|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 19, 2020 19:12:07 GMT -5
Jeff I certainly respect your skepticism about the efficacy of cloth masks. Much appreciation. Maybe that's the rub, right there. I'm constitutionally programmed to despise coerced symbolism, right down to the bone. It's too early in the thread to throw down the "H-word", but that's exactly what coerced messaging feels like to me. FWIW, Jessica (daughter #5) is a nurse at Emmanuel. Her take on this is quite counter to what I expect you're thinking right now. We had lunch last week, and her comment was "This is all BS. They've got me assigned to the covid floor and most of those people don't have any reason to be there. They're fine. They should just rest at home." Take that for what it's worth. And then there's this: I really and truly don't care if I am infected. I'm young enough and healthy enough and sciency enough to know that my risk of any sort of life-altering or life-ending outcome is functionally negligible. Same for everyone in my house. Have I ever told the story of my friend on the SWAT team? Damn shame what happened to him. This is about four years ago. He was a strapping young man, and I do mean strapping. Mid 30's. Built like a tank. Strong as a mule. Tough guy. Lived in the gym. He was a cop on OPD's SWAT team. He was one of the regulars at the cigar store. Everyone liked him. Super nice guy. Last time I saw him was on a Saturday. He was dead on Monday. Seasonal flu got him. A real six-sigma kind of deal, but it happens. He had minor symptoms on Saturday, started feeling much worse that night. Sunday morning he was way, way worse. His wife called an ambulance. He was admitted to Clarkson. Dead the next morning. As far as covid goes, for all I know I've already had it. Here's another story. This happened on Tuesday. A first grader at Angie's school said she wasn't feeling well, and was sent to the nurse. She presented with a very mild fever, and the protocol is she had to go home. (There's nothing new or "covid" about that. Throw down a fever in the nurse's office, you're going home. Been that way forever.) Anyway, this poor girl went into an absolute existential panic. She was screaming over and over "I DON'T WANT TO DIE!!! I DON'T WANT TO DIE!!! O MY GOD!!! I HAVE COVID!!! I'M GOING TO DIE!!!" Blood curdling, uncontrollable, panic. Heartbreaking. Now, the odds are she doesn't have covid in the first place, and the odds are that even if she does, she'll be fine. And really, the numbers aren't even close. What are the fatality rates for a healthy 6yo? Something like 0.0001% It's nothing. But somewhere she got the message that "Got covid? Game over." Who told her that? Where would she get that idea? I think she's been conditioned to that fear by people who don't appreciate that their desire to exaggerate the severity of this in order to promote the public policy responses they desire have the cruel effect of creating anguish and trauma in people unsophisticated enough to understand the full context of things. Well, that's another thing I'm not going to be a part of.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 19, 2020 13:37:30 GMT -5
He wrote me (email) on Sunday telling me he had been banned by the moderators. Seriously? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 19, 2020 12:35:21 GMT -5
Has Peter been around lately? If not, I hope he is just busy or taking a break ... He wrote me (email) on Sunday telling me he had been banned by the moderators.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 19, 2020 11:57:18 GMT -5
Mark's NYT article breezes over it..."health experts say masks are crucial"...really? I assume we're all heard about the Danish study released this week that says otherwise... Danish StudyYep. The study concerned protection to the wearer, it did not address what has always been primary reason for "masking up" which is to prevent the spread from those who are infected to those who are not. (and with Covid, 20% of the infected asymptomatic and unaware they have it and another unknown percentage are contagious but have not yet begun to show symptoms). Regarding the degree of protection to the wearer, the study's authors said their results showed that it would fall between 0-20%. Also, the study addressed masks ability to prevent infection completely, it did not address if masks reduced the viral load during an infection episode. Mask studies, like all studies, continue a learning process that both clarifies and confuses, but the general trend is towards a greater understanding, and that understanding continues to support the usefulness of masking up during viral episodes of consequence. (We do have mega MAGA studies that support the consequences of mask avoidance.) I get the political pressure to put the "don't use our data to argue against masks" disclaimer, but data doesn't get to decide what arguments it is used for. I don't read stuff like a Reuters summary of the study. I read the study. Here.And I don't read the preambles. Those are always politicized. I look at the actual data. Go read it. And understand they are talking about relatively high-quality surgical masks. Not improvised cloth masks. See if you still think general mask mandates are the panacea they are represented to be. I should hasten to add: I love mask mandates. We've sold tens of thousands of dollars worth of custom printed masks over the last few months. Selling like hot-cakes, they are. Nice, high-margin product, right there.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 19, 2020 9:26:19 GMT -5
It's the same tired old story. Anyone who doesn't agree with the left is a bad person. In this case, "whore" or "sycophant". It's never about competing ideas. It's always good vs evil. Life is so simple when you see it that way. Simple is a good word. Cloth masks have become a totem. If only the state would require everyone to wear them....then what? Mark's NYT article breezes over it..."health experts say masks are crucial"...really? I assume we're all heard about the Danish study released this week that says otherwise. I also assume we've all done a deep dive into the scientific literature (pre-covid) that generally concluded that cloth masks are useless at best and actively harmful at worst. Simple, indeed. We demand deliverance, and if that deliverance requires using force on those deplorables, so much the better. We'll show those bullies who's boss. It's their fault, those others. If everyone was just like me, this wouldn't be happening. I look around the world, observe how infection rates wax and wane, and see little correlation with any public policy. It's as if the virus pays no attention. The nerve! A very dear friend of mine has been hospitalized with covid for over a week. He's in his mid 70's and has had a rough time. I'm guessing in March he would have died, but clinical experience has improved enough since then to save him. That's good news. I'll never understand the reaction to this. It feels like thoughtless panic to me, and woe betide anyone who doesn't play along. What are the numbers today? IIRC, it's looking like we will end 2020 with something like 250k death attributed to covid. Which is to say, roughly equal to the number killed each and every year from medical errors. (Nevermind that a good percentage of deaths attributed to covid were going to happen anyway.) Months ago, I opined that it's too bad covid isn't sexually transmitted. If it were, we wouldn't have to be so judgy about it. That still feels right to me. Covid just is. It exists. It will sicken/kill some (very small, to be sure) number of us, independent of any efforts we make to the contrary. Maybe that anger we see so often stems from the dissonance that flows from the realization that government can't save us. Maybe we bet on the wrong god.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 18, 2020 23:17:24 GMT -5
Competing interests: her political future vs. public welfare. Maybe some members of the public have different ideas/values than you regarding how to maximize their welfare.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 18, 2020 22:58:25 GMT -5
"Trumps whores"? Listen to you guys. I think he means sycophant. She isn’t actually paid to have sex with Trump. I doubt Trump has even suggested that. I get that. But I dont think sycophant is much better than whore. Maybe this isn't about Trump at all. Maybe your governor is doing the best she can trying to manage competing interests.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 18, 2020 22:30:36 GMT -5
"Trumps whores"?
Listen to you guys.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 17, 2020 13:31:55 GMT -5
Aficionados of hot cereals should consider making a pilgrimage to Northfield, MN, the home of Malt-O-Meal Co. where Malt-O-Meal and a half-dozen or so other breakfast cereals are made fresh daily in the Malt-O-Meal factory. When the wind is right, the entire town smells like grandmother's breakfast table. It is a pretty incredible olfactory experience (and not in the way the feedlots of Omaha would be). Nosehounds from across the globe travel to Northfield in the spring to great the firing up of the new season's Malt-O-Meal cook. Thousands of them. You can see them spreading blankets and lying on any patch of grass they can find downwind of the factory with noses to the air. Sadly, perhaps, the South Omaha Stockyards are functionally long gone. Smells better down there, though. Pretty much the only thing left is the Livestock Exchange Building, which is pretty cool, actually:
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 17, 2020 11:49:55 GMT -5
Goes good in cookies.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 17, 2020 7:36:02 GMT -5
Reminds me of the 1990's when every corporation everywhere got on the "mission statement" bandwagon.
The pattern was nearly universal: "BigCo will [insert list of things they will never get done] by the year 2000".
Essential buzzwords were "synergies" and "world class"...your mission statement didn't count unless you had world class synergies.
But the central grift was "year 2000". In the early 90's, that date took on an almost mythical quality, but was still far enough away that there were no temporal limits on what you could claim you will achieve by then.
The date is always the key. The con is always embedded in the date. Precision engineered to be far enough into the future so as to not expose the absurdity of the project (and risk people thinking they might actually have to eat their own dog food), but close enough to fool people into thinking any of it means anything.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 16, 2020 11:58:00 GMT -5
It only seems a non sequitur if you ignore the time, years ago, when you threatened to send Islamic radicals to do violence on me because you didn't approve of the words I used. The hard opinion you have for the people of South Dakota, etc, seemed curious in that context. Given that you're still alive and kicking, one might assume any such "threat" (how long ago was that?) was not intended to be taken seriously -- especially since any reasonable person would know I had no way of actually doing it. It's not like I'm on ISIL's or Al-Qaeda's mailing list. The FBI tends to keep a close eye on those types, and the only concern I've ever heard from an FBI agent was whether I was going to quote him or whether we were off-the-record. Thinking back, in Kuwait I did have an Iraqi tailor who made some shirts for me but I think his only subversive tendency was that he was reluctant to do the button-down collars I wanted. He was more into the Spread collar, but he relented and actually did quite well with a button-downs. I guess the other question (in this "why-can't-liberals-take-a-joke" era) is why do you hang on to that after all these years? Of all the things said on this forum, why does that bother you so? Were you actually living in fear for your life? (I'll answer for you: No.) Did you take any affirmative steps to alter your routines or look under the bed before you turned in? (I'll answer for you: No.) Did you breathe a sigh of relief when you turned over your ignition in the morning and nothing blew up? Did you take it so seriously you contacted the authorities? Lose sleep over it? (We know where this is going: No, No and No.) In short, the "threat" didn't actually rise to the level of, well, a threat and you knew it. But if you think I need to include a "trigger warning" on my posts out of fear they will revive traumatic memories from years ago that you have worked hard to bury, I can do that in the interest of comity. In the alternative, I might suggest looking into the forum's "block" function. You'd never have to read one of my posts again. "Problem solved," as the saying goes. If you're arguing that you shouldn't be taken seriously, we're way ahead of you. But the point is made none the less. David and david didn't understand my apparent non sequitur. Now they do.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 16, 2020 11:17:45 GMT -5
So far, there's no reason to think any of this is going anywhere.
The stuff put forward by Team Trump so far has been negligible. No getting there from here.
Sidney Powell is running around claiming that the voting systems (Scorecard/Dominion) have been infiltrated.
That's an inflammatory accusation, for sure. But so far all they say is "we have the evidence". Big deal. If they have something, write it up and file it in court and lets have a look at it.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 16, 2020 11:05:03 GMT -5
A few years ago, as the process of the girls all building their own families, with all the extended family that creates, the process of scheduling holiday events was getting entirely out of hand. Coordination proved a practical impossibility.
I finally put my foot down and declared that the big three (Easter, Thanksgiving, Christmas) were all the same: Day of, my house, 1:00pm. Everyone is welcome, even MY inlaws, which isn't always the greatest thing, but whatcha gonna do?
Not sure how many to expect this year. Certainly a reduced number. Certainly none of the inlaws. Probably 20 or so total. The forecast looks nice, so I'll build a big fire in the firepit, put the bird on the Webber, and hang out on the patio.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 16, 2020 10:51:49 GMT -5
Seems a rather odd and limited choice. Similarly, I'm at a loss to understand what the misguided violent acts of people claiming to be acting in the name of Islam has to do with the subject at hand. That comes not just from left field, but from a rowhouse down North Kenmore Avenue from which you can't even see the ballpark. It only seems a non sequitur if you ignore the time, years ago, when you threatened to send Islamic radicals to do violence on me because you didn't approve of the words I used. The hard opinion you have for the people of South Dakota, etc, seemed curious in that context.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 16, 2020 8:46:15 GMT -5
Spent most of the weekend cruising around with the grandkids in the Caddy. "Banana Boat", as they call it.
Fun stuff.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 15, 2020 19:24:10 GMT -5
A more interesting question is if the Biden administration, having concluded that they lack the authority to order a national mask mandate, attempts to coerce the states into implementing them by threatening to withhold Federal funds. That's not what I'm asking, Jeff. I'm not asking about any predictions on mask mandates regarding the incoming Biden administration. I'm looking at the Constitution, which refers to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. All three have implied restrictions. For example, pursuit of happiness doesn't include taking advantage of a person for one's own gain, and liberty doesn't mean you can go out and start your own country. There are restrictions on our rights that are obvious, and there are restrictions that aren't obvious. What I'm asking, since the it is purported that not wearing a mask might bring danger to other members of society, is if not wearing one is an obvious restriction, or one that needs to be debated. I say debate it. And the place(s) for those debates are our legislatures. Balancing competing interests is the essential core of all legislation.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 15, 2020 18:13:21 GMT -5
I'd say that characterizing Todd's post as "inverting the question" is actually a way of dismissing the question, or at least diverting the topic up the abstraction ladder or to a different set of rungs. Believe it or not, there are people who take such questions seriously. As an example, this is exactly why Roberts was forced to do a little bit of a two step to preserve the ACA...declaring that the mandate to buy insurance was actually a tax. Details matter. Every rung matters. In the present context, it is highly relevant to ask from where the Federal government would find the authority for a national mask mandate. It's an entirely different question whether there is something in the Federal constitution that would prevent a state from implementing it's own mandate. For the most part, I don't see that. The states are independent sovereign entities, and the Feds have minimal authority over them. (Which is why most such apparent instances involve bribery or other financial coercion, rather than out right control.) A more interesting question is if the Biden administration, having concluded that they lack the authority to order a national mask mandate, attempts to coerce the states into implementing them by threatening to withhold Federal funds. If a governor exceeds his statutory authority, the remedy is in that state's courts, not Federal court.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 15, 2020 17:18:53 GMT -5
I have a question that will either be deemed silly or legitimate by the attorneys here, or anyone else in the know. I know nothing about this kind of stuff. And I realize I'm using the wrong legal language here. Freedom of speech might be a right, but has never been recognized as absolute. For example, yelling "Fire!" in a crowded place where there isn't a fire doesn't fit under the freedom of speech umbrella because it would be something not true, and could cause a panic and injury to others. I wonder how mask wearing fits into personal rights and freedoms. Is it so simple as saying it's a person's right not to wear one in public, or does/can it fit into some exception category as not wearing one might cause harm or injury to others? I'd say you're inverting the question. The right question, the one that should always be asked first, IMHO, is from where does a given unit of government get the authority to mandate a specific, affirmative action? BTW, it is worth reminding ourselves what was at issue when Justice Holmes issued his "fire in a crowded theater" ruling. A group of Yiddish speaking Socialists (who had for the most part fled Europe to get away from war) were pamphleteering (in a language unfamiliar to the vast majority of Americans) against President Wilson's desire to inject the US into WWI. Holmes ruled to jail them.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Nov 15, 2020 13:56:19 GMT -5
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I curse the goddamned libertarian doofus numbskulls who think they have a right -- even an obligation -- to be a disease vector that infects others. They define selfishness and stupidity. And we all think you're just an asshole and can fuck off. So I guess we're even. It is always the begged question that matters most. Which society will enjoy the most aggregate human well being over time? The one that has a reflexive bias toward individual liberty and personal autonomy, or one that thinks homosexuals should be thrown off buildings and blasphemous cartoonists beheaded?
|
|