ktchong

And here is why Indians don't get the coronavirus:

Humanity is the real virus of the planet. The coronavirus is just Earth's antibody and immune response, attempting to fight off the infection = humans. Hopefully Earth's next antibody and attempt will be more successful and kill off at least 50% of the human population on the planet.

So a Chinese doctor who was sent to Italy to help out the horrid situation there, observed what was going on in Italy and realized what Italy problem's was, (and I'm paraphrasing): "WHY THE **** IS NO ONE STAYING HOME? WHY IS EVERYONE STILL WALKING AROUND OUTSIDE?? AND WITHOUT A FACE MASK??? WHY HAS NOTHING SHUT DOWN?" THAT is the problem that has been causing massive casualties in Italy. Original source: China expert lambasts Italy’s ‘lax’ response to pandemic Well, here comes the punchline: the US is even more lax than Italy has been.

It's more about the hot chick than the song, but the Euro pop song is nice too: Faded by Alan Walker

Now, some potentially good news. Someone who had attended CPAC — which Trump and Pence had also attended along with tens or even hundreds of thousands of conservatives and Republicans — has been tested positive for COVID 19: Link to news article.

I'd give you a ****ing good reason why we should have single-payer universal healthcare: I am fairly young and in good health, so I bought an insurance plan that has high co-pays and a high deductible. So three weeks ago I came down with flu-like syndromes. I suspected that I might have gotten COVID-19, i.e., the Chinese coronavirus. I came in contact with a lot of Chinese who travel in and out of the country, so I might have gotten the infection from one of them. COVID-19 is fatal for older people and people who have preexisting health issues. I am in good health. I recovered after a week. So COVID-19 was not a problem for me. However, it is a certainly problem for OTHER people around me, for the community, and for the country. The thing about COVID-19 is that, even after someone got sicked and recovered, he could still be a carrier. I had thought about going to a clinic and doctor to get diagnosed. However, I changed my mind when I found out it would cost me over over $3,000 out-of-pocket to get screened for COVID-19. As I said, I am healthy. I have recovered from whatever I got. So the only reason I would go to spend over $3,000 of my own money to get screen for coronavirus is to do it for the sake of OTHER people. I don't have any close friends or relatives who are old or sick , so I would be spending $3,000 of my own money for the sake of STRANGERS. So... why should I? $3,000 is quite a bit of money. If we had universal healthcare, I would have gotten screened for COVID-19 for free or with minimal expenses. Truth be told: I certainly ain't gonna pay over $3,000 out of my own pocket for other people and strangers. I have insurance, and I still can't really afford to see a doctor or go to a clinic when I need it, (well, I certainly don't want to spend thousands of dollars out of my own pocket to protect other people and strangers when it is no longer my problem.) And think about this: given that, in America, everyone is out for themselves and do not really give a damn about anyone else. That is the pathos of America. Most old people vote Republican or for establishment anyway. Like, the people who think universal healthcare and Medicare-for-All is "socialism". So, if those people got sick from COVID-19 and die... well, whatever. Good riddance, I supposed. It is them who don't want universal healthcare anyway. Karma. Anyway, have to go out and possibly be super... like, a super spreader.

This is getting really sad...

YIKES. This happened just last night. Joe Biden showed clear signs of Alzheimer's. "One of things I'm proudest of... is getting passed the Paris Climate Accord. I'm the guy who came back after meeting with Deng Xiaoping..." Deng Xiaoping left office in 1992 and has been dead for 28 years, long before climate change became an issue. "My name is Joe Biden. I'm a Democratic candidate for the United States Senate. Look me over. If not, vote for the other Biden." He forgot he was running for President and against Bernie Sanders!

Correction: Libya, not Syria.

Also a consequence of US and EU foreign policies. Libya, when it was the most prosperous, progressive country in Africa and Qaddafi was in charge, used to be the gatekeeper that blocked/prevented African migrants from passing through into Europe. Then America and the NATO invaded, destabilized and destroyed Libya, (which is now ruled by brutal warlords and has open slave markets;) now the floodgate is wide open, and African migrants can pass through Libya into Europe. We have a word for that kind of scenario. It is called KARMA. Yes, IMO African and Middle Eastern migrant crises will destroy Europe -- or, at the very least, fundamentally transform the cultures and demographics in Europe. However, can't say I feel sorry for White Europeans... they brought the karma upon themselves. Sure, it has always been America leading the charge in invading, occupying, destabilizing and destroying countries of brown people, but then the NATO and Europeans have always been there every step of the way. Links: The Christian Science Monitor: How the fall of Qaddafi gave rise to Europe's migrant crisis MSNBC: How Libya became the gatekeeper of Africa's migrant crisis BBC: How Libya holds the key to solving Europe's migration crisis

I hated the ending of Season 1. So I did not watch Season 2. Season 3 seems to have upped its production budget. Seems like the show has turned into about poor android slaves working with underclass humans to revolt against the rich, evil human top-percenters. (Class warfare and economic inequality have become the popular theme in movies and TV all over the world in the past year, as over a dozen major movies like Parasite, Joker, Knives Out, etc., etc., in 2019 have shown.)

↑ ↑ ↑ DESTROYED by FACTS and LOGIC. P.S. a "Sino-bot" who knows US history better than you do.

Your timelines were off; more likely, you just made up BS as you went along -- like most conservatives I know do. Here are some historical FACTS and timeline LOGIC: FDR was elected AFTER the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression. In 1929, the Republican Herbert Hoover was the President (1929-1933). Hoover was a businessman-turned-President, the only one before Donald Trump. Before Hoover, Calvin Coolidge had been the President, also a Republican (1923-1929). Before Coolidge, Warren Harding had been the President, yet another Republican (1921-1923). (Just so you can't pin the blame of the crash and depression on a Democrat President; BTW, nowadays all three of Harding, Coolidge and Hoover are generally considered as among the worst presidents in US history, as their successive conservative policies ultimately led to the Great Depression.) FDR became the President in 1933, four years after 1929 and the Great Depression had started after a decade of Republican policies. Before FDR, Republicans had been one President after another and in power for over a decade. So I assured you conservative had plenty of "political cloud". (In contrast to his three Republican predecessors: nowadays FDR is generally considered as among the best presidents in US history.) The US entered World War II in December 1941, which was FDR's third term -- so he was already a very popular president. He was the first President to win a third term, (other previous Presidents had tried to win a third term, and failed.) Woodrow Wilson was the Democratic President in 1913 to 1921 -- and a leader and pioneer of the progressive movement. He is called the "Godfather of Liberalism". Wilson was before FRD, Hoover, Coolidge and Harding. So, long before FDR, the Democratic Party was already the progressive party (NOT a "right wing party" as you claimed.) So, saying that FDR "hijacked" a "right-wing party" and turned it into a progressive party was a LIE.

FDR. President. Progressive. Democratic Socialist. Most beloved and popular president in US history. Won four terms, unprecedented, has never been and will never be repeated. Effectively President-for-life until he died in office. Even if you want to dispute his "New Deals" accomplishments for saving America from the Great Depression, (which conservatives and libertarians love to dismiss by making wild and unproven assumptions like "the Great Depression would have ended sooner if not for his New Deals,") you cannot deny that his socialist policies paved the way for the "Golden Age" of America and ushered in half a century of unprecedented growth and prosperity in America.

Michael Bloomberg is not just a Republican, (who has only recently changed his party affiliation in October 2018 to run in the Democratic primary, and at the time he was still donating money to Republicans to defeat Democrats in the mid-term elections.) He is the archetypal NEOCONSERVATIVE. After Trump had taken over the Republican party, neocons like Bloomberg and John Bolton have been forced to either bend their knees to Trump -- or out of the Republican party. So neocons are looking for a new home. Bloomberg is making a leveraged buyout and hostile takeover of the Democratic Party, to turn it into the new home for neocon refugees. If Bloomberg successfully wins the nomination, he will take over the Democratic Party. Then, America will end up with a two-party system in which BOTH parties will be conservative: a Trump party, and a neocon party. It will be the end of liberal and progressive politics in America. I would say the priority right now should be to defeat the neocon Republican who is trying to take over the Democratic Party rather than to defeat Trump.

Here is how I think the whole Democratic primary will play out: After Super Tuesday, Bernie will NOT be able to win the decisive majority of delegates, (i.e., 2,376 of all 4,750 delegates.) So the final decision go to the DNC and super-delegates. However, the DNC and superdelegates will want to stay out of it -- because they know Bernie supporters will refuse to accept their decision. So, the DNC and superdelegates will NOT step in. Instead, they will instruct the candidates to work out a deal among themselves. As a general rule: when a dropped-out candidate endorsed another candidate, all the delegates he won would transfer to that other candidate. That means, at current count, Bernie has won 21 delegates from Iowa and New Hampshire. On the other hand, Michael Bloomberg already got 43 delegates from Iowa and New Hampshire -- which he will eventually receive from Bootyjuggs, Klobuchar, Warren and Biden. And I will tell you exactly why Bootyjuggs, Klobuchar, Warren and Biden will all endorse Bloomberg: Bloomberg will just pay for their endorsements -- and delegates, in exchange for donations to their political campaigns in the future, or just money to whatever private enterprises or foundations they want to start (for Biden who will score a nice retirement package from Bloomberg.) So there you go: 43 delegates will go to Bloomberg, plus whatever Bootyjuggs, Klobuchar, Warren and Biden will win from Nevada, South Carolina, and Super Tuesday. They will all go to Bloomberg in the end. I can already tell you what the candidates' final deal will be: all the centrist/establishment/moderate candidates will combine their delegates and transfer all his/her delegates to... Michael Bloomberg, (whom IMO will squeeze out all other establishment candidates on Super Tuesday.) You know as well as I do that those centrist/moderate candidates will NOT give their delegates to Bernie. And frankly, they should not -- because their own supporters voted for a centrist/moderate/establishment candidate in the primaries, and Bernie does not reflect those people's politics or votes. (So Bloomberg's strategy is becoming clearer now: he expects other centrists/moderates to drop out -- and then buy their delegates from early primary states and Super Tuesday. That is how a multi-billionaire roll.) So, the DNC and superdelegates will NOT step in to make a decision. The candidates themselves will make the decision... based on the "will" of their supporters, and Bernie will still lose. Bernie is to be blamed as well: he cannot just "barely win" in every primary state, and keep limping from one win to another. He needs to win every state DECISIVELY, with a huge margin, beating out the combined delegates of other establishment candidates. He will need to win the majority of delegates BY HIMSELF, (i.e., >2,376 delegates.) Otherwise, he will not make it. Which could actually turn out to be a blessing in disguise -- as I am starting to see the numbers (based on the turnouts of the early primary states on both Democratic and Republican sides,) and I think NONE of the Democratic candidate will able to beat Trump. If Bernie wins the nomination and then loses to Trump, it will be devastating to the progressives movements -- everyone will blame the failure on progressive movements and socialism. Progressives will NEVER be able to recover from that fatal blow.

I am saying this as a Bernie supporter myself: Bernie has the best chance to beat Trump in this election cycle, BUT Bernie has already lost to Trump. (Meaning NONE of the Democratic candidates will be able to defeat Trump in November.) It is just math. Back in 2016, when almost every media pundits and pollsters predicted that Hillary would defeat Trump in a landslide, only TWO university professors, HELMUT NORPOTH and ALLAN LICHTMAN, (links to their 2016 predictions before Trump won,) correctly predicted that Trump would win and become the President. In particular: Prof. Norpoth used a purely mathematical model called the “Primary Model”, which uses the turnout sizes of the early state primaries to gauge voter enthusiasm for any individual candidates — and to “calculate” the final winner of the general election. (The “early” primary states taken into consideration are New Hampshire and South Carolina; caucus states are NOT considered.) Link: http://primarymodel.com/ Using primary turnouts as the criteria, Bernie has already lost to Trump, by a wide margin. Link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2020/02/12/bernie-sanders-gets-50-fewer-votes-in-new-hampshire-than-2016-trump-gets-24-more/ It is just math, no personal bias or emotion.

Here is a little and shortened history lesson of this whole mess between China and Taiwan, and a little tale of how Karma is truly a bitch: After Taiwan -- aka officially the "Republic of China" -- lost the civil war and retreated to the island, Taiwan was actually in the United Nations between 1945 and 1971, as the official "Re pubic of China". The "Republic of China" was -- and still is -- Taiwan's formal designation and official name. Taiwan was a member in the UN, as one of the give permanent UN Security Council, for 26 years as the "legitimate" and "official" representation of CHINA and the CHINESE PEOPLE. Taiwan regarded itself as the government of all China -- included the mainland. At the same time, Taiwan called and labeled the China mainland as the "illegitimate" and "rogue" government on the mainland. The UN accepted Taiwan as the official "China" because Taiwan insisted that it will retake the China mainland from the communist government... WHICH NEVER HAPPENED. At that time, China was actually willing to recognize Taiwan -- if only Taiwan was willing to recognize China as a separate country and allow China into the UN. BUT TAIWAN REFUSED. Yup, Taiwan had the opportunity to become a separate country, to become independent from China. All Taiwan had to do was to recognize China as a separate country, and allow China into the UN as a separate country. BUT TAIWAN REFUSED, because it wanted to isolate China; and Taiwan had the upperhand at the time, and it thought it had the upperhand forever. Of course, Taiwan used its UNSC powers to put all kinds of tough economic and political sanctions on China, which caused hundreds of millions of death, miseries and suffering happened in China under Mao. So, was it Mao's fault to millions of Chinese death, or was it Taiwan's sanctions and isolation on China? Hm... certainly an interesting point to ponder over. So, after 26 years in 1971, China petitioned to the UN to replace Taiwan as the official, legitimate representative of "China" and the Chinese people. Many nations in the UN also thought it was getting silly to wait for Taiwan to "retake China", and felt that "we really have to have a government that legitimate representation for the Chinese people on the mainland, not some little island that has not ruled China for decades and just wants to put vengeful sanctions to punish and kill Chinese people." So the UN called for a vote, on UN Resolution 2758. Taiwan was not permitted to use its UNSC veto, (the first and only time a UNSC was not allowed to use its veto.) With clever and well-planned political maneuvers, China succeeded -- and replaced Taiwan as the "China" in the UN, by 76 to 35 votes. And Taiwan was kicked out of the UN and lost its status as an "independent country". And, here we are, and here is the irony: now that the situation is reversed, Taiwan is crying and whining about it being "not" China, it being an independent and separate country. Taiwan certainly did not see things that way back when it was in the UN between 1945 and 1971. It is only crying and whining right now because it lost the upperhand over China in 1971. Ah, sweet irony. Boo-hoo, cry me a river. Oh, poor baby, Taiwan does not want to play anymore. As for China: it still remembers the 26 years when Taiwan put and used all kind of sanctions that killed and starved millions of China. Taiwan still owes China some blood debts. There is still a price to be paid.

Finally, proofs that Americans — i.e., the PEOPLE, not just the government — are in fact a very evil people. Polls to confirm the wickedness of how willing Americans (BOTH Democrats and Republicans) are to use nukes:

Didn't the Iraqi Parliament just voted to expel all foreign occupying military forces??!? Iraq is being occupied by Western forces. It has no self-determination. It is effectively no different from being a colony of Western powers -- notably America. We don't call it that, but that is what it really is.

I've been watching a lot of videos on Iran, so now YouTube is recommending anything that's relevant to Iran to me. A bunch of Christian and Evangelical videos about Iran have just popped up in my recommendations. Oh boy are they super excited about the coming End Time.

Looks like Soleimani might have been invited by Iraq to Baghdad — on US behalf — to start a peace talk. Then the US turned around and assassinated Soleimani when he arrived on what was technically a US invitation. That was some Braveheart/Red Wedding-level villainy right there, a new low for America... or maybe not.