Whoopi makes a mess

[canpakes]

Blankets and heaters don’t work when it’s cold, either, considering that folks have still become frost bitten or died in the presence of either.

Are you trying to be funny, or dumb?

Blankets work. Heaters work. And if two teams play in the Super Bowl, but only one team wins, they still both played.

Do you have a point you are trying to make, panny? Or, are you just throwing things at the rim and hoping it falls through.

You have not one goddamn clue what hospitals have done during this pandemic. You are a sucker and a pest. The hospitals dealt with the pandemic, the virus, the fear the fear-porn and the people. They dealt with a lot. You did not.

“The hospitals didn’t work. People still caught COVID and died.”

Am I trying to be funny? Rather, am I just using your exact same argument tactic against you? Here you mention fear-porn, when you pushed fear-porn here for months.

This is a tired subject, and your claims have long ago been spanked. Why derail another thread with it?

[Binger]

What if it's not misinformation as in the case of the lab leak theory?

If you’re going to go off topic. I’m going to ask you: if you think that the Chinese were out to get us with COVID, why did you bitch so much about masks and mitigation efforts?

Hi panny.

[canpakes]

Blankets and heaters don’t work when it’s cold, either, considering that folks have still become frost bitten or died in the presence of either.

Are you trying to be funny, or dumb?

Blankets work. Heaters work. ...

Nope.

Canpakes is (rather obviously) responding to your flat assertion that "The vaccines do not stop contraction or transmission [of the COVID virus]".

Everybody knows that the effect of vaccination is to reduce the chance of your contracting the virus, not to eliminate it entirely. Vaccinating someone does not reduce the chance of infection to zero (though it does reduce it a great deal). Similarly, blankets do not reduce the chance of frostbite to zero, they just reduce it a great deal.

You know all that, of course. Perhaps it just excites you a bit to make a statement that some people will read as "vaccines are useless" when you know very well that they are not? I can't think of any other reason why you would choose to write like that on a topic that, for those wondering whether to get vaccinated, may be a matter of life or death.

And to think that he knows all of that, but can’t speak to it. It’s what makes his act so ridiculous.

[Binger]

What has Whoopi said about cloth masks? What has she said about doctors and nurses and Fauci?

The fact that she is suspended for applying the published definition of racism to the holocaust, but is free to say anything she wants about Fauci, vaccines and masks, is concerning.

Put Whoopi back on the air. She is not the mess. The mess is that too many pussies and dicks have hurt feelings. What Whoopi said was stupid, but it was in a syllabus. Put her back on the air and let the whiners whine.

[Chap]

she is suspended for applying the published definition of racism to the holocaust

Hmmm. A published definition, eh?

Here's an interesting discussion linked from the website of the Anti-Defamation League (A Jewish advocacy group).

https://j0nathan-g.medium.com/getting-i ... 01a517bf9d

[...]

As a case study, take ADL’s definition of racism. A few years ago, ADL updated our definition to reflect that racism in the United States manifests in broader and systemic ways and to explicitly acknowledge the targeting of people of color — among many others — by the white supremacist extremism we have tracked for decades. While this is true, this new frame narrowed the meaning in other ways. And, by being so narrow, the resulting definition was incomplete, rendering it ineffective and therefore unacceptable. It’s true, it’s just not the whole truth. It alienated many people who did not see their own experience encompassed in this definition, including many in the Jewish community.

In all honesty, as I re-read it this past week, it struck me that it didn’t even speak to my own family’s experience with the racism they experienced as Jews from the Middle East.

Many people noticed the change and called it out, taking to Twitter to vent their feelings. Some of these critics were allies operating in good faith who wanted us to do better. There also were numerous detractors who seized upon this issue as confirmation of a sinister plot to promote a political agenda or stop fighting antisemitism altogether. This certainly isn’t true, but with enough outrage and an Internet browser, a zealot can “uncover” a conspiracy in every digital breadcrumb.

And yet, even tough moments can be opportunities for introspection and improvement. Indeed, since we are entrusted with the safety of the community, we don’t have much margin for error. We need to acknowledge the issues so we can address them.

First and foremost, after internal consultation and external engagement, we updated the definition on our site, drawing upon the research of Professor Robert Livingston of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University and what he calls his “simple definition”:

Racism occurs when individuals or institutions show more favorable evaluation or treatment of an individual or group based on race or ethnicity.

Professor Livingston, as he notes in his book, took great care in developing his simple definition to allow room for, among other examples, “German racism against the Jews, Greeks or Turks.” Even as we make this change, effective immediately, we intend to use this framework as a jumping off point, and will continue to review not only this page but each of our definitions. Additionally, we are going to conduct an after-action analysis to review how we develop all of our definitions in terms of process and culture.

But we aren’t going to make this entirely an internal affair. This moment offers an opportunity to experiment and learn. And so, we are going to open ourselves to comments on our new definition of racism from the public. We are going to invite feedback at adl.org/comments, a new page we have developed specifically to take ideas in a productive fashion and move beyond the mindless trolling on social media. This page probably will evolve and improve over time, but I hope it will serve as a platform for discussion, one that will elicit constructive outside input rather than rely solely on ourselves or even solely on the outside experts to whom we will also reach out. In short, we know we will not get everything right and there is much more to do — and we hope this is a productive way for you to share your views with ADL about our definition of racism — or anything else you find on our website that needs review.

By all indications, our country is as divided today as at any point in our collective memory. It is not a matter of “bothsidesing” to acknowledge that there are well meaning people who take different positions on the same issues, whether they identify as Republican or Democratic, Conservative or Progressive. So we will do our best to listen to all sides as we move forward.

Unfortunately I suspect that this very statement of fact will inflame partisans on both sides who claim a monopoly on morality. And I fully expect that, no matter what measures we introduce, some will castigate ADL as too liberal even as others simultaneously slam us as too conservative. This is predictable. But I can promise that we will try to remain apolitical so that we remain rooted in firm principles not the faddish politics of the moment.
This means that we will be unrelenting in our work to defend the Jewish people, calling out whomever might defame or discriminate against any in our community and engaging with those willing to learn. We will mobilize in support of other marginalized communities, rallying against anti-black racism, anti-Asian hate, xenophobia, anti-Muslim bias and other forms of identity-based hate. We will create inclusive spaces for Jews of color along with Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews whose experiences and stories too often have not been heard both inside our own community and within the larger society.
We will build alliances, even with unlikely allies, if they share our values and want to advance our mission. We will fight back against the rising tide of extremism that directly threatens all vulnerable communities, whether it manifests as right-wing violence at the US Capitol or left-wing violence in Times Square or radical Islamist-inspired violence at a synagogue in Texas.

We will advocate for America and our democracy because it is the most pluralistic and resilient form of government in the history of the world. We won’t pull our punches on the danger of the Big Lie or mythologizing January 6 as anything other than a treacherous act of domestic terror. We will operate as an unapologetic advocate for Zionism for which, after millennia of suffering and cruelties at the hands of majoritarian populations in Europe and the Middle East, Jews do not need to apologize. And we’re not about to stop calling out the evil antisemitic tropes or the ugly bias motivating the many who delegitimize the only Jewish state in the world.

In summary, we will respond to the rise of hate by scaling what works even as we address our shortcomings so we can be even more effective. With a constant focus on culture and some new strategic initiatives, I’m confident we will improve. At the end of the day, enhancing our processes and exposing our positions to ferocious debate and rigorous inquiry won’t weaken our organization. It will make us stronger, battle tested and better prepared for the challenges of these complicated times.

[ajax18]

that's a tough claim to make unless you have some data that no- one else has about how hospitals would have dealt with a full-blown pandemic without any mitigation efforts.

Regarding masks, your claim makes no sense. How did mask-wearing destroy any economy?

Would any mitigation effort have been off the table for you?

Johns Hopkins University study finds lockdowns only reduced COVID deaths by 0.2%

BALTIMORE — A new study by researchers at Johns Hopkins University reveals COVID lockdowns prevented only a small number of deaths caused by the virus.

The authors reviewed 24 separate studies and broke them into three groups: Lockdown Stringency Index Studies, Shelter-In-Place Order Studies, and Specific Non-Pharmaceutical Intervention Studies.

An analysis of each found "that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality."

The numbers suggest lockdowns in Europe and the United States reduced the COVID-19 mortality rate by only an average of 0.2%.

Shelter-In-Place orders didn't fare much better, as they only reduced deaths by an average of 2.9%.

Researchers did find that lockdown orders caused enormous economic and social costs wherever they were implemented.

The authors concluded that lockdown policies are "ill-founded" and suggested they be rejected in future pandemics.

The study was performed by Jonas Herby, Lars Jonung, and Steve H. Hanke.

On their website, Johns Hopkins says the views expressed in the report are those of the authors and not necessarily the university.

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/nati ... ths-by-0-2

[Binger]

panny, thanks for the derail. This has led to some great stuff.

While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. Inconsequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument

Link to the research

Let's bring this back to Whoopi.

I learned something from this thread. And I think it is a very very important something to learn.

Whoopi/Karen Golberg/Johnson made a comment about whether the holocaust was about race. Hearing it, surprised me first because I thought she was Jewish. It also surprised me because it seemed so crazy crazy to think about the holocaust as a white on white, nonracial offense. But, when I stopped for just a minute and read what Res Ipsa shared, I had no choice but to revisit my own position on the topic and incident.

Yes. I am still a bit stunned by it all, and even more so by the contrived apology on Colbert.

No. She is not wrong to have said what she said, even if I disagree with her. What she said, was exactly the definition of racism that applied within any reasonable contemporary period of time for her to still have the standard she expressed. Do I agree with what she said, hell no. Was what she said a published standard within a few months or a short period of when she said it - YES IT WAS. So put her back on the air and let's talk about this. She did not make this mess, the feelings police and censor police did. Let Whoopi be Whoopi and get on with the show. Jesus F. Christ on a wooden cross in Jerusalem dying.