Covid19: American Exceptionalim

*Covid19: American Exceptionalism*

“scholars have rejected American exceptionalism, arguing the U.S. did not break from European history, and accordingly, the U.S. has retained class-based and race-based differences, as well as imperialism and willingness to wage war.“

"Irony is a literary technique in which what is written or stated is different from or the opposite of what is expected. There are several types of irony. For example, verbal irony is when a person says the opposite of what they mean, often to sarcastic effect, such as when a customer says 'Good job,' to a waiter who has dropped his tray...situational irony also requires one's expectations to be thwarted, but in this case, it occurs when an expected outcome does not happen, or its opposite happens instead."

https://examples.yourdictionary.com/exam…

An explanation of how Italy opened itself to CoVid. Hint: For many years, Italy had a communist Prime Minister.

https://frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/04/ita…

Sometimes the price of freedom includes being more susceptible to something like this, since of course our government simply cannot do what some Asian countries have done to its people. Given the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have died over the centuries simply to preserve our freedoms, it is a small price to pay.

The US has a few more people than Italy.

@prevert: "The US has a few more people than Italy."
_________
Yeah, it's hard to take any comment seriously if not presented per capita.

The IHME model mentioned in @Dugan's (otherwise idiotic) WSJ editorial shows projected first-wave Covid-19 predicted per capita deaths through Aug 20th. The US is in 11th place with about 1/10th the prected per-capita dealths of Sweden and the Netherlands. Italy is in 7th place in deaths-per-capita.

So Sweden is actually #1

OT: What is about right-wing nutcases and the obsession with China?

@Wally - close but no cigar. It's actually sarcasm, a form of irony meant to convey mockery or ridicule.
"Irony and sarcasm are often confused, which is understandable. In some cases, they are interchangeable. This is because sarcasm is a kind of irony, so all instances of sarcasm are irony, but not all instances of irony are sarcasm.

Irony is when something appears to be or is said to be one way, but is actually another.
One type of irony is verbal irony. It is when someone says something, but they mean something different.
“Great, my dress is ruined. That’s just what I always wanted.”
“It’s time to spend ten hours watching paint dry. I can’t wait.”
In both cases, the speakers are using verbal irony to communicate their displeasure.

Sarcasm is when someone uses verbal irony with the intent to *insult or ridicule*.
For example, if someone arrives to a location with their hair in a mess, saying “Oh, I love what you did with your hair!” would be sarcasm because it’s calling attention to how bad the hair is.

It can also be used to mock an idea.
So, while irony can cover situations, knowledge, and speech, sarcasm is only a form of ironic speech, and it is only used to insult or ridicule while irony can also be used for suspense or comedy.

@Random - "Yeah, it's hard to take any comment seriously if not presented per capita."
Yeah, it's not meant to be SERIOUS; it's meant to be SARCASTIC, Capisce?

@Dugan: "Sometimes the price of freedom includes being more susceptible to something like this, [...] Given the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have died over the centuries simply to preserve our freedoms, it is a small price to pay."

/s Thanks for your willingness to sacrifice others in pursuit of your selfish goals masquerading as patriotic fervor. /s

"@Wally - close but no cigar. It's actually sarcasm, a form of irony meant to convey mockery or ridicule."

Am I supposed to be Wally? It shouldn't have to be explained to you that what you posted invalidates your own point, but maybe it's necessary. That quote wasn't directed at you anyway. Other that, *yawn*.

Q: Am I supposed to be Wally?
A: It shouldn't have to be explained to you 😁
*yawn*

frontpagemag.com
Credibility Ratings via three news site rating organizations

Newsguard:
frontpagemag.com
Proceed with caution: This website severely violates basic standards of credibility and transparency.
A conservative website that has published false news and conspiracy theories about Muslims and minorities, owned by a nonprofit that declares "the political left has declared war on America."

CREDIBILITY
NO - Does not repeatedly publish false content
NO - Gathers and presents information responsibly
NO - Regularly corrects or clarifies errors
NO - Handles the difference between news and opinion responsibly
NO - Avoids deceptive headlines

TRANSPARENCY
NO - Website discloses ownership and financing
YES - Clearly labels advertising
YES - Reveals who's in charge, including any possible conflicts of interest
YES - The site provides names of content creators, along with either contact or biographical information

Newstrition Label
Frontpage Mag
Frontpage Mag is a conservative site with the stated mission of combating "the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror."

Media Bias / Fact Check:
Overall, we rate FrontPage Magazine a Questionable source based on Extreme Right Bias, promotion of conspiracy theories regarding Islam as well as propaganda that only reports negatively on Islam. This source has also failed fact checks by IFCN [ The International Fact-Checking Network of the Poynter Institute of Journalism ] fact checkers.

History

FrontPage Magazine is an online conservative political website, edited by David Horowitz and published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a non-profit organization in Los Angeles, California. The David Horowitz Center has claimed that the “Left has declared war on America.” Some notable writers for FrontPage include Ann Coulter and President Trump’s adviser Stephen Miller. All of which, who have failed numerous fact checks.

Funded by / Ownership

FrontPage Magazine is owned by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, which is a conservative foundation founded in 1988 by political activist David Horowitz and his long-time collaborator Peter Collier. It was established with funding from groups including the John M. Olin Foundation, the Bradley Foundation and the Scaife Foundation. Besides FrontPage Magazine, they also run the Questionable Jihad Watch, which promotes negative information towards Islam. The David Horowitz Freedom Center is a non-profit that generates revenue through donations.

Analysis / Bias

In review, FrontPage Magazine promotes extreme right wing propaganda that utilizes loaded language such as this: LEFTISTS HAVE ALWAYS LIED ABOUT AUSCHWITZ. They also routinely promote President Trump’s immigration agenda such as this: ORWELLIAN SPECTACLE OVERSHADOWS IMMIGRATION DEBATE. The primary purpose of this website is to paint Islam followers negatively such as this: AMERICA’S NEWEST MUSLIM MARTYR IS A CHILD RAPIST AND KILLER. In general, the stories published on this website serve to portray Islam in a negative light. You will never find a positive story, only murder, rape and terror. This is a classic propaganda and conspiracy website that many take seriously.

According to the SPLC David Horowitz and FrontPage Magazine are considered anti-Muslim hate groups.

A factual search reveals a few failed fact checks by IFCN [ The International Fact-Checking Network of the Poynter Institute of Journalism ] fact checkers.
Examples
Is Robert S. Khuzami, the deputy U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, an “Obama holdover”? – FALSE
Social media rumors claimed President Obama dropped leaflets warning ISIS militants of imminent airstrikes against them. – FALSE

Overall, we rate FrontPage Magazine a Questionable source based on Extreme Right Bias, promotion of conspiracy theories regarding Islam as well as propaganda that only reports negatively on Islam.
This source has also failed fact checks by IFCN fact checkers. (10/7/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 6/21/2019)

So, some liberal websites claiming to be unbiased fact-checkers say bad things about a conservative website. Yawn.

>since of course our government simply cannot do what some Asian countries have done to its people

Like lie about how many people died.

>So, some liberal websites claiming to be unbiased fact-checkers say bad things about a conservative website. Yawn<

@Mark, I cited sources. You disagree but cite NO SOURCES for your 'opinion'

Challenge: Check out the websites of my 3 sources. Report back on what supports / doesn't support your opinion of them:

1. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ [ MediaBias/FactCheck ]

2. https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/fi… [ Newstrition ]

3. https://www.newsguardtech.com/ [ NewsGuard ]

Backgrounder - Here are two additional links which discuss the challenge in rating credibility of news sources:

1. "What is credibility made of?"
https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/o…

From: The Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism

2. From the Trust Project [ https://thetrustproject.org/ ]

Out of an initial set of 37, the Trust Project collaborators decided on a core set of eight Trust Indicators to implement first. [ https://thetrustproject.org/faq/#indicat… ]

I await your considered reply.

I freely admit that front page is a conservative website. So, no argument there.

I also don’t see anything in their article that is incorrect. An avowed communist was PM of Italy. China bought dozens of large Companies. Over 100,000 Chinese moved to northern Italy to work there. There were frequent flights to Wuhan...........bingo/bango CoVid. Do you dispute any of this ?

I think the crux of your argument is that the source is conservative so therefore the story must be false. If that’s your argument, I’m not buying it.

“According to the SPLC David Horowitz and FrontPage Magazine are considered anti-Muslim hate groups.“

The SPLC has become a joke. They label dozens, perhaps hundreds, of right leaning Organizations as anti-Muslim hate group. According to SPLC, half the country are anti-Muslim haters. Meanwhile, the leadership of SPLC has been covered in scandal, including millions kept in secret accounts held outside the US.

More on the SPLC from today’s PJMedia

Last month, the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) released its annual list accusing conservative and Christian groups of being "hate groups" on par with the Ku Klux Klan. In that list, the SPLC attacked President Donald Trump no fewer than 66 times. The leftist group later went on to accuse the president of inciting anti-Asian harassment by countering Chinese Communist propaganda and referring to the coronavirus as Chinese. Both the White House and the Trump campaign have responded to the smear group's attacks.

As I recount in my book Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center, the SPLC has weaponized its history as a civil rights group that bankrupted the Ku Klux Klan in order to smear its political opponents and scare donors into writing big checks. Its list of "hate groups" is inflated and politically biased, but it bills that list as the gold standard on hate, encouraging Big Tech, corporate America, and the media to demonize and cut off from polite society whichever organizations end up in its crosshairs.

The US is far greater in size and population compared to Italy. And depending on the state you live in the stay at home order is interpreted and enforced differently. In summary if this country was not so political, and belived in human rights they would do a better job to have people stay at home. Other countries around the world have taken far more extreme measures to enforce their citizens to stay in their homes.

Spain is at 374 deaths per million, Belgium at 337, Italy at 329, France at 221, UK at 167, Netherlands at 165 (Worldometer data). By way of comparison, US is at 67.”

"So, some liberal websites claiming to be unbiased fact-checkers say bad things about a conservative website."
"I think the crux of your argument is that the source is conservative so therefore the story must be false. If that’s your argument, I’m not buying it."

No, that is definitely NOT my argument.
The political perspective or bias of an online news source is SEPARATE from its journalistic credibility and its organizational transparency.
@Mark
Since this is an 'old topic" likely to turn more political I'll PM you my remaining remarks.

===> "The political perspective or bias of an online news source is SEPARATE from its journalistic credibility and its organizational transparency."

Once upon a time I agreed with this, but not anymore. Even once well respected news sources like the New York Times and CNN have screwed the pooch more times now than I can count. They are so vehemently anti-Trump that they have published a lot of bad stuff that later was found to be uncorroborated and/or downright false.

Now part of this is the increasing financial reliance of certain news outlets upon audiences carving confirmation of their existing biases, but some of it has been the ingrained biases of the people writing the so-called news. When they are not engaged in never-ending spin, they are excluding relevant facts that work against their op-ed opinions disguised as news.

Sorry, "carving" should have been "craving" lol.

@joker44:
Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, by Tim Groseclose is one book that points to statistical research that there is infact (liberal) bias in the media and it is in fact measurable.

To you thread title, I do think AmeLeft Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind
by Tim Grosecloserican Exceptionalism prevented the U.S. from acting sooner on the COVID-19 lockdowns. I doubt we could have acted more quickly until we as a nation really *knew* we had a problem on our hands. We don't just willy-nilly shutdown travel and the economy without good reason and data to justify it. Now how history could and will judge us is another topic.