Quo Vadis GOP?

[crazy canuck]

On the other hand it was obvious from the start that outdoor rock climbing would not be a signficant vector for infection.

allright, I'll bite.  Give me the scientific studies from february-april that said outdoor contagion was extremely minimal.  And I'm talking date of publication, of course, not the date the data was collected like you did last time.
Should be easy since it was so obvious.

There were studies in April that were indicating that - I also think there were studies at that point indicating that aerosol transmission was the main way this was spreading.

There are also lots of other studies in relation to other viruses that show that sun and open spaces reduce transmission significantly. I don't think there was ever a reason to think that this virus would behave differently. And the Japanese and other East Asian countries based their policies with the assumption that it was probably aerosol transmission - so Japan's three c's (close spaces, crowded places, close contact settings) with far better results.

I think the failure in the West to react quickly to the emerging data that the key risk was aerosol transmission is a huge policy failure - it's only this year that it seems to be a key message when it has been obvious since, at the very latest, summer 2020.

I think the Western response often went with the plan they had and only moved once there was a strong level of evidence about something. I think in the future it needs to be far more nimble and also work on assumptions based on what we know about other similar diseases rather than waiting for a definitive answer.

yes, and based on those studies our PHO was telling everyone to go outside, but she also stressed the importance of social distancing when outside and the need for small groups, even outside.  There was also a requirement that we not travel to other regions to enjoy the out of doors there.  The reason being that when travelling people need to do things like get gas, buy groceries or go to restaurants etc - ie the movement of people increased the risk of spreading the virus.

[viper37]

I mean, it's not like you carefully evaluated Denmark's policy, carefully compared all the data that went into it, cross referenced it with that same data from Canada, and soberly concluded that Denmark is right to allow some travel and Canada wrong.

Nope...Canada doesn't allow travel, so they are wrong. Denmark does allow travel, so they are right. 100% outcome driven evaluation.

I certainly didn't do an extensive evaluation. What I did is recognize that Canada won't let in vaccinated travelers without an essential reason, and I think that is stupid. If you want to point to the vaccinated travelers that presented a negative covid test and that have spread covid, I'll reevaluate that opinion.

Viper just did.  Another example is the Uganda Olympic team.

See the problem is every time you rely on your own personal knowledge as a justification for questioning judgments of those who actually know what they are doing, you get into a bit of trouble.

Was he vaccinated and did he present a negative covid test on arrival to Canada? I've been googling and can't find anything on that.

all NHL players&staff were fully vaccinated before the start of the playoffs.
I do not know if he had to present a negative test, I have not seen this information anywhere.  The enforcement of the rules by the Feds have been spotty, but generally speaking, if you land at an airport, you have to show your negative covid tests.  Was there special rules for NHLers?  I am uncertain.  Someone who has watched hockey more closely this season could answere.

[crazy canuck]

The NHL put in special travel requirements to get the exemption from the Canadian government.  Covid tests before travelling were mandatory.

[alfred russel]

The NHL example is of a fully vaccinated person who tested negative before travelling but became positive.

The exact same thing happened with the Uganda Team member - fully vaccinated and tested negative before travelling.

The only reason these cases were caught is because of the other measures put in place because of the special nature of the events they were participating in.  There will be no such special measures once we start letting foreigners into our country - and these two examples show that even with people who are trying to be careful, infections can occur.

I don't imagine such an attitude for people who are willing to take the risk to travel at the earliest opportunity.  You do not present a very compelling case that our public health officials have made an incorrect judgement.

Well the risk isn't going to be absolute zero, but I think Denmark requires a test upon arrival (maybe they don't) which is what caught the Uganda guy. When I visited Uganda they actually did have a testing regime upon arrival for US citizens (but I didn't have to have one because I was vaccinated).

[crazy canuck]

The NHL example is of a fully vaccinated person who tested negative before travelling but became positive.

The exact same thing happened with the Uganda Team member - fully vaccinated and tested negative before travelling.

The only reason these cases were caught is because of the other measures put in place because of the special nature of the events they were participating in.  There will be no such special measures once we start letting foreigners into our country - and these two examples show that even with people who are trying to be careful, infections can occur.

I don't imagine such an attitude for people who are willing to take the risk to travel at the earliest opportunity.  You do not present a very compelling case that our public health officials have made an incorrect judgement.

Well the risk isn't going to be absolute zero, but I think Denmark requires a test upon arrival (maybe they don't) which is what caught the Uganda guy. When I visited Uganda they actually did have a testing regime upon arrival for US citizens (but I didn't have to have one because I was vaccinated).

And so I will remind you again about the practicalities of the US Canada border that you snipped from my earlier response that make that sort of testing regime for all the US tourists who come to Canada somewhat impractical.

[alfred russel]

And so I will remind you again about the practicalities of the US Canada border that you snipped from my earlier response that make that sort of testing regime for all the US tourists who come to Canada somewhat impractical.

The amount I care about Canadian travel policies is extremely limited. If Canada wants to close down, it really isn't any skin off my back.

But I don't think it is impractical, and I think we will see that in the next few months when Canada in fact implements such a policy. Some countries have closed their land borders and opened the airports to limit travel, that is always an option, and you can limit flights.

[viper37]

But I don't think it is impractical, and I think we will see that in the next few months when Canada in fact implements such a policy.

as vaccination rates increases, the risks of facing an eventual 4th wave that will strain our health care network will diminish accordingly.  By then, even if we haven't reached 95% vaccinated people, Canada will face much less risks from travelers and will adjust accordingly.

Right now, Ontario is still facing a couple of hundreds new cases a day and I don't think Ford wants lots of unvaccinated Americans to come visit and spread covid in his lands.

At the rate vaccination is going all accross the country, I expect the border to gradually reopen by the end of July at the latest.

[Solmyr]

Guys, this is not a covid thread.

[ulmont]

Guys, this is not a covid thread.

Well, it wasn't...

[Zoupa]

Well folks keep feeding the troll so it was bound to happen.

[viper37]

Guys, this is not a covid thread.

allright, allright.  Sorry.

So, about that US Civil War thing...

[Syt]

https://twitter.com/JoshMandelOhio/status/1411023629186482180?s=20

Josh Mandel
@JoshMandelOhio

The Bible and the Constitution are not supposed to be separate.
8:07 PM · Jul 2, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

[Valmy]

Really? Because they both are pretty clear that they are.

[viper37]

Really? Because they both are pretty clear that they are.

Separation of religion and State is a loose concept in the US.

[Syt]

National Guard missions, funded by your taxes rich guys' donations!

https://time.com/6076921/billionaire-gop-donor-bankrolls-national-guard-border-deployment/

Billionaire GOP Donor Bankrolls National Guard Border Deployment

As many as 50 National Guard members are heading to the U.S.-Mexico border to help law enforcement deal with the ongoing migrant crisis. But the cost of the deployment isn't being paid by local, state or federal government. Instead, a deep-pocketed Republican donor who made billions from auctioning off wrecked cars is footing the bill.

The peculiar arrangement was revealed Tuesday when South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem formally announced that she was sending National Guard troops from her state down to the southern border in Texas. A news release stated the deployment, which is expected to last for between 30 and 60 days, "will be paid for by a private donation."

The National Guard is usually called upon by state governors when there is a massive hurricane, earthquake or other natural disaster. On rare occasions, Guard members are sent across state lines to help a neighbor. The costs incurred are typically paid by state or federal funding following an emergency declaration.

Ian Fury, Noem's spokesman, tells TIME that this particular South Dakota deployment will be paid by Willis and Reba Johnson's Foundation, a charitable group from Franklin, Tenn. "Governor Noem welcomes any such donations to help alleviate the cost to South Dakota taxpayers," he said.

Willis Johnson is the founder of Copart Inc., a publicly traded auto salvage and auction company. Forbes estimates Johnson is worth $2.2 billion. According to Federal Election Commission filings, he has donated to a variety of GOP candidates in recent years, including $200,000 to the Trump Victory Committee in 2020 and a donation for the same amount four years earlier.

Wayne Hall, a National Guard Bureau spokesman, said the national bureau doesn't have visibility into how individual states choose to pay their Guard deployments, but noted each state has their own laws regarding funding. He referred all other questions to Noem's office.

Noem's announcement came just a day before former President Donald Trump is scheduled on a "tour of the unfinished border wall" in Texas. Noem, seen as a potential presidential contender for the 2024 GOP nomination, was lambasted by critics who say the decision to deploy state forces more than 1,000 miles away had more to do with politics than national security.

"We're flabbergasted," said Mandy Smithberger, a national security accountability expert with the non-profit watchdog Project on Government Oversight. "Our military and Guard should be used for advancing our national security and safety, and it's extremely troubling to see the Guard's actions being dictated and supported by a private donor. It sets a troubling precedent and risks further politicizing our forces."

South Dakota State Sen. Reynold Nesiba, a Democrat, was similarly concerned that an individual donor is paying for the deployment. "SD National Guard members signed up to serve our state and country, not to generate airtime for our Governor on Fox News or to be mercenaries for some wealthy donor," he tweeted. "Our National Guardsmen and women are not professional soldiers for hire."

In announcing the decision, Noem criticized the Biden Administration for weak policies that left an "unsecured border." She joined a growing list of Republican governors rushing to aid Texas amid Governor Greg Abbott's recent requests for help to halt illegal crossings from Mexico.

Earlier this month, Abbott and Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a fellow Republican, invoked the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, a mutual aid agreement between all 50 states. "With your help, we can apprehend more of these perpetrators of state and federal crimes, before they can cause problems in your state," the pair wrote in a June 10 letter to fellow governors.

Critics say Abbott and Ducey's plea for help is a political ploy to deride President Joe Biden over border security. Republican governors from Florida, Iowa and Nebraska have already promised to send their state police forces, helicopters, and drones to help Texas and Arizona law enforcement on the ground.

Rather than send state police, though, Noem opted to send service members— a stark departure from other governors' action. "The border is a national security crisis that requires the kind of sustained response only the National Guard can provide," Noem said. "We should not be making our own communities less safe by sending our police or Highway Patrol to fix a long-term problem President Biden's administration seems unable or unwilling to solve."

There are now about 3,600 service members, many of them members of the National Guard, already deployed along the 2,000 mile-long southwest border. Noem could've opted to send troops to help in that mission, instead of under the command of Texas officials.

The military mission at the border began in late 2018 when Trump directed the Pentagon to support of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to protect the U.S. against what he called "an invasion" by a caravan of impoverished Central American migrants traveling north through Mexico.

The soldiers didn't meet the caravan with force. Since the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, the U.S. military has been forbidden to take part in domestic law enforcement. Instead, the troops carried out support missions, such as hanging coils of razor wire atop border fences and points of entry with Mexico in California, Arizona and Texas.

Trump subsequently declared a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border in February 2019—a move that was widely decried by Democrats as a last-ditch effort to divert billions of dollars in government funding for a border wall without receiving Congressional approval.

The troops along the southern border have been handed a wide range of other tasks during their mission, including aerial reconnaissance, ground surveillance, search-and-rescue support, medical support, engineering support, helicopter transportation, personnel protection and painting the border wall with "anti-climb" paint. A little over two years on, the mission has cost taxpayers more than $900 million, according to the Pentagon.

Biden ended Trump's emergency proclamation shortly after entering office and issued an executive order to halt all construction of the border wall.

While sending 50 troops is obviously just a token political gesture, I feel having this paid by a partisan donor might be a bad precedent?