What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Covfefe-19 The 12th Part: The Only Thing Worse Than This New Board Is TrumpVirus2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
No one gets to complain about this anymore. Not on the right. Not on the left. That genie has been let out of the bottle, and anyone with common sense could see that it was a bad idea, no matter how righteous people think the cause is.

Engaging in that sort of personal protest directed at an individual in their home, or at a restaurant or wherever, is intended to harass, to annoy and to threaten. It is, for the most part, legal. But just because you can, doesn't mean you should. But other than Rube, as you noted, I didn't hear a big outcry against it around here.

As long as we accept that protesting/harassing is different when you are armed or not. One is a threat to vote in the future, the other is a threat to resort to violence. Free speech is limited when it becomes a threat to someone.
 
Anti mask protestors surrounding the homes of local county commissioner as they vote on masks.

remember when Rube was mad that Sanders had her meal interrupted in a restaurant? Good times

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/12/09/idaho-coronavirus-protest-homes/

It seems to me that this is what stupid people do, who wanted to spit on their own safety and the safety of the people around them. They believe in the theories they make up, not real facts. If they do not believe television (although television cannot be 100% trusted), what prevents them from obtaining information from reliable sources? Is the World Health Organization website not suitable for them either? I think tough measures should be taken against such antics.
 
Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention added pregnancy to the list of conditions that put people with Covid-19 at increased risk of developing severe illness, including a heightened risk of death.

The agency added pregnancy to the list after a study that examined the health outcomes of 409,462 symptomatic women ages 15 to 44 who tested positive for the coronavirus, 23,434 of whom were pregnant.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/08/...kT29UgtuHppmkxo16yoh39mPIEHzWU_7TYsGNwef7UcAs
 
Pregnancy is almost always a dangerous proposition relative to baseline. I'm trying to think of a situation where it's less risky to be pregnant than not and I'm coming up empty.
 
I'm still baffled by the outcry against wearing masks. I know, its purely political at this point. Which makes it even more stupid.

Half these people protesting probably wear masks as part of their jobs at some point, or even in their private lives. The motorcyclist wearing a bandana on the road, the carpenter or lumber mill worker dealing with dust or sawdust, anyone working with paint, mineral spirits, or chemicals etc. They don't complain about that.

But they do complain about wearing them when doing so might help save other peoples lives. The only reasons to do so are pure selfishness and in consideration, or because their political identity mandates they do. And again, its just ****ing stupid. But that's what stupid people do.

And Hovey, you can take your 'both sides' and shove it.
 
Pregnancy is almost always a dangerous proposition relative to baseline. I'm trying to think of a situation where it's less risky to be pregnant than not and I'm coming up empty.

If you're not a looker and your city is sacked by the Ottomans. They would kill the women they didn't take as concubines, but they would let pregnant women live -- even the uggos -- so they could take the male babies and raise them as Janissaries.

If your city is sacked by Christians they just rape you and then kill both you and your baby. Ya know, like Jesus said to.
 
Last edited:
Anti mask protestors surrounding the homes of local county commissioner as they vote on masks.

remember when Rube was mad that Sanders had her meal interrupted in a restaurant? Good times

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...protest-homes/

When the Reichstag voted on the Enabling Act of 1933, the SA physically surrounded the other Members as they voted.

Debate within the Centre Party continued until the day of the vote, 23 March 1933, with Kaas advocating voting in favour of the act, referring to an upcoming written guarantee from Hitler, while former Chancellor Heinrich Brüning called for a rejection of the Act. The majority sided with Kaas, and Brüning agreed to maintain party discipline by voting for the Act.[SUP][15][/SUP]

The Reichstag, led by its President, Hermann Göring, changed its rules of procedure to make it easier to pass the bill. Under the Weimar Constitution, a quorum of two-thirds of the entire Reichstag membership was required to be present in order to bring up a constitutional amendment bill. In this case, 432 of the Reichstag's 647 deputies would have normally been required for a quorum. However, Göring reduced the quorum to 378 by not counting the 81 KPD deputies. Despite the virulent rhetoric directed against the Communists, the Nazis did not formally ban the KPD right away. Not only did they fear a violent uprising, but they hoped the KPD's presence on the ballot would siphon off votes from the SPD. However, it was an open secret that the KPD deputies would never be allowed to take their seats; they were thrown in jail as quickly as the police could track them down. Courts began taking the line that since the Communists were responsible for the (Reichstag) fire, KPD membership was an act of treason. Thus, for all intents and purposes, the KPD was banned as of 6 March, the day after the election.[SUP][16][/SUP]

Göring also declared that any deputy who was "absent without excuse" was to be considered as present, in order to overcome obstructions. Leaving nothing to chance, the Nazis used the provisions of the Reichstag Fire Decree to detain several SPD deputies. A few others saw the writing on the wall and fled into exile.

Later that day, the Reichstag assembled under intimidating circumstances, with SA men swarming inside and outside the chamber.[SUP][15][/SUP] Hitler's speech, which emphasised the importance of Christianity in German culture,[SUP][17][/SUP] was aimed particularly at appeasing the Centre Party's sensibilities and incorporated Kaas' requested guarantees almost verbatim. Kaas gave a speech, voicing the Centre's support for the bill amid "concerns put aside", while Brüning notably remained silent.

Only SPD chairman Otto Wels spoke against the Act, declaring that the proposed bill could not "destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible." Kaas had still not received the written constitutional guarantees he had negotiated, but with the assurance it was being "typed up", voting began. Kaas never received the letter.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP][page needed][/SUP]

At this stage, the majority of deputies already supported the bill, and any deputies who might have been reluctant to vote in favour were intimidated by the SA troops surrounding the meeting. In the end, all parties except the SPD voted in favour of the Enabling Act. With the KPD banned and 26 SPD deputies arrested or in hiding, the final tally was 444 in favour of the Enabling Act against 94 (all Social Democrats) opposed. The Reichstag had adopted the Enabling Act with the support of 83% of the deputies. The session took place under such intimidating conditions that even if all SPD deputies had been present, it would have still passed with 78.7% support. The same day in the evening, the Reichsrat also gave its approval, unanimously and without prior discussion.[SUP][18][/SUP] The Act was then signed into law by President Hindenburg.

The Republicans are a fascist party. Republican voters are Nazis. These people have broken the social contract of America and are no longer citizens of a democratic state. They are traitors.
 
I'm still baffled by the outcry against wearing masks. I know, its purely political at this point. Which makes it even more stupid.

Half these people protesting probably wear masks as part of their jobs at some point, or even in their private lives. The motorcyclist wearing a bandana on the road, the carpenter or lumber mill worker dealing with dust or sawdust, anyone working with paint, mineral spirits, or chemicals etc. They don't complain about that.

But they do complain about wearing them when doing so might help save other peoples lives. The only reasons to do so are pure selfishness and in consideration, or because their political identity mandates they do. And again, its just ****ing stupid. But that's what stupid people do.

And Hovey, you can take your 'both sides' and shove it.

The most disappointing part is the people like Hovey who know better and still support not wearing masks.
 
If there was no asymptomatic spread (or even, significantly reduced), I'd probably be philosophically opposed to mask mandates and business closures as well.

But as many as 40% of the infected are totally asymptomatic or have virtually no symptoms - and spread it like crazy - so to me that changes the calculus substantially. We don't close down even in awful flu years because, for the most part, the sick stay home and spread is relatively light. That absolutely isn't the case with SARS2. Compound that with the fact that it's deadlier in acute cases and, as we're learning, the long-lasting issues it causes can be all over the map, I feel that my general libertarian views are not contradictory to mask mandates and closures.

It isn't much more complicated than that. It isn't a personal choice that you're making to go eat in a restaurant that only impacts you. It's a choice you make that impacts you and anyone you come into contact with. You don't have the right to decide for them.
 
I saw a tweet yesterday from an ER doctor (or nurse) treating a woman who had a Thanksgiving dinner with 22 people who were all fine. Then the next day one person started feeling sick and now all 22 people are positive and a few of them are severe. I just don't understand why people can't take one year off of doing a crazy busy holiday.
 
The most disappointing part is the people like Hovey who know better and still support not wearing masks.

As I have written repeatedly on this board, I wear a mask whenever I am out in public. Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of repeating myself for those with reading comprehension problems.
 
I saw a tweet yesterday from an ER doctor (or nurse) treating a woman who had a Thanksgiving dinner with 22 people who were all fine. Then the next day one person started feeling sick and now all 22 people are positive and a few of them are severe. I just don't understand why people can't take one year off of doing a crazy busy holiday.

But they NEEDS to!!!
 
As I have written repeatedly on this board, I wear a mask whenever I am out in public. Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of repeating myself for those with reading comprehension problems.
I really think that a few people do it to needle you. others, like a certain Mainer, are just jerks towards people who don't think and vote like them. There's then the third group who can't remember anything regarding other people because at arms' reach is a wall of mirrors.
 
I saw a tweet yesterday from an ER doctor (or nurse) treating a woman who had a Thanksgiving dinner with 22 people who were all fine. Then the next day one person started feeling sick and now all 22 people are positive and a few of them are severe. I just don't understand why people can't take one year off of doing a crazy busy holiday.

Because it's fine. They're all fine, it's all fine. Stop overreacting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top