>>9164730 (PB)
"I didn't misgender you, sir. You did."
>>9164336 (PB)
Most excellent. Want to thank you for that meme.
Got in a "debate" over the value of cloth masks with a "true believer" a few days back. He ignored the passage of single virii and claimed that clumps of virii were the culprit anyway.
Two problems. 1) a cube of WUFLU consisting of over 20k individual 11nm virus particles clumped together would still freely pass through the 300nm holes in most particle masks. 2) a cluster of WUFLU with more particles than that would fall out of the air all on their own. When I was operating woodworking tools in my basement, the air I was breathing was cleaner than the air outdoors. I don't claim to be a rocket surgeon, but the math involved isn't all that challenging.
>>9164002 (PB)
I think a lot of re-ordering of our economy is going to result. We've done without restaurants, movies and concerts so long I don't know that they will ever recover.
Help me out, frens.
A LONG time ago I and some others were having some "issues" with infinity chan and there was an adjustment in the setup menu of Firefox that made it "all better". I just spent maybe a half hour poking around in there and cannot for the life of me get the filter / report function to work.
Neither (probably a separate issue) does the floating comment box make an appearance when I am well into a bread and click on the post #.
Any Anons got a moment to help an old codger out?
While it IS unconstitutional, that's not the foundation of the decision. The foundation of the decision was procedural. The court asserts that he did not have the authority to extend the lockdown without consulting the legislature … not that the lockdown was itself unconstitutional.
I wish it had been on the more basic grounds, but it was a chickenshit decision based on how it was handled, not that it existed at all.
If you can show up in person and present identification to obtain a test for the WUFLU, you can show up in person and present identification to vote.
Or not.
THESE are "hateful memes".
It's an interesting thing that we've delegated all authority as to whether something is "constitutional" or not to a group of men and women whom we know in our heart of hearts cannot be trusted with that much power.
It's bad enough that they hold the fate of an accused man in their hands … but to let them be the default judges of what our entire nation should do is pure folly.
No. The Constitution determines what is constitutional and we, as citizens need to know what it says sufficient to stand in opposition to transgresses against it. We, not some elite cadre of black-robed British royalty, are its best judge and sole defenders in extremis.
I live in NC and am (sort of) involved with the local GOP. They endorsed Burr for this last run purely on the promise that he would retire after this. That was a bad decision on our part and won't (if I can make MY voice heard) be repeated.
The only problem this presents for us is that it is too late (probably) for a special election and we have a shit breath Democrat for governor who can't be trusted to make a decent nomination for interim Senator.