The blatant disregard for human life emanating from the Republican party is not something we might have expected in an America of yesterday.
But as Donald Trump, right-wing hate media, and deep-pocketed right-wing groups get their supporters protesting Democratic governors' coronavirus shelter-at-home orders ginned up with Gadsden flags, American flags, swastikas, and rifles, the Republican party is cheering from the sidelines, celebrating impending future deaths.
In an exclusive interview with ABC "World News Tonight" this week, anchor David Muir asked Trump his reaction to the predicted numbers of deaths as virus infections multiply.
Trump responded:
"It's possible there will be some [deaths] because you won't be locked into an apartment or a house or whatever it is...Will some people be affected? Yes. Will some people be affected badly? Yes. But we have to get our country open and we have to get it open soon."
Translation: For the Almighty Economy we must sacrifice.
And sacrifice we shall.
Internal projections "based on modeling by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and pulled together in chart form by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema)" indicate we are on pace to sacrifice 3,000 Americans a day to the coronavirus/COVID-19 by next month.
That's a 9/11 every day.
According to a New York Times and Washington Post report, the model for economic recovery the White House is following originated with an adviser "with no background in infectious diseases", Kevin Hassett.
The Post reported:
"By the end of April, with more Americans dying in the month than in all of the Vietnam war, it became clear that the Hassett model was too good to be true. 'A catastrophic miss,' as a former senior administration official briefed on the data described it."
On Monday, former New Jersey governor, Trump transition-team leader, and current ABC News contributor, Chris Christie, said the American economy needs to reopen quickly and tens of thousands of Americans are "gonna have to" accept that.
He added:
"Of course, everybody wants to save every life they can--but the question is, towards what end, ultimately? Are there ways that we can thread the middle here to allow that there are going to be deaths, and there are going to be deaths no matter what?"
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
