4 ms·

None of the articles you cite demonstrate what you seem to think they do. When the number of cases was minuscule, the threat to Americans was low and those arti

None of the articles you cite demonstrate what you seem to think they do. When the number of cases was minuscule, the threat to Americans was low and those articles were spot on: Keep vigilant, get your flu shot, but don't stress too much yet. Citing Pelosi visiting San Francisco (at a time when there were zero cases in the region, but a growing number of anti-Asian hate crimes) again doesn't make a point to any reasonable person. These claims speak only to zealots. More critically, you have a higher standard of every random article in every newspaper than you do of agencies actually responsible. Which is truly dystopian. Speaking of which, Trump's "travel ban" (that wasn't a travel ban) was the single action taken after the virus was already spreading uncontrolled in NY, Washington State, and Europe. It did nothing to restrict US citizens traveling to and from the affected areas unrestrained, which thousands continued to do, even if we believed it would be remotely effective at that point. It did nothing for testing or tracing. It was the laziest, least-effort action possible. And to be clear, long after all of these things, Trump declared that the number of cases would soon be 0. He made similar "nothingburger" comments for months. But you find issue with the media. Incredible.

Moodles 5y ago
> More critically, you have a higher standard of every random article in every newspaper than you do of agencies actually responsible. Which is truly dystopian. > But you find issue with the media. > Incredible. The HN topic is about the media, so I'm talking about the media. > Speaking of which, Trump's "travel ban" (that wasn't a travel ban) was the single action taken after the virus was already spreading uncontrolled in NY, Washington State, and Europe. It did nothing to restrict US citizens traveling to and from the affected areas unrestrained, which thousands continued to do, even if we believed it would be remotely effective at that point I'm not defending Trump. I'm pointing out media hypocrisy. What did they do? Call the travel ban racist. Their behaviour has been very partisan, often at the expense of the truth. Exhibit A: the lab leak theory in the OP.
- defaultname 5y ago
  There is zero disguising the intent of your comment. The bit about Pelosi "dancing" was particularly telling. There are a number of other replies that come straight from MAGA-verse, full of outrageous lies but that is where US politics are right now. The US had a catastrophically poor response under the prior administration. That wasn't because of the media. It wasn't because of Nancy Pelosi. It wasn't because people dismissed theories by racists and imbeciles (the "lab leak" theory was overwhelmingly put forward by the absolute slugs of humanity, so there isn't a lot of surprise that it got smeared along with it, however unfortunate). This whole "see, we wuz right!" thing is a bit bizarre given that no, people didn't ignore evidence early on. They ignored a theory based upon literally nothing, generally put forward by people arguing that it was somehow weaponized and intentional. If there is evidence it should be pursued, but that doesn't give credence to hysterical conspiracies. Again, it is remarkable reading your comment and then understanding that you're decrying "partisan" positions. It goes beyond irony.
  - jimmygrapes 5y ago
    Your unconditional hatred is showing.
    - defaultname 5y ago
      It is very conditional. I make no bones about the fact that I absolutely despise the cult of stupidity that has afflicted the United States. It is the downfall of the nation. There is a paradox that the "MAGA" crowd is the greatest setback to US achievement in centuries and still will likely destroy the country within the decade. So yeah, I _hate_ those people with every fiber of my being. It is hilarious that this thread is full of pearl clutchers who gasp and groan about how unfair this is, they're just patrons of the truth and non-partisan fairness...and then you look at their history, and they are precisely what you expected them to be. Antiscience cretins who put forth the most absurdly disingenuous nonsense purely for an audience of other cultists.
  - Dma54rhs 5y ago
    Incredible comment, is this is the level of discourse now in America?
makomk 5y ago
No, every bit of cynicism about the media coverage of travel bans seems 100% justified. For context, I'm from the UK where we have a right-wing Brexit-supporting government that's perceived very much as a Trump analogue - except they didn't impose travel bans on places like China early in the pandemic. Which means that over here, people blame our pandemic deaths on the supposed fact that our Government avoided placing restrictions on travel because they're evil right-wingers who were too worried about the damage to the economy that would cause. There was literally a talking point where the Guardian dug up an estimate that imposing travel restrictions on China would've delayed the outbreak here by something like a month, but it had to be a ban on all travellers who'd been in China within 14 days and not just direct travel - that is, it specifically had to be a Trump-style travel ban, an Italy-style one would not have worked. Meanwhile, their US coverage was attacking Trump for his travel ban. Also, remember that the current US president literally went from using the idea that travel bans were dangerous, counterproductive and made things worse in his electoral campaign to reinstating them with the exact same rules as Trump used as his first act in office, and the mainstream media cheered him on every step of the way...
- defaultname 5y ago
  I love that my other comment is at -4 already. The "MAGA" side of HN is flooding in, desperately thinking this is their moment of redemption. "but it had to be a ban on all travellers who'd been in China within 14 days and not just direct travel" Weird to call that "Trump-style" given that Trump's travel "ban" excluded Americans and their family members which already comprised the bulk of people traveling to and from China. One critic of the ban pointed out that in a single day, 30 aircraft from China landed in San Francisco, full, during the "ban". "Also, remember that the current US president literally went from using the idea that travel bans were dangerous, counterproductive and made things worse" This is either ignorance or an intentional lie. Which is it? Contrary to the shrill lies from a certain camp, zero Democratic leaders opposed the "ban". They opposed that it was the singular action taken during a very dangerous period. That quarantines or even tracing weren't put in effect. Etc. That the literal implementation of it was "only people carrying other passports can possibly be carrying COVID". And I mean...we all know how things turned out, right? Maybe this "he was right" victory lap might be in poor taste, 600,000 dead Americans later.
hintymad 5y ago
> It did nothing to restrict US citizens traveling to and from the affected areas unrestrained, which thousands continued to do I thought the federal government does not even have the legal power to do so. Personally, though, I think giving local government more power is a genius design by the founding fathers. > was the single action taken after the virus was already spreading uncontrolled in NY, Washington State, and Europe. I'm not sure if this claim is true, either. Trump did at least two things: 1. Signed a deal with pharma companies to promise that the federal government would buy their vaccines to every American so the companieswould be all in to develop vaccines. 2. Promised to give resources to state governments. Both Cuomo of NY and Newsom of CA thanked government for keeping its promises.
- ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
  The federal laws on trade and immigration actually have a lot of carve outs for infection control. The executive can quarantine any vessel, demand health documentation on passengers, and turn noncompliant vessels away.

Moodles 5y ago

> More critically, you have a higher standard of every random article in every newspaper than you do of agencies actually responsible. Which is truly dystopian. > But you find issue with the media. > Incredible. The HN topic is about the media, so I'm talking about the media. > Speaking of which, Trump's "travel ban" (that wasn't a travel ban) was the single action taken after the virus was already spreading uncontrolled in NY, Washington State, and Europe. It did nothing to restrict US citizens traveling to and from the affected areas unrestrained, which thousands continued to do, even if we believed it would be remotely effective at that point I'm not defending Trump. I'm pointing out media hypocrisy. What did they do? Call the travel ban racist. Their behaviour has been very partisan, often at the expense of the truth. Exhibit A: the lab leak theory in the OP.

defaultname 5y ago
There is zero disguising the intent of your comment. The bit about Pelosi "dancing" was particularly telling. There are a number of other replies that come straight from MAGA-verse, full of outrageous lies but that is where US politics are right now. The US had a catastrophically poor response under the prior administration. That wasn't because of the media. It wasn't because of Nancy Pelosi. It wasn't because people dismissed theories by racists and imbeciles (the "lab leak" theory was overwhelmingly put forward by the absolute slugs of humanity, so there isn't a lot of surprise that it got smeared along with it, however unfortunate). This whole "see, we wuz right!" thing is a bit bizarre given that no, people didn't ignore evidence early on. They ignored a theory based upon literally nothing, generally put forward by people arguing that it was somehow weaponized and intentional. If there is evidence it should be pursued, but that doesn't give credence to hysterical conspiracies. Again, it is remarkable reading your comment and then understanding that you're decrying "partisan" positions. It goes beyond irony.
- jimmygrapes 5y ago
  Your unconditional hatred is showing.
  - defaultname 5y ago
    It is very conditional. I make no bones about the fact that I absolutely despise the cult of stupidity that has afflicted the United States. It is the downfall of the nation. There is a paradox that the "MAGA" crowd is the greatest setback to US achievement in centuries and still will likely destroy the country within the decade. So yeah, I _hate_ those people with every fiber of my being. It is hilarious that this thread is full of pearl clutchers who gasp and groan about how unfair this is, they're just patrons of the truth and non-partisan fairness...and then you look at their history, and they are precisely what you expected them to be. Antiscience cretins who put forth the most absurdly disingenuous nonsense purely for an audience of other cultists.
- Dma54rhs 5y ago
  Incredible comment, is this is the level of discourse now in America?

makomk 5y ago

No, every bit of cynicism about the media coverage of travel bans seems 100% justified. For context, I'm from the UK where we have a right-wing Brexit-supporting government that's perceived very much as a Trump analogue - except they didn't impose travel bans on places like China early in the pandemic. Which means that over here, people blame our pandemic deaths on the supposed fact that our Government avoided placing restrictions on travel because they're evil right-wingers who were too worried about the damage to the economy that would cause. There was literally a talking point where the Guardian dug up an estimate that imposing travel restrictions on China would've delayed the outbreak here by something like a month, but it had to be a ban on all travellers who'd been in China within 14 days and not just direct travel - that is, it specifically had to be a Trump-style travel ban, an Italy-style one would not have worked. Meanwhile, their US coverage was attacking Trump for his travel ban. Also, remember that the current US president literally went from using the idea that travel bans were dangerous, counterproductive and made things worse in his electoral campaign to reinstating them with the exact same rules as Trump used as his first act in office, and the mainstream media cheered him on every step of the way...

defaultname 5y ago
I love that my other comment is at -4 already. The "MAGA" side of HN is flooding in, desperately thinking this is their moment of redemption. "but it had to be a ban on all travellers who'd been in China within 14 days and not just direct travel" Weird to call that "Trump-style" given that Trump's travel "ban" excluded Americans and their family members which already comprised the bulk of people traveling to and from China. One critic of the ban pointed out that in a single day, 30 aircraft from China landed in San Francisco, full, during the "ban". "Also, remember that the current US president literally went from using the idea that travel bans were dangerous, counterproductive and made things worse" This is either ignorance or an intentional lie. Which is it? Contrary to the shrill lies from a certain camp, zero Democratic leaders opposed the "ban". They opposed that it was the singular action taken during a very dangerous period. That quarantines or even tracing weren't put in effect. Etc. That the literal implementation of it was "only people carrying other passports can possibly be carrying COVID". And I mean...we all know how things turned out, right? Maybe this "he was right" victory lap might be in poor taste, 600,000 dead Americans later.

hintymad 5y ago

> It did nothing to restrict US citizens traveling to and from the affected areas unrestrained, which thousands continued to do I thought the federal government does not even have the legal power to do so. Personally, though, I think giving local government more power is a genius design by the founding fathers. > was the single action taken after the virus was already spreading uncontrolled in NY, Washington State, and Europe. I'm not sure if this claim is true, either. Trump did at least two things: 1. Signed a deal with pharma companies to promise that the federal government would buy their vaccines to every American so the companieswould be all in to develop vaccines. 2. Promised to give resources to state governments. Both Cuomo of NY and Newsom of CA thanked government for keeping its promises.

ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
The federal laws on trade and immigration actually have a lot of carve outs for infection control. The executive can quarantine any vessel, demand health documentation on passengers, and turn noncompliant vessels away.