« What Are They Trying to Accomplish? | Main | Xiànzài huàngè wánquán bùtóng de dōngxī!! »

June 16, 2020

Comments

I want them to leave because I don't believe in open borders. Why do you think they should stay with an invalid visa?

The question is why do their visas have to be invalid(ated) in the first place?

I'm a bit confused. Is "open borders" the same thing as someone wanting to come here and spend money? (Which is an accurate description of what foreign students are doing.) Should we maybe shut down tourism coming here as well?

Also, it's unethical to admit someone to a college and give them a visa so they can attend and then change the rules before they are able to complete their course of studies when they have done nothing to lose their student status.

They would be here taking courses in person if it were safe to do so.

And putting international students' student status in jeopardy over remote learning puts severe economic pressure on campuses to open up despite the public safety risk involved. Loss of projected tuitions will send campus administrations into panic. This is only going to add to the severity of either the pandemic (as campuses try to open in order to stay afloat) or of unemployment as colleges get rid of their adjunct teaching faculty as students withdraw.

And guess what that does to university research, a bunch of which is aimed at solving Coronavirus related problems? All those research agendas get affected too.

Stupidest fucking move ever, and the absolute worst time for a brain drain.

Issuing visas on a passport is not open borders.

WTF?

Plenty of American citizens attend medical school abroad. They are issued visas on their American passports by the host country.

Because they are visas to attend school, which they are not doing. So their visas don't have to be invalidated, they are invalid unless they have other classes besides the online only classes that qualify them.

No one's visa was singled out to be cancelled. The course were deemed to be outside the guidelines for valid classes to qualify for a visa. Because they were.

"Plenty of American citizens attend medical school abroad."

The important word here is attend.

The stupidest move ever was cancelling H1-B's, those people actually go through a difficult process that has been made unconscionably difficult by the administration, but cancelling even one of them after they are approved is the stupidest move ever.

how very pedantic.

I want them to leave because I don't believe in open borders.

Issuing visas on a passport is not open borders.

Nothing to add to that.

As far as "attend", they'll be attending the same way that all of the other students are attending, whether born here or elsewhere. There are lots of reasons why someone would want to be in the US, even if they were not attending class in person. And a lot of those reasons are useful to the US.

Like, maybe they'll like it here, and decide to stay here, and all of the value of various kinds that they create with their university educations will be created here.

The downside to all of this is that we are basically behaving dickishly to a population that represents, and creates, great value to our economy and to the nation in general.

I'm not seeing the upside.

Do I require a visa to follow this argument down the rat hole?

The stupidest move ever was cancelling H1-B's

Most H1-B visa holders work in tech. Many if not most of them can work from anywhere. A hell of a lot of people do that already, I work with teams colocated in Bangalore and Sofia right now.

Why is it any stupider to cancel H1-B's than to cancel student visas?

Do I require a visa to follow this argument down the rat hole?

Only if you need to participate in person.

I don't know why Marty tries so hard to make excuses for a president he claims to hate.

yes, a lot stupider.

Most H1-B folks don't work remote, although more have recently. However, it is the first step in a green card process that people can use to have companies sponsor come here. It is the first step in legal immigration.

Really russell, is there any person you think should not be able to get on a plane , bus, raft or train and come here with no actual rules or requirements? Or if their situation changes we should not make an exception for them?

I don't recall a single thread where you were not saying whoever was a valuable addition to our society so they should just get to stay. This is a serious question, not even being snarky.

You say you are not for open borders but there doesn't seem to be anyone you think should not just get to come and stay. Is there some rule you think should be enforced?

hsh, this isn't about the president. Its about immigration, I'm not the one that can't separate the policy discussion from the person.

But, whenever there is a disagreement someone has to play that "Oh you're supporting Trump" card.

That sucks.

Is there some rule you think should be enforced?

Obama deported a lot of people, which angered many on "the left." One thing that made it not so bad was that many of the people he deported were dangerously criminal. That was by design. So there's a rule I would support, and would guess russell would as well - deport people who are here illegally and who are actually dangerous criminals.

I can't figure out another reason why you support patently stupid things.

Just to be clear, a lot of my international students are still here in the US, but their classes are being taught remotely to eliminate the requirement that we meet in person (in order to slow transmission of COVID).

They will also have their visas cancelled, just because the (normally in-person) class they have enrolled in has been moved to a digital learning environment for public safety.

May I do pledge week and the first panty raid of the new semester via ZOOM?

"with no actual rules or requirements"

If they didn't cheat on their SAT to get into Wharton, they have a visa, stamped or attached to a passport, which is where this started not ten minutes ago when we were still in the mere anteroom of this rat hole.

Raft?

Why, are MORE of Marco Rubio's sh*theel relatives coming in to ruin my country?

"Is there some rule you think should be enforced?"

The State Department, like the EPA and numerous other agencies, is deregulating.

What's not to like?

Well, hsh, I guess you will just have to believe I am patently stupid. I would have to be to support Trump. And if I agree with some random administration immigration policy then I'm patently stupid anyway.

That assessment doesn't bother me much, I don't need to believe you are stupid to disagree with me. But if you need that then go ahead. Make yourself feel better.

just because the (normally in-person) class they have enrolled in has been moved to a digital learning environment for public safety.

Mystery solved! For this administration, acting in support of public safety (the piublic health kind; guns are a different discussion) is massively disloyal. Which they equate to being unpatriotic, if not outright treasonous.

Most H1-B folks don't work remote, although more have recently.

Not my point. My point is that many if not most *can*. Just like many if not most people here on a student visa *can* attend classes remotely, if those are offered remotely.

However, it is the first step in a green card process that people can use to have companies sponsor come here. It is the first step in legal immigration.

Likewise, many people who come to the US on student visas decide to stay and subsequently apply for, and receive, green cards etc.

You say you are not for open borders but there doesn't seem to be anyone you think should not just get to come and stay.

As a bare minimum, I'm in favor of letting stay are the folks who are actually already here legally.

I'm also in favor of letting people who are undocumented have a path to staying here, if they aren't criminals.

And I'm in favor of expanding the number of visas we issue per year. It's currently about a million a year, which sounds like a huge number, but is about 1/3 of 1% of the population of the country.

A lot of people want to come here, most people that come here improve their own lives and the lives of people around them once they're here, I don't see why we can't issue more than the number we do.

All of those people put together excludes, by my count, the vast majority of the 7 billion people on the planet.

In any case I'm absolutely not in favor of taking aways visas that people have already obtained legally, just because they will be (may be) attending class remotely rather than in person. They already applied, we already accepted them and granted the visa. They are going to continue to attend college, they will just not be attending (some of) their classes in person.

We're not talking about people who are sneaking into the country, or coming under false pretenses. We're talking about people who have followed whatever rules and protocols are involved in getting a student visa. We already gave them visas.

You are always talking about how you're not against immigration, you just insist that it be done "by the rules". Well, these people followed the rules, and now we are changing the rules in mid-stream.

Which is usually the kind of thing you object to.

And so far I haven't heard, from you or anyone, any positive benefit that we will get from telling these people they have to leave.

So, whatever.

And if I agree with some random administration immigration policy then I'm patently stupid anyway.

It's not random. It's a patently stupid policy.

I support criminal-justice reform even though Trump supported it. Because it wasn't stupid.

You're making really bad arguments in support of this patently stupid policy, which is a different thing from simply disagreeing with me.

wj asked ...

>>>A question for the lawyers among us. If the Justice Department end up being able to drop the charges against Flynn, could another administration refile them? That is, does the trial being voided constitute a basis for a double jeopardy argument?

Based on a hazy decades old memory from my first semester of law school, jeopardy attaches when a jury is impanelled and sworn in. In other words, you don't need to go all the way to one side resting or closing arguments. I think there may be a DoJ policy about only refiling charges based on new evidence which would be a greater hurdle.

No I am not. The policy says you can't get a student visa or keep it if you are taking a completely online course of study. That makes perfectly good sense and has been the rule all along. There was an exception made for spring and summer classes for the people that were here. It is July, if you are going to take a 100% online course load you don't qualify, just like it has always been.

You can take some online courses, in fact outside of a few specific visa types you can take mostly online courses. But if you are a remote learning student you don't have to be in the US. That seems like a reasonable rule to me that is harder because of the virus.

The students can transfer to other schools, the schools can ensure they have some number of classes that are in person for each degree program. This doesn't seem to be unsolvable for those affected and it retains a legitimate limit that people have to qualify for a in person degree program to get a visa.

And the reason why the (pandemic related) exceptions cannot be maintained while the pandemic continues is...?

Is there a pandemic still? If you listen to the governors of New York and Massachusetts we are all set for the fall. Wear some masks, go to lunch, have a class, grab drinks. California is less sanguine I believe, but it seems mostly LA County. Florida reclosed the bars but not much else. I really don't keep up with Arizona.

I am not sure where the decision to not extend the exceptions rests, but I can certainly understand that if we are going to allow bars to be open than a subset of classrooms at the universities seems a reasonable thing to open also.

I don't have a problem if they extended them a semester, nor do I have a problem with the current policy.

I really don't keep up with Arizona.

Then your information is notably incomplete. With or without Arizona, 50,584 new cases, in one day, yesterday.

So, some might say, pandemic. With or without bars being open.

It's Ringo's birthday today. He's 80. Ringo says, "Peace and love!".

So I'm gonna step away from this.

Have a good day, everyone.

Yes, there is still a pandemic in the US. Yes, states are reopening despite this.

https://www.covidexitstrategy.org/cdc-gating-criteria

So there is a lot of stupid going around in public policy, driven by a lot of stupid in public response, magical thinking, and a right wing disinformation campaign.

I think I will step away from this too.

A right wing disinformation campaign is a ridiculous statement. There has been no source, from any expert or political entity, that has provided any consistent or useful information. From any wing. As the northern states start to reopen we get our first view as to whether there is any way to reopen with any degree of "safety". Europe opens this month also, allowing a bubble, we'll see how that works out. But everything any expert has said so far has turned out wrong.

California was hailed as an early reacter that had tracing and tracking in place from the AIDS epidemic so they were under control and Newsome was a great Governor, now not so much.

Florida filled up with New Yorkers fleeing the pandemic, so everyone is surprised its the new epicenter? Well except Floridians. Oh but it opened too early, no it was never closed adequately. But since there were so few cases it was hard to get peoples attention.

Well, everyone is paying attention there now. Except they probably aren't even now.

It is really hard to convince people to do something today that you told them last month was useless.

California did a lot of things right early. Newsom didn't do as well as Cuomo, but did moderately well. However, California stands as an example that even getting most things right is not a guarantee of a good outcome. We got it right enough to keep from totally overwhelming our medical infrastructure. But not to keep cases from running high.

In contrast, Texas, Florida, and Arizona (most notably so far) demonstrate that getting it wrong will rise up and bite you. Even if you got lucky early.

This Cuomo thing just boggles my minds. NY still ha the most cases by double, the most deaths by an order of magnitude and still has over 25 deaths a day and Cuomo did what right?

Even the per capita numbers are huge.

NYC is an international hub that was hit hard before anyone knew it was happening there, before anyone had a clue how to treat this thing, and is far more densely populated than any of the places blowing up now. Hindsight is supposed to be 20/20, but few enough learned a GD thing from the first major outbreak that it’s happening again elsewhere.

Oh, and AZ’s cases have quadrupled in the last month. After months of seeing what happened in the rest of the world. That’s Arizona, if you want to know.

Have just read that the Ayn Rand Institute received a PPP loan of between $350K and $1 million.

Well, the ARI has their rationale though I think it's a little thin.

"Even advocacy groups have been cashing in, including some noted critics of profligate government spending such as Americans for Tax Reform and the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI).

The latter's acceptance of government aid provoked a lot of jeering on Twitter about the alleged hypocrisy at play, although ARI has said since late May that it would gladly accept PPP loans as an effective return of stolen goods.

Other free market organizations have taken a different approach."
The Paycheck Protection Program Is a Mess. Here's Who Is Benefitting From the Dysfunction.: A program designed to keep workers on payrolls showered benefits on lobbyists, advocacy groups, and even members of Congress.

A program designed to keep workers on payrolls showered benefits on lobbyists, advocacy groups, and even members of Congress

No question that too much money went to those folks. But that's not quite the same as saying that most of it failed to go to the people it was intended for.

It's possible for a program to largely achieve its goals, while still being misused by some.

The program seems to be largely an indiscriminate money drop. People got money whether they were connected or not. Being connected doesn't appear to have made any difference in whether someone received money or not.

Marty, I usually don't engage, so you can feel free to ignore these questions but
1. do you think that COVID-19 is something where steps have to be taken

If that's no, then we can agree to disagree

If it's yes
2. If people are affected by it, should they be helped?

If that's yes, then we move on to
3. If the person is from a foreign country, should they be helped?

Starting with visas and (non) attendance obscures these positions. If we agree, we can talk about it, if not, we can discuss why you don't believe in 3, 2 or 1.

Right wing disinformation campaign:

Epoch Times

Prager U

One America News Network

We started getting the Epoch Times, unsolicited, a couple of months back.

Crumpled it up, it's great for packing breakables for shipping. Also good or starting fires.

Crumpled it up, it's great for packing breakables for shipping.

Somebody might read it if you do that. Burning is great!

Burning is great!

But climate change!...

But climate change!...

Good catch. Shredding and packing. That might be best.

Papier-mache!

Papier-mache!

Must have an exhibit!

...while they have seen that one election can cause enormous problems, they may also (eventually) come to see Trump as an aberration unlikely to be repeated.

Trump wasn't simply an aberration. Have you forgotten that George W Bush also was massively incompetent? Yes, Trump is a horror, but his election continued a trend.

The US electoral system, as it works in the internet age, is not fit for the purpose of electing a President who is up to the job. From this side of the Atlantic it's Barack Obama who was the aberration.

If you were looking for someone to run your business, you'd reject Trump in the blink of an eye and GWB in five seconds. Biden fifteen years ago might get on a long list.

The rest of the world respects US economic and military might, but it has no confidence that the country will be adequately governed in any given future presidency.

(And no, the UK is not much better off in this respect. BoJo v JeCo makes me shudder.)

There has been no source, from any expert or political entity, that has provided any consistent or useful information.

how strange that a brand new virus isn't completely understood at the outset, right?

but there has been one source which has consistently provided misleading, dangerous and grossly irresponsible information, since January. open up! freedom! Drink Mor Bleech! it'll go away like a miracle! Democrat hoax! TYRANNY! masks are for liberals! they're trying to wreck our economy! don't test because the numbers will look better!

then there has been common sense and medical professionals saying we should take this seriously, even as knowledge evolves.

and which side are you mad at?

i mean. of course.

i love this "kick the foreigners out because on-line isn't real school" thing.

it's so fucking dumb. so fucking perfectly 2020 "conservative".

Dumb as the latest xenophobia over foreign students is, it isn't actually the scene of the worst disaster in education thanks to the virus. I expect most (all?) of us here are well past having children in school. But that looks to be (or be headed towards being) the biggest mess.

Mostly, this
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/reopening-bars-easy-schools-are-difficult/613861/
argues, because we didn't include education among the economic sectors which are "essential". As a result of which, minimal, if any, planning has been done towards how we get the (non-university) schools up and running again. In the long term, that may be the biggest impact of our mishandling of the pandemic.

wj's link reminded me that after the dislocation of graduation, the US hasn't had to deal with any of the stuff of education below university. This
It’s now early July, and we still have no idea whether or how they will be returning to classes that, ordinarily, would resume just weeks from now. My children’s summer has been idle. They have no jobs and not much summer programming to keep them busy. I try to convince myself they aren’t missing out on much. Hey, I grew up in the ’80s, I think, and all we did during the summer was hang out at the beach. Most days, I make it to about 10 a.m. before I rouse them.

In most other countries, education is year around (I take it, from discussions in the Guardian, that this is the case for the UK as well, it is certainly the case for Asia) so perhaps one partial explanation for the fact that the US has so totally screwed up its response is that other nations are having to deal with issues that occur because of COVID and secondary ed where as the US does not.

This LGM interview was also related,
https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/06/we-have-to-remember-that-schools-serve-a-variety-of-functions-beyond-acade

but when I read that, I didn't think about summer holidays. whoa.

perhaps one partial explanation for the fact that the US has so totally screwed up its response is that other nations are having to deal with issues that occur because of COVID and secondary ed where as the US does not.

Well, partially. In that we figured we could just skip the spring term, and by fall we'd be past it. (If we'd got our sh*t together and made use of the time our lockdowns, such as they were, bought us, that might even have worked.) Although it says something that we are that cavalier about how little our kids are expected to learn in half a year....

"Although it says something that we are that cavalier about how little our kids are expected to learn in half a year."

I dont know of any schools that shut down the spring semester. My personal experience was that they went to remote learning in all grades. So Fl, MA, and TX is my experience. Did some states just cancel the spring semester?

There has been no source, from any expert or political entity, that has provided any consistent or useful information.

Wash your hands frequently and avoid touching your face.

Maintain a social distance of at least six feet.

If you need to be in a shared public space, wear a mask.

Heard daily, since March.

You forgot the soap. To misquote Luther's small catechism: Water alone will not do though. It's the detergent that's with and within the water. Without the detergent the water is simply water and no proper lavation. ;-)

Except six feet wasnt enough, then it was, it was only on surfaces then it was airborne, then it was not airborne unless you were breathing hard from heavy activity, then it wasn't on surfaces, and masks weren't useful unless they were not, then any old mask would do.

Wash your hands, dont touch your face was pretty consistent.

yet somehow nearly every other country in the world dealt with evolving information far better than the US did.

maybe it thrives on apologists.

the US pulling out of WHO will not do much to help anyone understand the next virus quicker. that's for sure.

cancel culture!

I dont know of any schools that shut down the spring semester. My personal experience was that they went to remote learning in all grades.

My observation is that most tried for remote learning. But, especially for primary schools, it was terra incognito -- they were basically inventing a whole new approach to teaching on the fly. Some teachers came up with brilliant ideas on how to do it; others were less successful.

And then there were the communities where the infrastructure for remote learning is limited or totally absent. For example, for a lot of poor families, there just isn't Internet access at home; when the kids need it for school, they have to use the connection, and possibly the computers, in the public library. But a) said libraries are also closed down, and b) even if it is possible to use their WiFi from the parking lot, that's good for an hour or two, not a whole school day.

I'll spot you the masks, the CDC didn't have a clear story on that until April.

But this is all goalpost-moving nonsense anyway.

Hm, will certain GOPsters find this the right time to renew their assault on 'unconstitutional' child labour laws?
If the kiddies can't go to school and can't afford digital infrastructure why don't they do some productive work? Are there no chimneys to sweep (there is a coal renaissance, isn't there?), looms to tend to, sewers to tosh?

I'll spot you the masks, the CDC didn't have a clear story on that until April.

"conservatives" don't believe the CDC anyway.

it's just another cog is the great Dem hoax to make Trump look bad.

It must be simply a coincidence that Marty's preferred policies (e.g. on immigration) and Marty's unwavering talking points (e.g. nobody knows nuthin) line up so frequently with the policies and talking points of a crooked racist would-be autocrat. Simple coincidence, I say.

But the question remains: which of them empowers the other?

--TP

If viruses can come here and stay without a visa, why not people my friends? The inbred nature of our politics is a crying call for an unrestrained expansion of the US gene pool.

yes, if only the messaging was clearer, people wouldn't be trying to impeach the NC Gov for instituting the weak-ass protective measures NC has in place right now.

alas, these poor people are just too confused to hear six months of news about a "contagious and lethal RESPIRATORY VIRUS" and apply common sense.

Why is being required to wear a mask a violation of people's constitutional rights but being required to wear clothes isn't?

hsh-
That is a state's rights issue covered by the always expedient invokkkation of the 10th Amendment that was written solely to justify the public policies I prefer.

Remember, masks are the road to tyranny, just like sane visa policies = open borders, i.e. an irrefutable logical identity.

Got it?

I can't wait for CharlesWT to endorse bobbyp's answer to hairshirt's question :)

Meanwhile: I've seen several cellphone videos of maskless assholes getting so outraged at being admonished that they intentionally cough in people's food, on people's babies, and in people's faces. I'd call that "assault". What would lawyers call it? What would Libertarians call it? What would Marty call it?

--TP

if only the messaging was clearer, people wouldn't be trying to impeach the NC Gov for instituting the weak-ass protective measures NC has in place right now.

You have to understand, requiring clothing is a matter of public morals. Whereas requiring masks is merely about public health. And one has to have one's priorities clear.

And public health is bad because public health people talk about sex and indoctrinate children to become LGBT and go to Planned Parenthood and become satanic witches.

Disinformation campaign:

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-99-percent-coronavirus-cases-totally-harmless-claim-mcenany-white-house-191725001.html

Soon to be amplified and defended by the usual media outlets.

Even US Kristian(TM) fundamentalists have, alas, dropped the traditional ideas (expressed e.g. by St.Jerome) about proper female clothing.
Let's put it this way: for these actual traditionalists (what else could one call Fathers of the Church?) women in Saudi Arabia are seriously underdressed (since it is still possible to notice that there is a vaguely humanoid shape somewhere under the cloth).
So, at least females wearing masks would be a step towards upholding public morals.
The naturally exempted males (who should show their faces since it is in the image of G#d*) should bang the drum for that. I assume it is their raw and sinful lust** preventing the idea to get a firm hold.

*according to St.Jerome the female face is not, so it must be hidden from sight for that reason alone.
**as expressed by e.g. Jabbabonk himself

Why is being required to wear a mask a violation of people's constitutional rights but being required to wear clothes isn't?

Some of the mask-wearing edicts of various government entities have been a bit over the top. Such as requiring masks outside in open spaces where people are not near each other. But I'm OK with business owners requiring people entering their businesses to wear masks pandemics or not.

Is that a constitutional matter or just general criticism?

Because, as general criticism goes, I agree. There's no reason to wear a mask outside if you're not near anyone. Maybe bring one in case, but keep it in your pocket.

CharlesWT: Such as requiring masks outside in open spaces where people are not near each other.

Sincere question: where/when did that happen, and how was it enforced?

Irresistible snark: if a tree takes off its mask in the forest, does it ...

--TP

Assault. I'm a fervent mask requirer. I think a 3 week enforced quarantine for simply thinking about coughing on someones food. Every building in the country should have a No shirt, No shoes, No mask, No service sign

Every building in the country should have a No shirt, No shoes, No mask, No service sign

Enforcement here got quite lax for a while after an employee pointed out the sign and refused entry to a customer, and the customer pulled out their concealed handgun and shot the employee. It wasn't fatal for the employee and the customer will be going to jail for a long time but staff are reluctant to actually deny service.

Almost everyone here is doing the best they can. It's the small population of total loons that are the problem.

Sincere question: where/when did that happen, and how was it enforced?

aren't masks required everywhere (outside your own house) in many countries?

i wear one whenever i go to a store. but if i'm just outside (ex. running) i never do. i do live in the woods, where it's not unusual to literally never see another person while i'm out running, though.

I saw this article by Timothy E. Wirth and Tom Rogers, and it is frightening.

Someone put me at ease, please.

liberals have guns, too.

liberals have guns, too.

wth

Sapient, that kind of scenario requires that people acquiesce. Specifically, it requires that the military and (federal) law enforcement people go along with it. Some of them no doubt would. But most of them actually take their oaths seriously.

At which point, Trump's only hope would be an overt militia-based coup. Which they can't win if the military won't roll over -- the technology is long past the point where farmers with their hunting guns could stage a Civil War and make it last. And they wouldn't.

Feel better?

John Roberts likes being Chief Justice of the United States. Installing single-party reactionary rule means he serves at the pleasure of the party, and the current head guy prefers a court led by a yes-man. Roberts and the four liberals can simply rule that Congress can't constitutionally cede that much authority to the President, national emergency or no, and the whole scheme falls apart. I think Gorsuch would go the same way, and Thomas should as well given the single party's attitude towards people of color.

I think you are wrong wj. It could work right up to the deadline but the SC would uphold the Demicrats right to have the four states electors count.

But,Trump wont win more than 15 states, the electoral count wont come down to 4 states and the Chinese crap wont get past the first court hearing.

So, dont worry. Joe Biden is the best thing the Democrats ever did. I talked to 4 Trump supporters, real supporters, this week and all said they loved Trump but we cant live with four more years of this, (The media always wins) since its Biden they would rather suffer through 4 years of him and hope the overall hatefest settles a little.

He cant win without those people.

Sincere question: where/when did that happen, and how was it enforced?

One example is Riverside County, CA in early April. There may be others.

"It’s unclear when deputies would issue fines or arrest people who violate the face mask order, but the county said local law enforcement agencies had the power to enforce the order “as they deem necessary.”

Bianco noted that the enforcement may include fines or imprisonment, but stressed that his department would not set up roadside checkpoints to stop vehicles or people hiking, walking or running without masks.

“We will not be setting up any type of police state,” he said. “And, this is not a declaration of martial law in Riverside County.”"
California sheriff says public health officer's coronavirus order to cover faces 'enforceable,' but calls for calm (April 7)

He cant win without those people.

Works for me.

Thanks. I do feel better because y'all are here.

CharlesWT - the CA face mask order does not require a mask when outdoors and exercising or when just around the household, only when around others in a situation where one cannot socially distance. It does apply when in public waiting in line or in a parking structure or other public access way.

And public health is bad because public health people talk about sex and indoctrinate children to become LGBT and go to Planned Parenthood and become satanic witches.

nous, as so often, you delight me. But catching up on this thread, what really cheers me up is Marty's report of his interview with the four Trump supporters. Marty, FYLTGE.

I'm thinking we really dodged a bullet by nominating Biden rather than a woman or a minority....

Sometimes (2008) the right thing to do is take a chance and see if you can break new ground. Other times, and I'd say that this year is one, the right thing to do is minimize your risk and take the conservative course. Because the downside risk is just way too high.

If we get rid of Trump this year, we can think about breaking new ground down the road. But make no mistake, this time we're all-in. Lose, and chances are there is no future opportunity any time soon. As in, in our lifetimes. Yeah, I think the stakes are just that high.

I'm assuming that wj's comment is a response to mine and as such, I think it is a fair point. On the level of systems, yes, this is a all or nothing moment.

But that shouldn't normalize things. I'm not going to play what-if, but I will say that maybe one of the reasons that we are at an all or nothing moment is because we didn't take the idea of diversity seriously before.

This isn't to take it out on anyone here. I will pass on these two articles that might be related and ask that you think about them.

https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/archaeology-diversity/

https://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2013/10/15/archaeologists-the-whitest-people-i-know/

In rightwing disinformation campaign news

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/07/08/facebook-removes-network-of-inauthentic-behavior-tied-to-roger-stone.html

LJ posted:

>>>I'm thinking we really dodged a bullet by nominating Biden rather than a woman or a minority....

No one is super-excited about Biden, but when I hear this (and it's not an uncommon sentiment so I'm not picking on LJ), it strikes a dissonant chord. Black folks fueled Biden's nomination. Black folks had non-white candidates to choose from, including a non-white female. Black primary voters overwhelmingly chose Biden and I get really uncomfortable when progs imply that these voters are not woke enough.

Again, not saying that LJ was going there, but I hear this too often and it bugs me.

Partial disclosure: I have someone close to me who works for Clyburn so I may have some bias.

Hi Pollo, no worries. I have basically the same take as John Stewart, which is he wasn't my first choice or even my top four. However, he's has something that we really need, which is someone who knows what loss is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po22b-_bt2k

If Biden picks Stacey Abrams for VP, she'll get to boss around the Senate, which will be *sweet*.

he's has something that we really need, which is someone who knows what loss is.

No offense, but I'd say that this is one of those times when we what we need is the person with the best chance of winning. Full stop. Which, in the opinion of Democratic primary voters, is Biden.

And, in the opinion of this Republican anyway, they're not wrong. I may have had others in the Democratic race that I was more partial to. As did, so far as I can tell, pretty much everyone here. I wouldn't be surprised if that was even true of a fair number of Biden primary voters. But . . . priorities.

The comments to this entry are closed.