Glimpsed at Starbucks:

https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ

Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.

Not one ounce of self-awareness.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 22:05:40 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>
>https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>
>Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>
>Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>

I don't see the problem. Of course she wants to smash capitalism, so
long as it doesn't impact her. I feel like she would do well in China.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 17:26:42 -0500
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 22:05:40 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >Glimpsed at Starbucks:
> >
> >https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
> >
> >Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000
> >MacBook.
> >
> >Not one ounce of self-awareness.
> >
>
> I don't see the problem. Of course she wants to smash capitalism, so
> long as it doesn't impact her. I feel like she would do well in China.

She should be sent to China for a few weeks to see just how it really
is and then be offered a trip back to the (sorta) "capitalist West":
I'll bet she'd be back in a heartbeat. North Korea would be even better
but they aren't nearly as likely to let her go again.

--
Rhino

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>
> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>
> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>
> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>

Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:47:13 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:

>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>
>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>
>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>>
>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>
>
>Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?

Some people are. I know I see customers and some of the staff at my
local Publix still wearing masks. Though I also notice some families
where one person is wearing a mask and the rest of the family aren't.
Which raises the issue of what if one of the non-mask wearing people
get sick and are living in the same home as the mask wearing person.

In article
<1204799607.730694547.717152.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

> > Glimpsed at Starbucks:
> >
> > https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
> >
> > Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and
> > $2,000 MacBook.
> >
> > Not one ounce of self-awareness.
> >
> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?

Not forced to but there are a lot of people who are still either
ridiculously paranoid or who wear them as a political statement, to
broadcast to everyone that they're 'progressive'.

On 2/26/2024 7:12 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:47:13 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>>
>>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>>
>>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>>>
>>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>>
>>
>> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?
>
> Some people are. I know I see customers and some of the staff at my
> local Publix still wearing masks. Though I also notice some families
> where one person is wearing a mask and the rest of the family aren't.
> Which raises the issue of what if one of the non-mask wearing people
> get sick and are living in the same home as the mask wearing person.
>
Or it could be that the mask wearing person is immunocompromised and
they also wear it at home.

On 2/26/24 4:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>
> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>
> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>
> Not one ounce of self-awareness.

Now that's irony coming from an anonyshit such as yourself. Because you
don't want to come off as a hypocrite, why don't you explain about the
"self awareness" you have for yourself.

On 2/26/24 9:39 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article
> <1204799607.730694547.717152.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>>
>>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>>
>>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and
>>> $2,000 MacBook.
>>>
>>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>>
>> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?
>
> Not forced to but there are a lot of people who are still either
> ridiculously paranoid or who wear them as a political statement, to
> broadcast to everyone that they're 'progressive'.

So is the current MAGA stance that COVID has ceased to exist? Do you
pretend COVID is no longer listed as a cause of death on coroners'
reports. Well, I would imagine this wouldn't be of much interest to the
the type of sick fucks that look at the events in Uvalde TX as "par for
the course" in gun ownership. Just a couple of gay anonymous losers I
guess.

atropos@mac.com wrote:

> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>
> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>
> Not one ounce of self-awareness.

They never do, hence "useful idiots".

--
"The sky was low and heavy, like the brow of a retarded child."

anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>
>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000 MacBook.
>>
>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>
> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?

They still wear them here.

--
Let's go Brandon!

On 2/26/24 10:39 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article
> <1204799607.730694547.717152.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>>
>>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>>
>>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and
>>> $2,000 MacBook.
>>>
>>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>>
>> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?
>
> Not forced to but there are a lot of people who are still either
> ridiculously paranoid or who wear them as a political statement, to
> broadcast to everyone that they're 'progressive'.
>

Sure there are. Because they tell you that,right?

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 2/27/2024 12:20 AM, suzeeq wrote:
> On 2/26/2024 7:12 PM, shawn wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:47:13 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>>>
>>>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>>>
>>>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and $2,000
>>>> MacBook.
>>>>
>>>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?
>>
>> Some people are. I know I see customers and some of the staff at my
>> local Publix still wearing masks. Though I also notice some families
>> where one person is wearing a mask and the rest of the family aren't.
>> Which raises the issue of what if one of the non-mask wearing people
>> get sick and are living in the same home as the mask wearing person.
>>
> Or it could be that the mask wearing person is immunocompromised and
> they also wear it at home.

Or maybe they're random strangers nobody's willing to ask about.

On Feb 27, 2024 at 5:41:09 AM PST, "FPP" <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/26/24 10:39 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article
>> <1204799607.730694547.717152.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>,
>> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>>>
>>>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>>>
>>>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and
>>>> $2,000 MacBook.
>>>>
>>>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>>>
>>> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?
>>
>> Not forced to but there are a lot of people who are still either
>> ridiculously paranoid or who wear them as a political statement, to
>> broadcast to everyone that they're 'progressive'.
>>
> Sure there are. Because they tell you that,right?

They've told everyone. That's the whole point. If you're a virtue signaler,
you have to, ya know, signal your virtue.

"I'm fully vaxxed and the cdc said I could go out without a mask but I'm not
about to look like a republican so it looks like the mask is staying on"

https://x.com/aubree_9722/status/1387805113062920195?s=20

Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks

It is a matter of cultural identity, not a matter of policy or science.

While there has been a quietly energetic campaign to memory-hole the fact,
some of you will remember that, in the run-up to the 2020 presidential
campaign, vaccine skepticism was a Democratic thing, not a Republican thing.
Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Andrew Cuomo, and every third progressive nitwit on
Twitter cast doubt on the safety and the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines
that were being developed under Operation Warp Speed, the Trump
administration's program to expedite a vaccine. It was childishly predictable:
With Election Day looming, anything that might redound to the credit of the
Trump administration had to be cast into doubt or held up for scorn. We are
governed by people who have never mentally or morally progressed beyond the
politics of the junior-high lunchroom.

After the election, the Democrats and the Republicans settled back into their
familiar respective grooves. Republicans who had sympathized with the Trump
administration's early efforts to play down COVID-19 went back to pooh-poohing
it, Democrats returned to their peculiar form of technocratic pietism.
Democrats sacralized the vaccines, Republicans scorned them and talked up
quack cures. And masks became the burqa of the COVID era, with the
Subaru-mounted mutaween of suburbia zealously guarding the new public
morality.

The ritual covering of the head or face is an ancient tradition, one that is
found in so many fundamentally different religions spread across so many
disparate cultures as to make it a nearly universal phenomenon: Christians
with their mantillas, wimples, and zucchettos; Muslims with their hijabs,
niqabs, and chadors; the Hindu ghoonghat; the Jewish kippah and tichel; the
Sikh dastār and chunni; the Buddhist zukin-- from Muslims to Mennonites, from
Tibet to Texas, head coverings and face coverings have long been, and continue
to be, points of religious, political, and social sensitivity. We have grown
so accustomed to considering it bad manners for a man to wear a hat indoors or
at the table or while the national anthem is being sung that we do not even
remember why that is, having forgotten the reason long ago. Ask the etiquette
experts about this and they will fail to give you a persuasive answer:
Removing the hat is a sign of respect, says Emily Post. Yes, but why?

Given the weight that masking now has in our culture, it is amusing to
consider the possibility put forward by some scholars that ritual head
covering began as a sanitary measure-- that hair first was covered in public
as a prophylactic against infection by lice and other vermin. From thence, the
theory goes, the covered head came to be a sign of physical cleanliness, and,
by extension, moral purity.

Whatever else it does or does not do, the COVID-era mask has taken on that
role. It may not do much of anything to stop the spread of the virus but it
says something-- in some contexts, a great deal-- about what kind of person
you are. I think that if I could learn two things about a person-- the
situations in which he will wear a mask even if it is not strictly required
and the situations in which he will refuse to comply with a mask requirement--
I could probably tell you for whom he voted in 2020. In Tibet, the two main
monastic sects differentiate themselves by the color of their hats, red for
one and yellow for the other. Puritans wore capotains ("pilgrim hats", as they
are commonly called) to set themselves apart from other, less austere
Christians. The turbans that Sikhs wear are meant to symbolize social equality
among believers but they also communicate another message: Us and Them.

So, too, with masks.

And that is what is making unmasking-- and a more general return to normal--
so difficult for so many of our progressive friends: It has become a cultural
and social issue, and a quasi-religious one at that. For a certain kind of
progressive, giving up masking feels like giving in. It doesn't feel to them
like the epidemic has been beaten-- it feels to them like *they* have been
beaten, and their cultural enemies (Joe Rogan, and that estranged uncle who is
angry on Facebook) have won.

This is a near-guarantee of bitter social conflict. Consider the protests
going on right now in Canada. Raquel Dancho, a Conservative MP, told the BBC
that Canadians, normally an orderly people, have had enough: "We abide by all
the rules. We stepped up and we have 90% of Canadians vaccinated," she said.
"What we’re seeing now is that Canadians have come to the ends of their ropes.
We've done our part and now Canadians are looking to their governments and
saying, 'That's enough of this. We need to move forward. What's the plan?'"
The problem with figures such as Justin Trudeau is that they have defined
themselves wholly in opposition to their critics. What is Justin Trudeau? That
is a question that really can be answered only in the negative: He is not x.
We are in much the same situation in the United States, where the core
identity of each political party is simply that it is not the other political
party. The mask scolds at your local grocery store cannot give up ritual
face-covering for the same reason the Judean People's Front and the People's
Front of Judea cannot give up their mutual rivalry: Without it, they will not
know themselves.

But there are a great many Americans who are not fanatics, who do not live in
Idaho militia compounds-- voters in California and Connecticut and New Jersey
who, like our Canadian neighbors, suspect that we missed the off ramp a few
exits back and are due for a course correction. What they are running up
against-- and what Joe Biden is running up against among his own base-- is a
species of religious fanaticism. Like the declarations of progressives who
once swore off "Trump vaccines", it is a matter of identity, not a matter of
policy, much less one of science.

The news on COVID is generally good these days. And I cannot remember another
time in which generally good news has caused so much angst and misery.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/02/why-progressives-cant-quit-their-masks/amp/

On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks

Because covid is still killing people. Just saved everybody a lot of
bullshit.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>
> Just saved everybody a lot of bullshit.

How? My post is still there. Snipping it out in your reply won't change
that. You've 'saved' no one from anything, Shit Shoes.

On 2/28/2024 7:29 PM, FPP wrote:
> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>
> Because covid is still killing people. Just saved everybody a lot of
> bullshit.

Yeah, I don't know the actual risks, but I'd assume wearers are fearful.

On 2/28/24 9:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>
>>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>>
>> Just saved everybody a lot of bullshit.
>
> How? My post is still there. Snipping it out in your reply won't change
> that. You've 'saved' no one from anything, Shit Shoes.
>

And neither did you snipping my answer. You think people actually read
your repetitive drivel?

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 2/28/24 10:17 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 2/28/2024 7:29 PM, FPP wrote:
>> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>>
>> Because covid is still killing people. Just saved everybody a lot of
>> bullshit.
>
> Yeah, I don't know the actual risks, but I'd assume wearers are fearful.
>
>

CDC latest data still lists covid deaths as number 3 or 4 killer behind
heart disease and cancer.

> Heart disease: 695,547
> Cancer: 605,213
> COVID-19: 416,893

Fucknuts would have you think covid is a thing of the past.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

In article <17b8371d5e2f02fc$176$3235685$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>,
moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> On 2/28/2024 7:29 PM, FPP wrote:
> > On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

> >> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
> >
> > Because covid is still killing people. Just saved everybody a lot of
> > bullshit.
>
> Yeah, I don't know the actual risks, but I'd assume wearers are fearful.

My favorite bit of recent mask absurdity was the woman in line at the
supermarket checkout who was dutifully wearing her mask but who would
pull it down every 30 seconds or so to cough like a serial smoker, then
put it back up again.

Not one ounce of self-awareness.

In article <urpqno$ggcp$1@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 2/28/24 9:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >
> >>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
> >>
> >> Just saved everybody a lot of bullshit.
> >
> > How? My post is still there. Snipping it out in your reply won't change
> > that. You've 'saved' no one from anything, Shit Shoes.
> >
> And neither did you snipping my answer. You think people actually read
> your repetitive drivel?

Well, I get an awful lot of replies that seem to reference what I post,
so unless this group is full of psychics, yeah.

On 2/28/24 1:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2024 at 5:41:09 AM PST, "FPP" <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/26/24 10:39 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <1204799607.730694547.717152.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>,
>>> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Glimpsed at Starbucks:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://ibb.co/HhJ05yZ
>>>>>
>>>>> Smashing capitalism with a $12 Starbucks, $200 Ray-Bans and
>>>>> $2,000 MacBook.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not one ounce of self-awareness.
>>>>>
>>>> Is this a current picture? Are you guys still wearing masks?
>>>
>>> Not forced to but there are a lot of people who are still either
>>> ridiculously paranoid or who wear them as a political statement, to
>>> broadcast to everyone that they're 'progressive'.
>>>
>> Sure there are. Because they tell you that,right?
>
> They've told everyone. That's the whole point. If you're a virtue signaler,
> you have to, ya know, signal your virtue.
>
> "I'm fully vaxxed and the cdc said I could go out without a mask but I'm not
> about to look like a republican so it looks like the mask is staying on"
>
> https://x.com/aubree_9722/status/1387805113062920195?s=20

Thanks for proving yet again that a representative sampling of one still
isn't statistically significant. I did get a good laugh from this
though, so at least you were good enough to help with that.

> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>
> It is a matter of cultural identity, not a matter of policy or science.
>
> While there has been a quietly energetic campaign to memory-hole the fact,
> some of you will remember that, in the run-up to the 2020 presidential
> campaign, vaccine skepticism was a Democratic thing, not a Republican thing.
> Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Andrew Cuomo, and every third progressive nitwit on
> Twitter cast doubt on the safety and the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines
> that were being developed under Operation Warp Speed, the Trump
> administration's program to expedite a vaccine. It was childishly predictable:
> With Election Day looming, anything that might redound to the credit of the
> Trump administration had to be cast into doubt or held up for scorn. We are
> governed by people who have never mentally or morally progressed beyond the
> politics of the junior-high lunchroom.
>
> After the election, the Democrats and the Republicans settled back into their
> familiar respective grooves. Republicans who had sympathized with the Trump
> administration's early efforts to play down COVID-19 went back to pooh-poohing
> it, Democrats returned to their peculiar form of technocratic pietism.
> Democrats sacralized the vaccines, Republicans scorned them and talked up
> quack cures. And masks became the burqa of the COVID era, with the
> Subaru-mounted mutaween of suburbia zealously guarding the new public
> morality.
>
> The ritual covering of the head or face is an ancient tradition, one that is
> found in so many fundamentally different religions spread across so many
> disparate cultures as to make it a nearly universal phenomenon: Christians
> with their mantillas, wimples, and zucchettos; Muslims with their hijabs,
> niqabs, and chadors; the Hindu ghoonghat; the Jewish kippah and tichel; the
> Sikh dastār and chunni; the Buddhist zukin-- from Muslims to Mennonites, from
> Tibet to Texas, head coverings and face coverings have long been, and continue
> to be, points of religious, political, and social sensitivity. We have grown
> so accustomed to considering it bad manners for a man to wear a hat indoors or
> at the table or while the national anthem is being sung that we do not even
> remember why that is, having forgotten the reason long ago. Ask the etiquette
> experts about this and they will fail to give you a persuasive answer:
> Removing the hat is a sign of respect, says Emily Post. Yes, but why?
>
> Given the weight that masking now has in our culture, it is amusing to
> consider the possibility put forward by some scholars that ritual head
> covering began as a sanitary measure-- that hair first was covered in public
> as a prophylactic against infection by lice and other vermin. From thence, the
> theory goes, the covered head came to be a sign of physical cleanliness, and,
> by extension, moral purity.
>
> Whatever else it does or does not do, the COVID-era mask has taken on that
> role. It may not do much of anything to stop the spread of the virus but it
> says something-- in some contexts, a great deal-- about what kind of person
> you are. I think that if I could learn two things about a person-- the
> situations in which he will wear a mask even if it is not strictly required
> and the situations in which he will refuse to comply with a mask requirement--
> I could probably tell you for whom he voted in 2020. In Tibet, the two main
> monastic sects differentiate themselves by the color of their hats, red for
> one and yellow for the other. Puritans wore capotains ("pilgrim hats", as they
> are commonly called) to set themselves apart from other, less austere
> Christians. The turbans that Sikhs wear are meant to symbolize social equality
> among believers but they also communicate another message: Us and Them.
>
> So, too, with masks.
>
> And that is what is making unmasking-- and a more general return to normal--
> so difficult for so many of our progressive friends: It has become a cultural
> and social issue, and a quasi-religious one at that. For a certain kind of
> progressive, giving up masking feels like giving in. It doesn't feel to them
> like the epidemic has been beaten-- it feels to them like *they* have been
> beaten, and their cultural enemies (Joe Rogan, and that estranged uncle who is
> angry on Facebook) have won.
>
> This is a near-guarantee of bitter social conflict. Consider the protests
> going on right now in Canada. Raquel Dancho, a Conservative MP, told the BBC
> that Canadians, normally an orderly people, have had enough: "We abide by all
> the rules. We stepped up and we have 90% of Canadians vaccinated," she said.
> "What we’re seeing now is that Canadians have come to the ends of their ropes.
> We've done our part and now Canadians are looking to their governments and
> saying, 'That's enough of this. We need to move forward. What's the plan?'"
> The problem with figures such as Justin Trudeau is that they have defined
> themselves wholly in opposition to their critics. What is Justin Trudeau? That
> is a question that really can be answered only in the negative: He is not x.
> We are in much the same situation in the United States, where the core
> identity of each political party is simply that it is not the other political
> party. The mask scolds at your local grocery store cannot give up ritual
> face-covering for the same reason the Judean People's Front and the People's
> Front of Judea cannot give up their mutual rivalry: Without it, they will not
> know themselves.
>
> But there are a great many Americans who are not fanatics, who do not live in
> Idaho militia compounds-- voters in California and Connecticut and New Jersey
> who, like our Canadian neighbors, suspect that we missed the off ramp a few
> exits back and are due for a course correction. What they are running up
> against-- and what Joe Biden is running up against among his own base-- is a
> species of religious fanaticism. Like the declarations of progressives who
> once swore off "Trump vaccines", it is a matter of identity, not a matter of
> policy, much less one of science.
>
> The news on COVID is generally good these days. And I cannot remember another
> time in which generally good news has caused so much angst and misery.
>
>
> https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/02/why-progressives-cant-quit-their-masks/amp/

You probably don't even see the irony and stupidity of the "National
Review" talking about Canada, do you pusillanimous pussy.

On 2/28/24 8:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>
>>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>>
>> Just saved everybody a lot of bullshit.
>
> How? My post is still there. Snipping it out in your reply won't change
> that. You've 'saved' no one from anything, Shit Shoes.
>

Were you crying when you wrote this followup, perhaps before literally
driving off a cliff?

On 2/29/24 12:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <17b8371d5e2f02fc$176$3235685$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/28/2024 7:29 PM, FPP wrote:
>>> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>
>>>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>>>
>>> Because covid is still killing people. Just saved everybody a lot of
>>> bullshit.
>>
>> Yeah, I don't know the actual risks, but I'd assume wearers are fearful.
>
> My favorite bit of recent mask absurdity was the woman in line at the
> supermarket checkout who was dutifully wearing her mask but who would
> pull it down every 30 seconds or so to cough like a serial smoker, then
> put it back up again.
>
> Not one ounce of self-awareness.

You're confused. Perhaps she was a right wing asshole, and wearing an
N95 mask to protect herself, but didn't give a shit about infecting
others by coughing without the mask. Makes sense, doesn't it, right
wing asshole?

On 2/29/24 12:17 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <urpqno$ggcp$1@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2/28/24 9:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2/28/24 2:01 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Why Progressives Can't Quit Their Masks
>>>>
>>>> Just saved everybody a lot of bullshit.
>>>
>>> How? My post is still there. Snipping it out in your reply won't change
>>> that. You've 'saved' no one from anything, Shit Shoes.
>>>
>> And neither did you snipping my answer. You think people actually read
>> your repetitive drivel?
>
> Well, I get an awful lot of replies that seem to reference what I post,
> so unless this group is full of psychics, yeah.

"An awful lot of replies" sounds eerily similar to the fat orange
bastard beginning a sentence with "A lot of people are saying..."