Bobref

Sounds like the intro to a @DT contraction argument.

= illogic

“My” logic? A statement is either logical or it isn’t. That one isn’t. My remark was not intended to comment on any political issue one way or another.

One of the great non sequiturs I’ve ever seen.

That’s what everyone says: “I’m sure there are ... things we can do.” As I said, the devil is in the details. Protecting the vulnerable, while allowing the less vulnerable to resume normality, is not a plan. It’s a goal. Now it’s time to come up with a plan to achieve that goal. So far, all I’ve heard is a lot of people pounding the table to get back to “normal.” I want to hear how we get there. How we deal with the elderly living in facilities. How we deal with people in high rise building elevators, in doctor’s offices, hospitals, clinics, etc,, in government offices and courthouses, on airplanes, etc. We all want to get “back.” What we disagree on is what we need to do going forward.

Sounds logical. Makes sense. But, of course, the devil is in the details. Just how is this going to happen? You’re going to essentially cut a sizable segment of the population off from anyone else. You do realize that 1 in 7 Americans is over 65? Add to that the other vulnerable people, like poorly-controlled diabetics, those with auto-immune diseases, the immune-suppressed, those receiving chemotherapy (650,000 every year), and you’re talking well over 15% of the population, i.e., more than 50 million people. I would like to hear someone explain the “protective measures” for these 50 million people that will allow the other 275 million to just go about their business as if nothing had ever happened. Maybe we should just relocate all these people to a single geographic area where we can more easily protect them? You know, like concentration camps, but with internet and cable TV. I’ve got news for you. Things have changed forever. We’re not “going back” to the way things were.There will be a “new normal,” and it’s going to include at least some of the protections that have been employed in the last 2 months. These various measures fall at different places along the most protective/least restrictive spectrum. The choices that are made in the next 6 months will determine what the “new normal” is.

It was only a matter of time before Biden stepped in it. The real issue is whether anyone who was offended by his totally tone deaf remark, and who would have voted for him, will now vote for Trump as a result. My guess is not very many. So, in that sense, Biden was right. He does own those votes.

OK, in retrospect it sucked at any price.

Thanks, doc. It’s so simple. Why didn’t all those experts think of that? 😷🤒🤧

I could use a little “lake life” right now. I had two Canadian fishing trips planned for this Summer, and have had to cancel both, as the border won’t be open until at least June 21.

I don’t think you can separate the two. It’s a unique situation, to which the judge fashioned a unique response.

I also note that Judge Sullivan was a Clinton appointee to the federal bench, for whatever that’s worth.

Keep in mind that this case is an entirely different type of proceeding than a normal prosecution because there was a special prosecutor, not Justice Department lawyers, who decided to charge Flynn. That could make all the difference in the Court of Appeals. It’ll be very interesting to see how it plays out. Edit: Upon further review, the Flynn prosecutors were DOJ attorneys, but they were not from the DC US Attorney’s office. They were appointed by the Attorney General. I think the questions regarding the district judge’s ability to take this sort of “activist” role is novel.

Interesting stats. What exactly is the point you’re trying to make by citing them?

And you wear your ban like a red badge of courage.😂

If you’re If you’re not a Warren Zevon fan, you won’t get it.

Either you’ve got the worst analytical skills of anyone on the GID, or you’re engaging in a “self-fulfilling prophecy.” Fact is, I haven’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since I was in law school. I voted for the Libertarian candidate last time.

Yes, that is chicken-bleep.

I have criticized your style more than once ... and I’m not anyone’s example of a “lefty.”

Athletes and their parents already sign a very comprehensive participation waiver.

Of course. But I won’t need much. After all, that’s what the weapons are for.😜

I was thinking what a monumental undertaking it is to try and get this right, when it’s absolutely without precedent. Those people at the IHSAA are really earning their pay these days. They not only have to decide when to “restart,” but also how to deal with situations that arise after the restart. What do you do if a player has symptoms? What do you do if a player has been exposed? What do you do if a player tests positive? Same questions for a coach, trainer, manager, etc.? Same questions for a family member living in the same household as a player, coach, trainer, etc.? Who do you test, and when? Do you require testing at all? Using what criteria? What do you do with a player, coach, etc., who tests positive for antibodies, i.e., has already been infected and has recovered? What sort of protocols have to be in place in the locker room, weight room, practice facility, etc.? We haven’t even addressed the issues of fans and games. These occurred to me right off the top of my head. I’m sure that the people working on this will have to answer these questions and many, many more. I don’t envy them.

I’m storing mine at an undisclosed location I call “Fortress Bobref.” It’s there along with supplies, weapons, and DVDs of every game I ever officiated. I’ll be ready for whatever.

You have officially gone around the bend.