Today's "this should make you comfortable about Trump as President" moment comes from the fact that he's retweeting Chuck Woolery saying how everyone is lying about CV to keep the economy from coming back and that we should reopen schools. So... yeah.

All my friends and colleagues who have children seem to be struggling alot with having to parent 24/7 without a break. I can't imagine what this pandemic is like with children myself however I get the feeling that maybe 60% of them would send their kids back school.

Which is crazy to me because we are in the middle of a pandemic...

If you are having trouble being a parent during this pandemic, you never should have been a parent to begin with.

Where we are, I'm OK with my daughter going to HS in late August to start. We can always pull her and switch to online. But online is worthless, so we're not starting there. I remain skeptical that school is going to work, but we're on the low end of cases/spread, so we'll give it a chance.

I'm more worried about my other daughter at college. Not only is she going to be in a worse place spread-wise, but it's college - hard to believe they are going to control themselves and willingly lock themselves in their rooms. And my daughter isn't very social at all, but she turns 21 the day after school starts. I'm sure the pressure on most kids to go to parties and act normal will be enormous. At least with my HS kid, we can control what she does outside of school. Not so much with college kids.

I think for families with 2 parents that work, either at home or not, and very young children that's pretty unfair.

We're getting that a lot on Facebook from neighbors, too. Our kid is slated to start kindergarten in a month and both my wife and I work (from home, for now) and we just can't envision a scenario where we send him. We're definitely stretched thin with him at home. In so many of the comments, you can hear the desperation and there are days when we feel it, too. But there's no way we're sending him into a pandemic petri dish school for his sake, for our sake, for anyone's sake.

SI

It's naive.

I'm lucky that my kids are 20 and 18 now, but I have tried to imagine what it would've been like with both me and my wife trying to be on meetings all day long (when they conflict, I go into my bedroom and take meetings), and having a 4 and 2 year old basically left to their own devices while child care is shut down. It would've been a total fuckin' shit show, regardless of how patient I am or how much I love them. It just wouldn't have been a good situation.

There are a lot of reasons people shouldn't be parents but this isn't one of them.

It is healthy for everyone to have a break from their kids. Not being able to get that break, while also having to act as a teacher, playmate, etc...can be stressful for all.

We have the option to keep our kids home for virtual school if we want. The issue for me is you can't go virtual and play sports. Athletes have to go into school. I can't get an answer on if that means the whole year or just the part of the year your sport is happening.

I don't want my daughter going to school now, but that might be different next spring during softball season.

If we start virtual, we have to stay in it for the full semester. And I'm not clear on what will be different versus how they handled the end of last year. But there was no teaching, no school. It was just "here's some homework, figure it out and turn it in on Friday and I'm available by email if you have questions." It was a joke. So we're going to try the in-school thing first. Maybe it only lasts a week until a slew of positives comes back.

I don't think ours is tied to sports in any way. That's kinda crappy. They might as well call your "virtual" school homeschooled.

So yeah, about that needing a break from kids.

My 7 year old decided she was going to paint a box. She chose the dining room table to do this, without consulting me. At some point the cat knocked over the paint, spilling it on the area rug that was delivered last Thursday. Paint also got on the hardwood floor and the ceiling.

Her art desk, that sits on a tarp, was 10 feet away in the next room.

Are they not allowing virtual athletes to play? We are in a similar situation here in Arizona. The district I coach in will be fully remote the entire first quarter and the current start of Football practice has been pushed back to August 17th. (Normally would have been next Monday)

First games pushed back from 8/21 to 9/11 with restrictions on how many players can sit on a bus. So we would either need to take 4 buses instead of 1, or have kids follow the bus for kids that don't drive/can't get rides in their cars. One of our games is 4 hours away this year. (Of course 22 players then run into, breath on and sweat on each other for the next 2+ hours)

We have had absolutely no organized off season program because we can't meet with players outside of zoom and there would be phased in requirements when practice does start. (Groups of 10, no ball to start, social distancing in those groups) This is a nightmare scenario for Football and I don't see how it can be pulled off if the surge here does not drop dramatically. The AIA doesn't even have a plan yet on if a player tests positive during the season, though I am sure it would almost have to mean a cancelled game as they can't test every high school player at the frequency pros/colleges can test.

A few smaller schools have already cancelled fall sports and I am sure there will be more. Again, with the safety of the kids being paramount I don't see how HS Football is going to work right now. My wife has already floated not coaching to me because her parents are so high risk, and even though I am in excellent shape, I am also 57 sooo. I put the coaching conversation off, but I will have to address it and I have to do what is best for my family, which is what we should also be doing for the players. It will be an interesting month.

NJ, which has this somewhat under control, pushed all fall sports back until October. I don't see how places like FL, TX, and AZ can even remotely consider trying to pull it off.

Our district allowed team workouts starting last week. Groups had to be kept to 10 or less people.

It started on Monday and on Wednesday they announced everything was being stopped for the foreseeable future because one of the football players tested positive.

I can't see things proceeding like they are. The numbers just keep going up every day. At some point someone needs to see the light and start putting restrictions in place again.

But all the doctors and scientists are lying.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trum...ry?id=71749066

Totally. The entire world created this hoax to prevent Trump from getting re-elected.

I don't think there is any way in hell and as I mentioned, if we don't have a hold on it here, as much as it sucks, the season should be either moved to the spring (Really touch to do for multi-sport athletes, facilities etc) or cancelled, which is probably the best option. October/November bring flu season and we have no idea how Covid-19 will be (surge/drop) at that time. It is obvious the heat knocking it down was completely wishful thinking.

I feel bad for seniors that would lose the last chance 98% of them have to play competitive Football, but many teens are not going to be prudent away from school and the risks at this time are just too great. Even if Arizona goes forward, the season will be a chaotic shit show with positive tests, games cancelled, players not revealing positive results and infecting more teammates, starts and stops due to quarantine. Ugh!

Reminds me of the time I was home alone with the kids because my wife had gone to a show in NYC. They were both young, and my son got sick and started throwing up. I had just finished cleaning up a round of the vomit, and I left my son standing by the toilet while I brought the soiled stuff out to the garbage in the garage. (I'm germaphobic, and like to get stuff out of the house ASAP.) I come back not two minutes later, and my son has thrown up all over the bathroom counter and sink. All I could think was, YOU WERE RIGHT BY THE TOILET! WHY DIDN'T YOU THROW UP THERE?!?

Wait...you guys don't remember that time that a black man got himself killed so he could make trupm look bad and keep him from getting reelected?

Truths abound everywhere!

I've been a single parent working from home for the majority of the pandemic. (My ex is a nurse, so the kids have been largely with me since March to avoid unnecessarily exposing them to COVID.) I don't know about how other people handled it, but I was definitely ready for the end of the school year after several weeks of juggling my professional responsibilities and my homeschooling role.

And at the same time, I felt blessed that I was able to work from home. I can't even imagine how it would have been manageable if I'd had to physically leave for work (especially since all of the daycares in our area shut down.)

Our school is slated to begin August 4, and I plan to send them. Not because I can't handle the homeschooling aspect...but I can tell you 100% that I can't do both their educational development and my professional obligations *well*. One of those two things is going to suffer, and if I have to pick, I'm making sure the mortgage gets paid and there's food on the table before I worry about how well they're mastering fractions.

JUST IN: Federal judge seeks copy of Trump's order commuting Roger Stone sentence over questions it may not commute his probation https://t.co/HGjR0p3FH6 pic.twitter.com/9YINPlK0Si

— The Hill (@thehill) July 13, 2020

So, what chance is there than the WH pinheads did such sloppy work (DACA anyone?) that they will have bungled the "let the boss's buddy the criminal off scot free?" play here? Seems to be in play, given what we know of this bunch. lol

Answer; people in those areas have decidedly different expectations & demands than those in New Jersey.

I don't understand what you mean.

Are you claiming people in those parts of the country care more about high school sports than the health and well being of their children?

Lots to talk about. First agreeing on a definition. Let me know if you agree, disagree, add to etc.

I've read your articles and googled on others. I will attempt to define what American Exceptionalism so we have basis for discussion.

The wiki definition is:

American exceptionalism - Wikipedia

Reading further into the wiki article, there are other nuances and attempts to add context. Some discussions take it all the way back to de Tocqueville, another made reference to Reagan, then Cheney, to Obama's take, and then to Trump/Putin's POV (interestingly, this is where some in the radical left may actually agree with Trump/Putin).

With that all said, I think the both of us can agree that defining American Exceptionalism is important otherwise we'll likely talk past each other.


* * * * *

In reading the 3 points above, I actually wouldn't define American Exceptionalism the way it did. So in my googling, I landed on the below.

American exceptionalism - New World Encyclopedia

Three additional context.

First, I would agree with addendum from Obama.


I've watched enough History/Discovery channels to know that Romans, Greeks etc. were exceptional in their time. We should not presume US is the only exceptional nation for the past 3-5 millennia. But currently, let's say since 1980's (e.g. since I've been an adult and can talk to it), it has been exceptional.

Second. America is not without faults. I can forsee this discussion naturally leading to all the whatabouts. Many of those whatabouts are warranted but, at the end of the day, the calculus is do the pros far outweigh the cons.

Third. America has no obligation to extend the exceptionalism to all people and all countries. Obviously resources are limited and America has to pick and choose what is best in her strategic (political, military, economic/technological, societal etc.) interests.



(On my next post, I'll react to the articles you posted)

and they did this at the same time that the entire world automatically started respecting the USA again after Trump took office. They respect him SO HARD that they created a worldwide hoax to discredit him.

That would be poetic justice at its finest.

As ever, the question has never been that simple. But I do think people in those states are less willing in general to shut things down to promote safety than those in NJ, and that's absent the fact that NJ already got hit hard once and will naturally take it more seriously than states who are just going through this for the first time.

Have you met Texas?

You don't think they are currently learning their lesson?

I realize a subset of the population will never learn their lesson, but I would imagine a large enough group will, and I would hope the ones making decisions that will impact our kids health would. Trump and DeVos aside of course.

Dola- I will also add high school football in NJ is a really big deal. Not Texas level, but bigger than I think most people realize.

Some are, but I don't see indications yet that it's nearly enough to overcome the cultural distinctions between the northeast and the south in general. It's no so much about football or whatever being less important elsewhere as it is the mindset that going about normal daily life is essential for the health and well-being of their families, etc.

Having been in NJ and Georgia, I can say that down South there is a bit more of a health of the players aren't as important mentality. Regardless of how important the game.

I lived in Texas, I get that, but it amazes me that enough people would put it high enough on a pedestal to try and fight through it.

The main push back here in Arizona is going to come from the parents of D1/D2 level athletes as they are going to fear their kids lose scholarship opportunities. (Like we tell parents everywhere I have coached, stress academics first as the odds of getting free college money is much easier, but that's for another thread)

Football here is definitely more important in some districts/schools than others thanks to open enrollment and other nonsense. When there was talk earlier of California's season being in jeopardy, there was documented outreach from players in California about transferring to different programs here. There will always be a portion of any population that puts an undue worth on athletics and as a coach who has committed over 30 years to the sport it is getting worse and quite frankly it's sad.

So I don't know what will happen here, but I do know if the season goes on participation, already an issue in some areas, will decline substantially. This will completely gut some programs, leaving others more susceptible to shutting it down after the season start, if there are injuries/positive tests.

Think about it. If your kid has D1 talent and that might be his only option to get into college, you are likely going to be fine assuming any risk to realize that dream/goal. If your kid is a 2nd/3rd string player who is not going to see the field much anyway, are you going to send him to practice day after day to assume all risk and no reward? A lot will not and I can't say I blame them, but that will cripple some programs and make the season an utter mess.

It sucks, but the reality is there is no good answer, and no good way to have HS football in many states this year.

I feel more for the kids who aren't going to play collegiate sports. For the vast majority of H.S. athletes, the game ends after graduation. That's really tough for kids that have grown up with the structure and routine of sports. I get the worry about scholarship athletes, but somehow the games will continue for them. For the kid that just loves to play, losing that opportunity has to be tough.

And the same applies to students in the arts that aren't going to pursue a career in the arts.

As the various college/HS feederl "play-in" sports grapple with these questions and lost seasons, this may be the only time in my life I've ever thought, "Man, I'm glad I'm not a sportsball scout or recruiter."

That is the shittiest part. I coach at an inner city school that we took over 2 years ago and they have had 4 winning seasons and 1 playoff appearance in over 60 years of competition.

See here for a reference of some of their history
https://www.maxpreps.com/news/ESem5K...ing-streak.htm

We played them a few times over the years when I was at Westview, which was a perennial power and we wouldn't even study film on them, just decide on what we wanted to work on for later games and would always have the starters out by halftime, but their kids would always try hard and never quit.

Since going there to coach I have fallen in love with these kids. Great kids that get stereotyped because they come from a bad area, but they would run through walls for you and many if them will do great things in life if they can only get an opportunity (also for another thread LOL)

I don't think they have ever placed a player in a D1 school for Football, even the lower levels, including Juco are rare. That said, we have worked hard to build a culture and embrace an identity there that matches the kids and their neighborhood. Tough, gritty, and determined despite lack of top talent. We were excited for our senior class this year, because they are solid for this school and with realignment we had a chance to get that rare winning record and even contend for region.

And even though it is not ultimately about winning to me, it is still nice and nobody deserves it more than the kids in this community, whose wins in sports and life and few and far between. It breaks my heart knowing they will possibly/probably lose that last opportunity. Yeah it's only sports, but there is an opportunity to build men, redirect kids down positive paths and more than the games, that will be lost too if we lose the season and it SUCKS!

I know football/basketball mean a lot more to people and the country as a whole, but a bunch of kids just went through this in the spring. My younger daughter's softball team was a top 2/3 team in the state with 3 D1 players and would have contended for the state title, and it got completely wiped away. Most of the seniors will never play organized sports again. Several rising seniors are caught in the middle of a terrible recruiting situation. It sucks.

We're hosting a Kentucky East/West all-star game tomorrow to try to recognize some of the players who had they careers ended prematurely.

I think the NFL happens because there is a ton of money at stake and lets face it, getting COVID is likely not as bad as having your brain scrambled a dozen times a weekend. I think they'd be smart to add an extra bye week or two.

Still don't see college football happening. Maybe in the Spring which would actually be kind of cool. Hopefully there will be a vaccine by then and you could largely open it up to fans if that's the case (assuming we have enough vaccine). They would own the spring and it would be fun for a season.

Unrelated: I wish that in addition to a fact-check algorithm, FB and other media platforms had a "logical fallacies" algorithm.

Also unrelated: Regarding the fact-check algorithm that FB uses, does the person who posts a "fact-checked" link also see the fact check? Or is it just everyone else? I kind of like the idea that everyone sees it except the person who posted it.

ETA and related: Who even knew that Tomi Lahren was still a thing in 2020?

BREAKING MINUTE ORDER PER JUDGE AMY BERMAN JACKSON: Trump and Stone have until tomorrow to provide full paperwork on his legally impossible commutation. �� pic.twitter.com/WpheKzYUWz

— Eric Garland (@ericgarland) July 13, 2020

So, what seems to be going on here is pretty funny.

By way of background: Subject to some very minor exceptions not relevant here, federal sentencing no longer has "parole" as we traditionally think of it. You don't get out of jail early for good behavior. But most sentences come with a term of "supervised release" at the end of them, which pretty much operates like the general conception of parole. So you will be sentenced to, say, 5 years in prison, followed by 2 years of supervised release (report to your probation officer, take drug tests, etc.).

So the President presumably commutes Stone's sentence. And the court then asks the parties the relatively innocuous question of whether the President commuted the supervised release, too, or just the period of active incarceration. That's a pretty reasonable ask. The Probation Officer just needs to know whether this guy is on supervised release or not.

Now, though, the judge suddenly moved the deadline up to tomorrow. And the speculation is that the Trump Administration NEVER ACTUALLY FILED THE COMMUTATION. Which is really funny.

At the end of the day, it is Bill Barr's DOJ, and Stone isn't serving any time, even if they have to just make up paperwork and predate it.

But watching these people fuck up the most ministerial of tasks should give us all some small pleasure in these trying times.

We really couldn't have found a worse leader for this crisis.

I have no idea what this is in reference to, but I suspect if I go to my mother in laws facebook page I will find out.

I can't tell if he really is so stupid that he can't grasp the basic concept that the number of positive tests doesn't equate to the number of cases, or if he full well knows this line of thought is full of shit, but also knows a large portion of his followers are too stupid to grasp it.

I think it's a 60/60 toss-up.

Kentucky math

That was the joke! Foiled by everyone making typos on their phones.

I don't know how I haven't heard this before but holy crap, if this isn't the motto of the times (along with "scream in your heart")...

SI

From the COVID thread to keep that apolitical:


I don't agree.


Except it doesn't show that necessarily. There's a lot of people who believe that we have been in 'cure worse than the disease' territory. That we're reacting in fear to the virus and that reaction is worse than the virus itself, both in terms of the economic cost of the shutdowns, the cultural/societal impact of being willing to change our routines and how that will permanently change us as human beings in certain ways, the basic principle of sacrificing freedom for security, etc.

Some people just don't care, but it's not justified to claim that just because someone doesn't wear a mask means that they don't. The calculation of some people is just different and I've seen it swing both ways on this (i.e. a lot of intolerant dismissal of the economic consequences by pro-restriction folks). The bottom line is we don't get to decide someone doesn't care just because they've come to a different conclusion than we have. No matter how wrong they are, that just doesn't follow.

I think that playing sports is less dangerous for kids than going to school, and the extremely slim number of deaths that would occur amongst kids would be worth the tradeoff for the emotional and mental well being and development of the 50 million instead of asking them to lose an entire year of their lives.

The real question is whether as a society we want to risk the additional spread and deaths in other age groups that will undoubtedly occur, but it's disingenuous to argue that thinking kids should be going to school and playing sports means you don't care about the health and well being of children.

Looks like the commutation covered just about everything

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/13/judg...mmutation.html

Ignoring science isn't the same as coming to a different conclusion.

I feel betrayed by the fact that no one has ever created a "shoving forks into your eyeballs" emoji.

To be clear that's not what I was doing

A lot of people aren't ignoring science. You don't have to ignore science to disagree with some of the requirements. But even if it were, that still that doesn't dispense with the idea that you're still setting up a scenario where we determine in advance what causes people are allowed to protest and which ones they aren't. It's not particularly consistent to claim that and then also say people's freedom isn't under attack.

We can agree to disagree.

If you don't wear a mask you're an asshole. It is that simple. There is a reason the "no mask" crowd fall under a similar demographic.

Which demographic is that?

Lets just say all the no mask people on my timeline, I see in stores, and I see on twitter are angry middle to older white dudes. Lots of them in red baseball hats. None of my teacher friends, or friends in the medical profession, worried about their freedom.

I would be interested in an actual study that breaks down who is wearing masks and who aren't. Maybe I'll go sit outside my grocery store and see and watch.

Interestingly I would say close to half - it may even be half - of all those I've seen without masks are women. That doesn't mean it's any more accurate than anyone else's anecdotal observations, but the point is that's all these things are right now. We don't have hard data from a sufficient sample size to make such claims. And I never see red hats in my fairly conservative-leaning area by these people.

Long as you don't have a problem with people making such blanket assumptions about other groups of people protesting a cause they think is ridiculous, we have no issue here.

So let's hear some examples where you are putting elderly and highest risk among us at risk for their lives that are equivalent and then maybe we can have a discussion.

Mask wearing is a literal urgent and immediate matter of life and death. I'm interested in hearing, in your BS "Devil's Advocate" way of having nothing at risk but wasting everybody's time on hypotheticals, what other causes reach this level?

Low income whites is the no mask group in my area.

Wonder where they get their news from?

Like this fine lady?

NC Woman Shouts 'Trump 2020' During Mask Tirade At Restaurant: VIDEO

Where have I talked about hypotheticals at all? This insistence on finding an equality of validity of causes totally ignores the main point, which is that any such assessment is fundamentally misplaced. The issue is who gets to make that determination.

If you want to argue that some outside power (government, general public opinion, whatever) gets to decide what causes are valid and what aren't, then we need to be straight about the fact that is what we are doing and therefore we don't really value that whole freedom idea. We also need to accept that any causes *we* think are valid but other people don't get to be treated the same way.

This isn't a hypothetical. It's a present and real issue right now in our society.

They just know better than the experts.

The exact same thing could be said about mass protests. Every issue of balancing competing rights is about freedom. It's not like that's unique to this situation, and the two concerns are intextricably linked, not distinct from each other.

I dont think we can say this with any level of certainty.
And I think that is where the disconnect comes from.

Still I dont own a mask. But I did order one last week and will wear it next time I go into a store. But no immediate plans for that at the moment. It hasnt arrived either.

Heh, we could have a million dead and people afterward will be like "well how could we have known?"

What are y'alls opinion on condoms?

What are you even arguing? This makes no sense.

So, do you think the scientific and medical community is lying about the efficacy of mask wearing? Or you don't care?

I feel triggered that my comment reacting to the phrase "scream in your heart" was deemed political.



ETA: j/k.

Hmm... That would track with my prejudices, but the data here shows the biggest spike in cases has been among Hispanic people on the East side, so that might just be a case of who I see in my every day life. I will say that it shocks me what proportion of non-mask wearing people I see in grocery stores are over the age of 50...

I've been to the bigger city parts of South Carolina a few times recently... Based off that I doubt CU Tiger making it 2-3 people out of 20 in a store wearing a mask will be the tipping point in his neck of the woods. :/

I've said it several times now. I'm not sure how much will be accomplished by saying it again, but people have made two distinct and incorrect claims about those that don't wear masks.

** That this act alone is evidence that they don't care about others. This is refuted by the fact that there's a significant segment of society that legitimately believes the actions we've taken in response to the virus are worse than the virus itself.

** That it's ok for others to protest for a cause they deem worthy, but not ok for those who don't wear masks to protest for a cause they deem worthy. In other words, that we can predetermine what causes are valid to protest and what ones aren't, but that this has nothing to do with freedom and is totally fair, none of which passes the simplest tests of rationality.

Basically the argument being made is special pleading. We put non-mask-wearers in a special category to be singled out for criticism, even though there's really no principled way to do so.

I feel like the non maskers are the exact prototype of people that would get wiped out. I don’t think my particular county has ever been very infected but we but up against 2 Ohio virus cesspool counties. So really happy to see all the Ohio plates when I need to get groceries.

Sure there is: What you are defining as their method of protest can literally only serve to extend the conditions they are supposedly protesting against.

Same issue there; you're telling them how they have to view the situation. From their perspective, it's doing no such thing. They think what's extending the conditions is continued overreach and overreaction and that the consequences of that are worse than just riding it out.

Again, we don't get to decide for them what a valid perspective is, and then say nobody can do that with other forms of protest.

You provided a lot of links. I'm going to summarize them per below:


The gist is Trump, racial tensions

Quote:

But amid dueling crises — the coronavirus pandemic and the racial reckoning — belief in American exceptionalism has been deeply shaken. A staggering 62 percent of Americans no longer see their country as the “shining city on a hill” that Reagan once imagined, a Yahoo News/YouGov poll revealed. Outside the U.S., Europeans’ trust in America has also deteriorated, according to a European Council on Foreign Relations poll.

The gist is Trump, socioeconomic decline, and in general, inequality/inequities

Quote:

One “immigrant” he could not keep out, however, was the coronavirus, which—owing significantly to his acts (or lack of them)—has played havoc with the over-there conceit.

Quote:

Meanwhile, the socioeconomic level of the country has plummeted as middle-class Americans lose their jobs and begin the long fall into another existence.

(Behind a paywall so couldn't read it)


The gist is Trump, EU exclusion of America

Quote:

Trump’s unwillingness to take the coronavirus pandemic seriously is resulting in a much different kind of wall—one protecting the rest of the world from an endangered America and its citizens.

The gist is Trump, pandemic response

Quote:

“The United States had the advantage of being struck relatively late by the virus, and this gave [us] a priceless chance to copy best practices and avoid the mistakes of others,” he noted. Instead, the United States squandered that advantage on many fronts.

The gist is Trump, pandemic response, environmental concerns

Quote:

Today, however, we have become exceptional in another way. Going our own way, with total disregard for the desires and interests of other countries, we eschew multilateralism, whether in trade negotiations or dealing with climate change. We undermine NATO, the World Health Organization and other international institutions that we helped create. We have even become exceptional among developed nations in our inability to deal with COVID-19. : No longer the leader of the free world, we have become the crazy uncle living in the attic.

* * * *

My thoughts:

Honestly, when reading through the articles, I didn't think the top-2 themes are reasons why American Exceptionalism is dead, dying (or we never had it).

The common thread is Trump, pandemic response and, in distant third, internal societal challenges. Trump and pandemic response is going to come and go. Unless Trump wins re-election in 2020 and/or his protege wins in 2024, Trumpism is going to die (albeit) a slow and stubborn death as the younger generation takes over.

I do believe in American Exceptionalism. There is a decline in some areas but there is growth in others. The decline is not because of Trump and inadequate pandemic response, that is way too short term IMO, American Exceptionalism is bigger than that.

The big ones are, in no particular order, below ... and the good news is, other than #4 which I don't see a realistic solution, none of them are inevitable.

1. Being taken over economically and technologically (but not yet militarily) by China and potentially, the challenge from the EU (but they have their own problems)
2. Reduced leadership roles & weakness in galvanizing other countries to do what America thinks should be done (militarily, economically/technologically). This is not just Trump, there has been examples in other Dem/Rep administrations.
3. Internal political schisms, the seemingly lack of political compromise, moderation and move towards more extremist views
4. The debt & deficit
5. Unwillingness to encourage "brain drain" from other countries to the US, unwillingness to compete for "human/intellectual capital" (e.g. skilled workers). This by itself will do wonders for continuing American Exceptionalism by adding skilled immigrants, diversity, increasing population growth (and therefore tax base) etc.

(In my next post, I'll share why I believe in American Exceptionalism)

I was just in South Carolina for a couple of days. I'm aware of the poor compliance in an urban area. I mean, if he's saying he never sees anybody, so it's not necessary, I am apt to believe him knowing what I know of where he lives. But I don't know that's what he's saying.

Protest doesn't mean free license to break the law. If masks are mandatory, sure they can protest, but they can also end up fined or in jail. I don't like that law isn't a legitimate reason to ignore it.

There's a plenty principled way to do so.

This is real close to the old "be tolerant of intolerance" argument.

They are basically arguing for the right to spread a deadly disease to others fully without their knowledge or consent. So I feel more than satisfied with my stance in this case that your refusal to take a step to protect others should be ignored and trampled on in the name of public health and safety.

It is exactly like the idiots that protest seat belts. Protest all you want, but you are also paying fines.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Makes sense, inasmuch if you aren't tolerant of intolerance you are definitionally not tolerant at all.

In case there's confusion here, I'm in favor of a national mask mandate and I wear them myself in public even when not required. I believe it's justifed as a temporary measure.

None of that touches the part where we single people out for special criticism though, assume nefarious motives on their part, dismiss their protest cause because we don't agree with them, etc.

Right, but this is the first time the law's been brought up in this discussion and at least half the country still doesn't have a mask mandate. Those who break the law should be made to suffer the consequences, but that's not relevant to what I've been talking about.

Should someone who is HIV positive be able to advocate their right to unprotected sex without informing their partner?

But that is literally what this is. It is a literal fact that wearing a mask can reduce transmission. It is not a belief, it is not a hypothetical, it is nothing other than fact. These people who refuse to wear masks do not believe the science behind it and believe their personal "freedom" is more important than slowing the passage of the virus. You know why doctors and surgeons wear masks? It's so you don't get fucking sick. If you do not wear a mask, you are actually saying that you do not care about others not getting sick. You can say it is for reason X (freedom), reason Y (stupidity), but it is really that you do not care.

And yes, the same is about protestors and anyone who does not wear one. It is so easy to do and causes the wearer no harm. We do so many other things in society to protect ourselves and others, this is just beyond stupid.

You should be able to advocate for pretty much anything. Naturally I'm still in favor of that kind of behavior being criminalized and punished accordingly, but that's totally different than saying someone shouldn't be able to advocate for it.

The second sentence literally contradicts itself. Which of those two points do you want to propose; that they don't believe the science, or that they do but think their freedom is more important? And more importantly, what evidence do you have that this is what all of them think?

So people should be able to advocate for anything free of criticism regardless of how deplorable it may be?

Wouldn't this line of thinking make it impossible to criticize groups like NMBLA?

Why can't I say that's not a valid perspective? Anyone who believes that they individually understand everything about covid is objectively an untrustworthy moron and literally the only collective change that not wearing a mask can influence is an extension of these conditions. Not wearing a mask will certainly make an individual feel more physically comfortable, but if that's the crux of this protest let's be honest about it.

Because it's fundamental to the very idea of a free and fair society that each person gets to decide that for themselves.


Not true at all. There's the setting of various precedents, the fact that society will unavoidably emerge from the pandemic different than when it went in and the details of that depend on actions we take now, including masks, etc. There's a lot more involved that just the spreading of the virus.


No. I have not once said that anybody is free from being criticized; in fact I have at least twice now said that some behavior should be criminalized which goes far beyond mere criticism. Criticism is an equal part of a society that values freedom of expression. I have said it's wrong to criticize them hypocritically and not give them the same space to express themselves that we do to other groups who believe in other causes.

I'm pretty sure it's out of ignorance not neccesarily a Trump thing. (Though one could argue he pulls a lot of the ignorant white vote) There are a lot of low income blacks in the city of st louis not wearing masks. In fact I have said this earlier in this thread my friend who is a police officer in the city said the during the supposed quartentine you would have never known it in the lowest income parts of the city.

My personal anecdotal observations of who doesnt wear the mask around me...
Ignorant rednecks (like you would expect)
20 somethings quite more frequently that any other age group
Dressed up women

"I am protesting against undefined details" is not a compelling argument for validity. I mean, I get that you're trying to make the most gracious case for the "my freedoms" crowd that can't quite elocute the depths of their feelings, but I think it's worth something that you can't define the threat either.

Disclaimer: I don't wear a mask when I'm outside, and I'm still pretty much avoiding public spaces, so for me personally the prospect of wearing a mask is like 2-4 hours of random errands per week, usually never for more than an hour at a time. I think the seat belt comparison is apt, I simply don't understand how something done so easily & for one's own safety is causing so many people such issues, but my mask regime probably wouldn't meet the standards of a lot of folks either.

....I am also convinced that a significant number of mask-deniers have been so resistant to the idea from the beginning that they're likely unclear on the use/mandate and think they're being told to wear them 24/7, outside and/or in their homes and as a result they are resisting rules that they've invented themselves, which are ironically much stricter than reality.

I honestly don't understand what you're getting at here.

Fair enough. I don't know what to say to that other than I give up explaining it since I've done so I think six times or so across two threads. It boggles my mind that anyone could read what I've written and say that I was against criticism in general, but at least two people did.

It is what it is.

I like how some keep going back to protests like they were some major spreader event when a small segment of the population (less than 1% of any city) were participating. That's not to say 1% of a city doing anything isn't a huge number and we shouldn't be gathering people together in that number for anything (and it's why a lot of us thing putting sports fans together in a stadium is pure folly).

The cases are tracking a lot more closely to the opening up of economies. Because a handful of one-time (or few day event) activities with under 1% of the population are going to look like a rounding error next to an opened up economy with 30-50% of people participating constantly in small-medium sized groups.

But let's keep bringing up these protests that were happening a month, a month and a half ago because we don't like them.

SI