus-surge-brings-suffering-impoverished-underresourced-mississippi-delta-n1234098?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3UYASU7nptCtwe30pxsyzjQfWimjT0NFVvL3NM1SC3EtzoMCLiSps_gOA

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

smh said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

That poll says nothing about those that oppose Obamacare support the ACA. In fact, if anything it suggests those that do oppose Obamacare (read Repubs) are more likely to know they are one and the same than those that don't oppose it (read dems). That from the right-wing bastion NYTimes

---

of course moore attractive to us doddering Bernie Bros-Sistas is the percentage lusting after european/ commonwealth/ MM style health care.. oh baby oh baby, socialize me baby
# forked predatory health corpse shell games

---

Yes, yes, if only the US had the UK's death rate of those infected with COVID-19 (15.3%) or even Canada's (7.9%) as opposed to our own (3.5%). Traffic would flow much better.

---

I will not get into the inactions of Boris Johnson which mirror Donald Trump's but with less local control.

Deaths lag new cases and spike when they hit nursing homes and/or when concentrated in one location and ICUs get overwhelmed. Canada's new cases peaked on May 3 with 2,760 new cases. However deaths peaked 4 weeks later on May 31 at 222 deaths even though new cases had already dropped to 757. Most of the deaths were tied to outbreaks in nursing homes in and around Montreal. Since then the virus has been brought under control and deaths have dropped:

Yesterday, July 24, Canada recorded 533 new cases and 7 deaths.

Meanwhile on July 24 the US recorded 74,360 new cases and 1,150 deaths.

The geometric increase in new cases in the US mathematically reduces the "deaths per infected" metric due to the lag. As a somewhat extreme example, if new cases are doubling every week and 10% of infected will die in 4 weeks, the "death per infected" will appear to be only 1.25% when it is really 10%.

However, the bigger problem with the current boom in new cases in the US is we are just now seeing ICUs reach capacity in places like Texas and Florida so the underlying death rate is almost inevitably going to ramp up.

There is a reason Canada closed the border with the US. 7 deaths compared to 1,150 deaths? Really not a great argument against Canada.

Oh, and after someone recovers from COVID-19 in Canada there is no medical bill. In the US medical debt was out of control before the pandemic and now...https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/16/coronavirus-hospital-bill-healthcare-america

Really not great to compare the US with Canada on this one.

---

Nice spin. You found a date where the death rate was statistically similar. Yet the overall figures say you are twice as likely to die if you catch COVID-19 in Canada. As for your nursing home excuse, over 40% of the US COVID deaths are linked to them. Had our Mayors opted to use facilities provided by the feds instead of putting COVID positive seniors in nursing homes the US death rate would be even less.

As a green-card carrying Canadian I can assure you the medical care in the US is far superior. Anyone in Canada with a serious illness comes to the US to get treated if they can afford it (please don't make me give out my own family's record in the US v.s Canada). Personally, I'd rather be stuck with a bill than be dead, but that's just me.

---

I did not cherry pick anything. Deaths lag new cases by a month. A country where the new cases are declining rapidly is going to have a higher ratio of deaths over new cases than a country where new cases are climbing rapidly. That is just math.

The virus is the virus. There is no cure. The US does not have any technology for treating it that Canada does not have. Yes, if you can afford it, the US generally has better medical care, especially at the top end. I don't doubt your experience or that of your friends. I have heard the same from my wealthy Canadian relatives. They always get their procedures done when they are at their winter homes in Palm Springs.

However, in the US if you do not have insurance, and cannot prove you can pay, hospitals can turn you away.

Again, 7 people died in Canada yesterday versus 1,150 in the US and it is getting worse:

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/07/10/houston-coronavirus-emergency-rooms/

---

There is a surge of people dying at home in the US with no testing:
https://www.propublica.org/article/a-spike-in-people-dying-at-home-suggests-coronavirus-deaths-in-houston-may-be-higher-than-reported