According to Jack Holmes of Esquire magazine, “The Hot New Conservative Talking Point on COVID-19 Is Extremely Wrong.”
Is it really, Jack?
Is it really “extremely wrong?”
“The weekend’s big talking point for people more concerned with propping up the president’s campaign than grappling with reality was that a new CDC report found 94 percent of people who have been recorded as dying from COVID-19 have also had other causes of death listed.”
I’m not sure exactly how this can be viewed as, “propping up the president’s campaign,” unless exposing the truth about the China virus accomplishes this.
And you, Mr. Holmes, and your liberal friends, seem to be the ones “grappling with reality.”
Well, I guess you’re not really “grappling…,” it’s more like intentionally twisting reality.
“The thinking from some exceptionally large brains in the conservative media was that this meant only six percent of the recorded COVID deaths are actually deaths due to COVID, so that a big chunk of the 183,000 recorded deaths in the U.S. somehow shouldn’t count.”
Well, I gotta tell you, Jack…, 100% minus 94% does leave us with 6%, now doesn’t it?
And, these “large brained” people you speak of are not implying that the China virus had nothing to do with the deaths of the 94%…, they’re just correctly pointing out that only 6%, or 10,980 people died solely from the virus, with no underlying conditions, which would be about .0033% of the US population.
Even the entire 183,000 number is only .0555% of the US population.
Remember that .5 would represent one half of 1 percent.
Again, who do you feel is “grappling with reality,” Mr. Holmes?
Comparatively, in 2020, an estimated 606,520 people will die of cancer in the United States.
That’s 3 times the COVID related number, and 55 times the COVID only number.
And, the number of people who die from heart disease are pretty similar to the cancer numbers.
Holmes continues by saying, “This hasn’t yet spread as widely yet as some other right-wing tropes [please note that ‘trope’ is new liberal buzzword, meaning a ‘figurative idea’], but these days, you have to take it all seriously—and nip it in the bud early.”
Yes, we know Jack…, you gotta nip those nasty facts in the bud early, and put the proper liberal spin on them as soon as possible!
“It’s understandable that the president’s partisans would prefer not to confront his actual record on the pandemic.”
Now wait one darn minute there, Jack.
Who says, “The president’s partisans would prefer not to confront his actual record on the pandemic?”
I mean bsides you, of course?
Most people, who support The President, which would include me, feel he has done a good job dealing with the pandemic. It is the democrat governors and democrat mayors who have mishandled the handling of the China virus in my opinion, while Biden condemned President Trump’s early flight restrictions from China, and Pelosi and DeBlasio encouraged their constituents to ignore the virus and go out and have a good time. You know, your friends, Jack.
Mr. Holmes then goes on to say, “Much like he’d [The President would] rather dwell on—and encourage—the unrest in the nation’s streets.”
I’m not sure where this bit of liberal propaganda BS came from, but it does give us clearer view as to where you’re coming from, Jack, if indeed we needed a clearer view.
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article. From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
We’re all entitled to our opinions. I value yours and your feedback as well.
I’d love to hear from you!
Thank you, MrEricksonRules.