"Bringing a single, healthy tennis player, who happens to be unvaccinated, into any country, in the midst of this wave is a moot event. There’s really no medical or epidemiological value to keeping Djokovic out of any tournament. Making him test daily and keeping him isolated from everyone would be a more than sufficient solution. The point is not to protect the players and fans, though. It’s to punish the lepers."
If countries have COVID regulations on the books and they let someone through just because they're a sports star, how many exceptions should those countries be prepared to grant if they (through their leniency) demonstrate that those regulations are less "rules" than "suggestions"?
Djokovic played a Stupid Game and won a Stupid Prize. (I'm also not going to shed a tear for a single Serb who may be "particularly sensitive to the smell of persecution".) I only wish that the American sports establishment had half the backbone of their Australian counterparts. If Djokovic wants to play tennis, I'm sure that there are plenty of countries with more lenient policies that would be happy to have him.
If you're suggesting I'm somehow contradicting myself asking for a porous southern border while bringing down the hammer on this tennis player, you're barking up the wrong tree. We should be enforcing our border regulations as rigorously as the Australians are enforcing theirs.
No, just a general remark expressing my opinion of one aspect of the mess at the southern border. Certainly nothing directed at you. I'm through judging mask and vaccine enforcers and their critics. I'll try to take care of myself and the people I care about. I did just now read a news report that indicated some people believe Justice Gorsuch was attempting to assassinate Justices Breyer and Sotomayor by going maskless at a hearing even though those two were participating remotely.
I saw mention of the Gorsuch thing, but didn't have time to dig into it.
Would have Sotomayor and Breyer heard the case in-person had Gorsuch masked up? Relatedly, has Gorsuch masked up for other arguments? That seems to be the pivot on which the issue turns.
Maybe I'll look into it this afternoon if I need some more soap opera drama in my life.
(Did some homework waiting for a call to get some context...)
"We are now six days into mask-mania at the U.S. Supreme Court. It all started during last Friday’s oral arguments in the vaccine-or-test mandate cases when Justice Neil Gorsuch was reportedly the only justice not masking throughout the session, though evidently Justices Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas removed their masks for extended periods. The masking protocol at the high court has long been a bit haphazard: When the justices began to hear cases in person again in October, Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only justice wearing a mask. But the other justices all began to mask last Friday, the first sitting since the omicron surge, after more guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Likely not by coincidence, Sotomayor participated telephonically last Friday. (She has diabetes, which is a comorbidity factor with COVID, even the milder forms.) The Supreme Court’s spokeswoman also confirmed to Slate that Sotomayor then participated remotely in conference, where only the justices are present."
"The pattern has continued with slight modifications since then: On Monday, Gorsuch was the only one to take the bench without a mask according to the AP’s Mark Sherman, and Sotomayor again participated remotely. Gorsuch opted not to wear a mask for oral arguments again on Tuesday when both Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dialed in for the sessions. Breyer had a false positive test and was staying home out of an abundance of caution, but on Wednesday, we learned that Sotomayor would stay home all week."
Sounds like drama to me. Not necessarily on the Justices' side, but on the side of anyone trying to blow this up to be more than it is.
My understanding of it was that CJ Roberts had asked everyone to mask and Gorsuch refused to do so, leading Sotomayor to dial-in. Perhaps I read incorrectly.
Don't know, don't care. I'm finished judging what people think is in their best interest for their own health. Just make sure you do what you think is best.
"In a few years, after the pandemonium has cooled down some, I think the world will be ashamed of how it is now treating modern lepers, just like the American government is ashamed of the way it has treated American Indians and those of Japanese descent who were interred during World War II."
There's a big difference between Native Americans or those of Japanese descent, and being unvaccinated. The former two groups did not make a choice to be members of those two groups: it is inherent in their very being, and actions taken because of that nature are abhorrent and bigoted/racist. Being unvaccinated is a voluntary choice made by the individual, and choices have consequences. That's the issue so often being seen as of late: people making a choice, and being unable to accept or deal with the consequences that occur. It makes you wonder who the real snowflakes are.
But people make a choice on the basis they think it's the right choice and they shouldn't be penalised for it. There's also the choice to get vaccinated. I don't think Djokovic regrets his choice ... and nor do I regret mine. Some of those who chose to get vaccinated have though.
"Bringing a single, healthy tennis player, who happens to be unvaccinated, into any country, in the midst of this wave is a moot event. There’s really no medical or epidemiological value to keeping Djokovic out of any tournament. Making him test daily and keeping him isolated from everyone would be a more than sufficient solution. The point is not to protect the players and fans, though. It’s to punish the lepers."
If countries have COVID regulations on the books and they let someone through just because they're a sports star, how many exceptions should those countries be prepared to grant if they (through their leniency) demonstrate that those regulations are less "rules" than "suggestions"?
Djokovic played a Stupid Game and won a Stupid Prize. (I'm also not going to shed a tear for a single Serb who may be "particularly sensitive to the smell of persecution".) I only wish that the American sports establishment had half the backbone of their Australian counterparts. If Djokovic wants to play tennis, I'm sure that there are plenty of countries with more lenient policies that would be happy to have him.
Exceptions - maybe like our southern border?
Can you elaborate?
If you're suggesting I'm somehow contradicting myself asking for a porous southern border while bringing down the hammer on this tennis player, you're barking up the wrong tree. We should be enforcing our border regulations as rigorously as the Australians are enforcing theirs.
No, just a general remark expressing my opinion of one aspect of the mess at the southern border. Certainly nothing directed at you. I'm through judging mask and vaccine enforcers and their critics. I'll try to take care of myself and the people I care about. I did just now read a news report that indicated some people believe Justice Gorsuch was attempting to assassinate Justices Breyer and Sotomayor by going maskless at a hearing even though those two were participating remotely.
I saw mention of the Gorsuch thing, but didn't have time to dig into it.
Would have Sotomayor and Breyer heard the case in-person had Gorsuch masked up? Relatedly, has Gorsuch masked up for other arguments? That seems to be the pivot on which the issue turns.
Maybe I'll look into it this afternoon if I need some more soap opera drama in my life.
(Did some homework waiting for a call to get some context...)
"We are now six days into mask-mania at the U.S. Supreme Court. It all started during last Friday’s oral arguments in the vaccine-or-test mandate cases when Justice Neil Gorsuch was reportedly the only justice not masking throughout the session, though evidently Justices Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas removed their masks for extended periods. The masking protocol at the high court has long been a bit haphazard: When the justices began to hear cases in person again in October, Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only justice wearing a mask. But the other justices all began to mask last Friday, the first sitting since the omicron surge, after more guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Likely not by coincidence, Sotomayor participated telephonically last Friday. (She has diabetes, which is a comorbidity factor with COVID, even the milder forms.) The Supreme Court’s spokeswoman also confirmed to Slate that Sotomayor then participated remotely in conference, where only the justices are present."
"The pattern has continued with slight modifications since then: On Monday, Gorsuch was the only one to take the bench without a mask according to the AP’s Mark Sherman, and Sotomayor again participated remotely. Gorsuch opted not to wear a mask for oral arguments again on Tuesday when both Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dialed in for the sessions. Breyer had a false positive test and was staying home out of an abundance of caution, but on Wednesday, we learned that Sotomayor would stay home all week."
Sounds like drama to me. Not necessarily on the Justices' side, but on the side of anyone trying to blow this up to be more than it is.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/01/neil-gorsuch-not-masking-real-problem.html
My understanding of it was that CJ Roberts had asked everyone to mask and Gorsuch refused to do so, leading Sotomayor to dial-in. Perhaps I read incorrectly.
Don't know, don't care. I'm finished judging what people think is in their best interest for their own health. Just make sure you do what you think is best.
"In a few years, after the pandemonium has cooled down some, I think the world will be ashamed of how it is now treating modern lepers, just like the American government is ashamed of the way it has treated American Indians and those of Japanese descent who were interred during World War II."
There's a big difference between Native Americans or those of Japanese descent, and being unvaccinated. The former two groups did not make a choice to be members of those two groups: it is inherent in their very being, and actions taken because of that nature are abhorrent and bigoted/racist. Being unvaccinated is a voluntary choice made by the individual, and choices have consequences. That's the issue so often being seen as of late: people making a choice, and being unable to accept or deal with the consequences that occur. It makes you wonder who the real snowflakes are.
But people make a choice on the basis they think it's the right choice and they shouldn't be penalised for it. There's also the choice to get vaccinated. I don't think Djokovic regrets his choice ... and nor do I regret mine. Some of those who chose to get vaccinated have though.