buddha

me neither. and they fog up my glasses. the entire point of mask mandates was that they would stop transmission of a deadly virus that was going to overwhelm the health care system. the health care system is no longer in any danger of being overwhelmed. we have treatment options for covid. we no longer require them in bars or restaurants. we dont require them at concerts. we dont require them at ANY indoor gatherings other than on planes and in transit centers. yet, there is little to no evidence that the virus passes on planes and certainly no evidence that is passes greater on planes than in other indoor spaces. so why keep the mandate on planes? i doubt this would even be a discussion among the left members of this board if the cdc had changed its guidelines, which is was going to do soon anyway.

i mentioned many times about the air filtration systems in planes. so did edman if you'd rather believe him. i asked you a separate question about bars, not as a deflection because i already answered your other question. so what do you think about masks in bars?

but ted kulfan has an article up about how great suter has been... lol.

or a speed car that can take me to cali in less than 5 hours. if there is little to no scientific evidence to support a mask mandate on planes, then why have it? its not just a minor inconvenience to wear an n95 for 4 hours. its hard to breathe. if there isnt any point in doing it, then they should rescind the rule. and in reality, they were going to rescind it. but the cdc is a bureaucracy and they havent gotten around to it yet. the courts beat them to it. the biden administration will wait a couple weeks and see how this goes and test the public's reaction and then decide whether to pursue an appeal.

its the same argument in restaurants! you walk in with a mask and then take it off when you sit down. there is no logic to it.

do you think we should have mask mandates in bars?

in the beginning they did, before a mandate. no spread, iirc. they have really good air filtration systems on planes, that's the reason i think.

if someone asks me to wear a mask, i wear one. i put it on on the train ride home. i dont complain about it. but i'd rather not and i dont think there's a big need for it anymore.

that's cause for an international incident.

g2, they trace these things constantly and there have been little to no spread on airplanes. so why keep doing it? for show?

but you still want them required on planes where there have been little to no cases of spread and the air is constantly filtered out. so where do you draw the line (because lines must inevitably be drawn)? why do you allow people to not wear a mask in a bar where there is a huge risk for spread of airbirne contagions, but require them to wear one on a plane, where the risk is very low (and people take the off to eat and drink on the plane)? the people who are throwing out the argument that thosr who object to this do are doing so "because its haaaaard to wear a mask are just making up strawmen. there is a legitimate reason to ask why we are doing this on planes. should we keep doing it? if so, why?

as opposed to a guy wearing a helmet lying there and bleeding out?

there have been almost no cases of covid spreading on planes. the air is filtered out almost constantly. the cdc does not make people wear them in bars. BARS! but yet makes people wear them in "transit hubs" and on planes. it's incredibly inconsistent.

wearing masks may have some marginal effect on preventing airbirne illness, should everyone be required to wear one all the time in the future in order to slightly restrict the spread of such illnesses?

i cant stand jordan poole.

no more masks on planes thanks to a nationwide injunction. i hate these types of injunctions, even if i feel good that i dont have to wear a mask on a plane anymore. no district court judge should have that kind of power.

tampa hasnt been great lately. maybe the wings play well and keep it close and keep tampa under double digits?

cossa's numbers have dipped this year a bit. but it has to be all about projection with him. he's huge! 6'6!

nixon was a helluva lot smarter than trump. but both had that insecurity that can turn out to be very dangerous in powerful people.

well,i don't know. i havent been following it. but it seems like he was in on at least some of it, right? what do you think?

inciting a riot is really difficult to prove. treason is even harder and i think he's clearly not guilty of that under the legal definition. as to attempting to "overturn" the election, i agree with you that he wanted to do it and tried to do it. the question will be where the line is drawn on legitimate challenges to results (which all participants are entitled to) and attempts to manipulate and throw out good results (which i think - like you - that he or some of his supporters tried to do). and for all the handwringing about herr fuhrer trump, none of his efforts succeeded because the system worked. from all the trump appointed supreme court judges on down, he lost at every level. now they need to fix the holes in the system to make sure it doesnt happen again.

what is happening in hungary and belarus has no bearing on what is happening in the united states. trump says a lot of things. last time i checked, cnn was still on the air. "journalists" in the united states are all just fine, from the whiny liberals to the whiny conservatives, they all continue to have a voice with limited to no interference from the government. but their victimhood act sure does serve to get them attention, tucker to andy ngo to taylor lorenz. trump's actions did little to change the government. he accomplished almost nothing other than giving everyone (especially himself) a big tax break. the bigger issue is congress' unwillingness to act on big issues that ends up leaving those decisions into the hands of the president, the administrative bureaucracy, and the courts. that's not a problem created by trump, its a problem with congress that is exacerbated by having a feeble minded president who doesnt respect the process in office. his lack of respect for institutions doesnt make him a dictator. there are loopholes in the electoral system that are seemingly being closed now. we'll see if they get it done before 2024. there seems to be bipartisan support for it.

i dont know enough about it to know how far up it goes. i havent really been following it.

i said the perpetrators should be prosecuted. if he was actively involved in the perpetration then he should be prosecuted.

how? i said the perpetrators should be prosecuted. tater talks about trump like he's mussolini. he's not. he's just a whiny bitch. that doesnt mean he isnt dangerous and bad for the country, but he's not dr. evil.