Gromnir

yes, it is a terrible curse that we read text as written as 'posed to divining what you believe were meant, or what you intended but did not write. is a burden to be able to read. that said, is another teachable moment skarpy will never benefit from, 'cause you gotta know how am gonna resurrect this when he inevitable laments how some group he approves o' is mistreated by angry "snowflakes." HA! Good Fun!

am very much against any individual who resorts to violence to make a point much less murder. 'course you blame antifa and blm for every cop who is murdered 'cause o' your perverted transitive property fails. most o' your other claims, (eg. atifa rapists) is lunatic fringe stuff and hardly merits response 'cause again, you latch on to singular examples from the most tangential related individuals and actions to condemn literal thousands. such behaviour is obvious unreasonable and wrong and doesn't need reply save for our repeated mention o' sadness o' how quirky kanadian gamer vol were amusing and the 2020 incarnation is something else. what a shame. and your selective quoting is not helping you make a case... you left out, "for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity." either intentional or a grammar fail, but is not that the product endorsement need be for personal gain to be inappropriate and illegal. 'course campaign activities on federal land/property is also illegal, which is why yesterday's rose garden speech were so bizarre. we do miss loony and harmless vol. HA! Good Fun! ps we has expressed many times how much the goals o' antifa offends us. when first amendment rights, put into practice, offend a listener, the response should be the one described in our signature as expressed by J. Brandeis. just as is a failure o' character to respond to nazis in skokie with silence, it would be inappropriate to stop their parade with force. am thinking we ain't been subtle 'bout our displeasure with antifa espoused goals, but such is a long way off from blaming antifa for rando murders.

rip ie game vol. his extremism and frequent bouts o' incoherence were quirky when weren't 'bout race. but 'cause vol wants us to stay on topic... trump is unconcerned with law and even less bothered with right. the only remedy for Presidential behaviour with the current doj is impeachment, and the President knows if they didn't impeach him for his obstruction and russia entanglements, and the senate didn't convict him for the ukraine stuff and his attempts to bury the resulting ig report, then there is little he need worry 'bout from a practical pov... at least until january 3, 2021. if senate flips, then is a new ballgame. HA! Good Fun! ps there is no double jeopardy for senate impeachment trials.

“The challenge was to compose a traditional fanfare, direct and powerful, yet with a contemporary sound. . . . The music was not terribly difficult to compose, but working slowly as was my custom, I did not have the fanfare ready to send to Goossens until November. The piece has been Fanfare for the Common Man for so long that it is surprising to see on my sketches that other titles were considered: Fanfare for a Solemn Ceremony, for the Day of Victory, for Our Heroes, for the Rebirth of Lidice, for the Spirit of Democracy, for the Paratroops, for Four Freedoms. After I decided on Fanfare for the Common Man and sent the score to Goossens, I think he was rather puzzled by the title. He wrote, ‘Its title is as original as its music, and I think it is so telling that it deserves a special occasion for its performance. If it is agreeable to you, we will premiere it 14 March [sic] 1943 at income tax time. . . .’ [The income tax deadline was changed to April after the War.] I was all for honoring the common man at income tax time. “Since that occasion, Fanfare has been played by many and varied ensembles, ranging from the U.S. Air Force Band to the popular Emerson, Lake, and Palmer group. . . I confess that I prefer Fanfare in the original version, and I later used it in the final movement of my Third Symphony.”-- aaron copland seeing how today is tax day... HA! Good Fun!

trump is a liar. he has admitted to being a fabulist in past interviews/books and he clear knew 'bout stuff like stormy daniels payments when he lied 'bout such 'cause there is recordings o' conversations with cohen 'bout the payments. the President has stated there is a difference 'tween lying to media and lying to a magistrate, 'cause is only bad to lie to magistrate. 'course we know trump lies to magistrates as well given evidence from roger stone trial. @ShadySands references trump's propensity to double-down on a falsehood; even if the original falsehood were error, the double-downs is not. etc. again, fabulist tendencies is admitted in his books where trump says he prefers not to lie, but he is not averse to exaggeration he knows isn't accurate. 'ccording to trump, people expect and want the razzle dazzle. yes, many trump lies has their genesis in the almost unbelievable ignorance o' the President, as were obvious from his disinfectant injection comments. we elected a man who is willful ignorant, which is not same as dumb. many trump lies get their start 'cause they is things he kinda recalls hearing from fox or oan and he then exaggerates. once trump doubles-down on such stuff, is no longer trump profound ignorance to blame but intentional lies. however, fact that many trump lies start 'cause he is an ill-read b00b with a penchant for exaggeration does not preclude recognition that he is also willful mendacious to a historic degree. worst o' both aspects. lucky us. worst part is these qualities were known before he were elected, and that didn't stop americans from choosing him as President. and yes, hillary were also a liar. cling to that truth allows those o' you who voted for trump to sleep better at night? HA! Good Fun!

probable won't make you feel better, but flood insurance purchased from your typical insurer is having a premium set by FEMA. the nfip were instituted 'cause ordinarily, if you live in a place which floods more frequent than the extreme o' living memory, you wouldn't actual be able to buy flood insurance. insurers would not/did not insure such a risk, 'cause from their pov, it weren't actual a risk. private insurance companies handle the policies, but the premiums is fixed 'cause is government which actual pays. one exception: extreme high value homes. government has a cap 'cause build your multimillion dollar home in a place which floods frequent is... stoopid. government don't feel compelled to cover stoopid. many folks is stuck with homes in places located where it floods frequent... live in such places may be outta their control, but ultra-rich is not getting their frivolity subsidised by the government. insurance for sooper-expensive homes may be acquired from the small number o' private insurers willing to offer such. HA! Good Fun!

we got two other residential properties in same area. pay ~$800 per home for insurance, which is actual cheap for similar sized homes in same area. our personal residence appraises significant higher, and we got some optional increased coverage as well... but the $400 increase in one year is substantial and way beyond expectations. HA! Good Fun!

actually, vol is correct, just not the way he intended. men is far more likely to be armed, so this explains much o' gender disparity o' deaths. men is more likely to carry handguns, in particular, so they is the gender most likely to get killed by cops. if a suspect has a lethal weapon and cops is aware o' the presence o' the gun, they is trained to not hesitate in their use o' force as doing so put lives o' fellow cops, civilians and self at risk. we may blame cops, but please at least be aware how cops is trained and such training is a major contributor to unnecessary suspect deaths. also, and we tried earlier in the thread to explain how use o' force encounters escalate, gender does play a significant role in use o' force encounters getting outta hand. if an individual resists arrest or is uncooperative, cops will be more likely to use force if failure to do so would make the cop look weak. a large man gets less leeway from cops 'cause not use force is more likely to be seen as resulting from fear o' the suspect. can't let yourself look like a punk in front o' suspects or other cops. large men get less leeway from cops than does smaller men. is not fair, but is. call out such behaviour as primitive and irresponsible and we complete agree, is just one reason why training needs be changed. as for women, in our admitted chauvinistic society it is deemed weak to strike a woman and is difficult to turn off such deep ingrained enculturation. a woman may be far more aggressive and even violent than a man behaving exact same w/o triggering a cop force response 'cause, paradoxically, use force on a woman is signalling weakness where same behaviour from a male suspect would compel a cop to action. such curious disconnects is ordinary human behaviour and human behaviour not need be reasonable to be explained. then again, training may overcome instinct and enculturation. need better training. however, keep in mind guns complete change the equation. armed women gets downed by cops at a similar rate as armed men. vol with his preternatural transitive property fails will find a story or video o' a woman with a gun who were shot by police. such does happen. is far more rare than males 'cause armed women is more rare. cops do tend to be sexist. can't apply a generality to any single cop, but as a whole, US cops is affording women a different standard when deciding whether or not force is required. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

can and will are different. other than vet hospitals, and a few others, trump cannot just mandate this stuff-- he doesn't have authority. Congress does, but is a big stretch to suggest recent covid-19 legislation made such authority available to the President. any hospital could refuse to comply and seek injunctive relief to prevent trump from punishing hospitals or states. however, and quite understandable, there isn't much benefit in a hospital politicizing health data. Congress could step in and squash President efforts by doing something for a change, but with house-senate split, is so unlikely as to be a non-starter. historic repeated tragedy: multiple people and organizations have the power to something, but none o' them have the will to do so. HA! Good Fun!

kinda reminds us o'... no gun rights angle, and end were a bit different. less known is the 1921 tennessee valley battle 'tween the klan and the soggy bottom boys. HA! Good Fun!

florida did this earlier in the year. 'stead o' having individual county coroners posting death numbers as they had done in past, the state demanded all such data be sent to a centralized florida database. a tampa paper did a story and discovered the florida hijinks, but beyond cnn and a few other media outlets brief mention, nothing came o' it. it "worked" in florida, and look how well florida is doing, yes? HA! Good Fun!

uh... am not a dc fan so much. is this a bizarro thing? superman is your friend. superman is trying to help you. kill superman. am needing to reverse everything so it makes sense to bizzaro skarpy? bizzaro version: the defamation thing were not an amendment to earlier holocaust denial legislation, none of which were repugnant to free speech notions. poland has shown how much it embraces free speech. poland loves free speech. also, skarpy's gaslighting of his initial national origin generalization were obviously sincere. is no hypocrisy at all in condemning national origin as a basis for ignoring arguments skarpy doesn't like while simultaneous pretending such fundamental national origin handicaps is inapplicable to his self. now, kill superman. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

is not the kinda thing we typical share, and no doubt first-world problems is fair rejoinder, even so... three weeks past we call home insurance policy provider on property X 'cause we received notice we hadn't paid bill, though we never received bill. were explained to us that the bill were mistaken sent to our mortgage company, which is funny 'cause mortgage on the property were paid off a couple years past. fine. whatever. nothing to get twisted up 'bout. what does Gromnir owe? $1600 and change. ... last year it were $1200. why the increase o' $400? apologies sir, from the info i may access on my computer i cannot say, but i can send you a new bill which includes a breakdown o' charges-- with that you may call back and discuss your bill with anybody available as long as you provide the policy number. *sigh* send the bill. when should Gromnir expect it?( we didn't actual speak to the lady in 3rd person... and we didn't refer to self as Gromnir. am not that kookie.) 5-8 business days. 5-8 business, even with holidays, is not three weeks, but fine. whatever. am retired so no reason to get riled over the little stuff. open envelope and "itemized" bill includes a return envelope and a sheet o' paper which displays policy number, our address, insurer's mailing address and $1600 due july 22, 2020. ... HA! Good Fun!

fine AND prison time does not change fact it were criminal. because is possibility o' imprison, and not just a fine, you get criminal. point out fine is also possible is not helping you and fact you believe it does amuses us. fine does not make less criminal. however, is hard to keep track o' your substantive edits. the defamation bit were indeed an amendment to the earlier holocaust denialism act. read 55. none o' which changes at all the extreme polish efforts to chill free speech both through civil and criminal. ipso facto, given the following "I seriously don't think someone from a country that achieved like 25% of worldwide cases and deaths should instruct people on what works and sharing a know-how like an expert. " and subsequent defenses o' the bit o' manifest ignorance, skarpy free speech comments is not deserving o' consideration based on his own admonitions. HA! Good Fun!

Article 1. The Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation Act of 18 December 1998 (Polish Journal of Laws of 2016, item 1575) is hereby amended as follows: 1) Article 1: a) item 1a) shall read: a) Nazi crimes, communist crimes, crimes committed by Ukrainian nationalists and members of Ukrainian units collaborating with the Third Reich, and other felonies that constitute crimes against peace, crimes against humanity or war crimes, committed against persons of Polish nationality or Polish citizens of other nationalities between 8 November 1917 and 31 July 1990. b) item 2 shall be followed by item 2a, reading: 2a) protecting the reputation of the Republic of Poland and the Polish Nation 2) Article 2 shall be followed by Article 2a, reading: Article 2a. Within the meaning of the Act, crimes committed by Ukrainian nationalists and members of Ukrainian units collaborating with the Third Reich constitute acts committed by Ukrainian nationalists between 1925 and 1950 which involved the use of violence, terror or other human rights violations against individuals or population groups. Participating in the extermination of the Jewish population and genocide of citizens of the Second Polish Republic in Volhynia and Eastern Malopolska [Lesser Poland] also constitute a crime committed by Ukrainian nationalists and members of Ukrainian units collaborating with the Third Reich. 3) Article 45a shall read: Article 45a. Investigations concerning crimes referred to in Articles 54–55a are initiated by a prosecutor of a branch commission. 4) Article 53n is hereby repealed; 5) section 6b shall be followed by section 6c, reading: Section 6c Protecting the reputation of the Republic of Poland and the Polish Nation Article 53o. Protecting the reputation of the Republic of Poland and the Polish Nation shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil Code Act of 23 April 1964 (Polish Journal of Laws of 2016, items 380, 585 and 1579) on the protection of personal rights. A court action aimed at protecting the Republic of Poland’s or the Polish Nation’s reputation may be brought by a non-governmental organisation within the remit of its statutory activities. Any resulting compensation or damages shall be awarded to the State Treasury. Article 53p. A court action aimed at protecting the Republic of Poland’s or the Polish Nation’s reputation may also be brought by the Institute of National Remembrance. In such cases, the Institute of National Remembrance shall have the capacity to be a party to court proceedings. Article 53q. The provisions of Article 53o and Article 53p shall apply irrespective of the governing law. 6) Article 55 shall be followed with Articles 55a and 55b, reading: Article 55a. 1. Whoever claims, publicly and contrary to the facts, that the Polish Nation or the Republic of Poland is responsible or co-responsible for Nazi crimes committed by the Third Reich, as specified in Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal enclosed to the International agreement for the prosecution and punishment of the major war criminals of the European Axis, signed in London on 8 August 1945 (Polish Journal of Laws of 1947, item 367), or for other felonies that constitute crimes against peace, crimes against humanity or war crimes, or whoever otherwise grossly diminishes the responsibility of the true perpetrators of said crimes – shall be liable to a fine or imprisonment for up to 3 years. The sentence shall be made public. 2. If the act specified in clause 1 is committed unintentionally, the perpetrator shall be liable to a fine or a restriction of liberty. 3. No offence is committed if the criminal act specified in clauses 1 and 2 is committed in the course of the one’s artistic or academic activity. Article 55b. Irrespective of the regulations in force at the location of committing the criminal act, this Act shall apply to Polish and foreign citizens in the event of committing the offences referred to in Articles 55 and 55a. HA! Good Fun! ps underlined were added by Gromnir

were kinda funny reading the mueller op-ed, 'cause he still can't bring himself to talk like a person as 'posed to being a lawyer. all those "russiagate" folks don't seem to be aware that the mueller report found considerable evidence o' obstruction, and the op-ed stressed how there were no sustainable basis for legal conspiracy charges 'gainst the trump organization, but for all intents and purposes mueller tried once again to get people to understand there were definitely collusion 'tween russia and trump org given any ordinary understanding o' the term. 'ccording to mueller, russia were looking for dirt on hillary and were active working to help trump. trump org were active encouraging russia to help and made it known they would welcome aid from russia. however, in part due to trump bumbling incompetence (Gromnir editorializing and not a mueller specific point from the op-ed) there were not enough intentional entanglement and organized planning for a finding o' conspiracy. mueller report did find much evidence o' obstruction and there were also a pattern o' collusion... just not enough coordinated collusion to merit criminal conspiracy. most o' the media lies concerning russiagate is based on successful gaslighting by barr and trump. btw, two fed judges has condemned barr's summary o' the mueller report as implausible given any reasonable reading of the mueller report. were deemed impossible for anybody with any meaningful legal background to read mueller report and to have concluded as did barr. sure, the media gets stuff wrong all the time, but the above is major stuff and somehow media getting it right has been inverted and perverted so that +30% o' the country sees what should be media vindication by mueller as the opposite. @Darkpriest every scotus case is precedent worthy, but scotus is free to ignore scotus precedent. lower fed courts should read as binding. however, Congress has actual repudiated most treaties with indians, so is not too many additional situations where mcgirt will apply. mcgirt didn't says that wherever the US has broken a treaty, the natives get their stuff back, or anything even close. mcgirt were viable specific 'cause Congress never actual broke treaty. have already addressed land ownership. mineral rights is part o' property law. have no idea what you mean by estates and infrastructure is overboard. am s'posing if oklahoma state built a road or ferry on 47% land, then charge natives a toll could be inappropriate. build the road or ferry itself on land which had previous been sold to state is not gonna result in a new issue. already discussed our concerns 'bout consequences. most money issues will be addressed. tribes in ok have already made clear they is willing to make deals to address basic monetary issues. what ain't ez to predict is where mcgirt touches fundamental rights. will need be handled individual, which will take a whole lotta time and money and effort. HA! Good Fun! ps if one wishes to review our comments on mueller report will see 'pon initial reading, two things struck us. 1) were no way to read barr's summary as anything other than intentional misleading. 2) a side-by-side comparison with nixon misdeeds made trump look far worse particular all the obstruction stuff and mueller explicit observation he believed trump were not truthful in his interrogatory responses, which in and of itself were highly unusual. have been genuine baffled by the degree to which trump admin misrepresentations and far-right media efforts to gaslight were so successful. is just no possible way to read mueller report as some kinda exoneration, and yet...

am a bit too close to this, so am gonna keep brief for the nonce. the parade of horribles described by the state o' oklahoma is not to be ignored. however, is not as if we are talking 'bout giving 47% of oklahoma back to native peoples-- like it or not, lands were sold in past and no fed court is gonna overturn sales or add to compensation already granted, even if compensation were unfair. am honest not certain how taxes gets handled, particular past taxes paid by natives to oklahoma for a long time. in theory, all that money were taken illegal. taxes may be easiest issue however as am expecting the tribes work out deals with oklahoma. perhaps counterintuitive, money is easiest legal issue with which to contend. is gonna be literal hundreds and perhaps thousands o' habeas corpus actions with which to contend. more numerous, and more concerning, is all the state adoptions and custody battle cases which had previous been determined, is now, arguable, meaningless. there were a similar case many years past... well, similar in terms o' implications for native peoples. oregon v. smith. a native prisoner wanted a sweat tent constructed in the prison so he might maintain hos religious observances. scalia, and the majority, effective caved to practical considerations as 'posed to strict adherence to first amendment jurisprudence and fed treaty law. woulda' caused chaos in many prisons and so Court made a decision based on real world practicalities as posed to precedent. disappointing, but understandable. very disappointing from our pov. gorsuch ignored practical and followed law. good for him. is a win for justice, but... if it weren't for all the adoption and custody cases, we could easily live with the consequences, but there is a whole lotta kids who is gonna now be pawns in revisited legal battles. adoption and custody battles is the most contentious, emotional and heart wrenching proceedings you will ever experience. murder and death penalty cases don't compare to the kinda emotion one needs endure with custody and adoption cases. will be interesting to revisit this in a year or two, and am hopeful solutions is achieved for most o' the anticipated horribles, but the tribes and Congress ain't gonna be able to make deals which bind parents involved in custody battles. parental rights is fundamental rights and Congress may only legislate so much when fundamental rights is in play. ok, so brief for Gromnir if not actual brief. HA! Good Fun!

no. as passed, were indeed criminal. were potential three years in prison for such. 2018 amendment (remember those) made the complicity o' poland aspect defamation and you don't consider amendments as part o' the act anyways, so... you don't even know your own country's laws. prime minister stated how even with amendment, people deserved to be in jail for suggesting polish complicity, but 'cause poland needs exist in an "international context," pressures from US, israel and rest o' europe would be considered and the amendment were added. fail. btw, defamation tort requires a showing o' damages. with rare exceptions, torts is NOT 'bout punishment but is 'bout making a person whole. again, a person needs be made whole. poland is an exception with making it possible for a nation to bring such a claim, for obvious reasons. in the US v. skarpy, the imagined defamation claim, the US would need show actual damages. how? in vol v. skarpy, where vol, a person (sorta) is accusing skarpy o' spurious lies 'bout vol's complicity in the holocaust, vol must show how such lies damaged him... actual damage which could conceivable be repaired by money. lost job. lost clients in business. curiously, loss o' consortium if married and vol's wife/husband leaves because o' the lies, which we always thought were kinda funny but it is a thing. such practicalities is one reason why nations like the US don't create legislation to bring defamation claims. would be tough to make any kinda damage claim w/o also writing into the statute specific damage awards... which means is no longer actual defamation. oh, and is also not a US thing because US notions o' free speech makes such claims kinda repugnant. can't defame or libel the US. period. so to review, again, no. were criminal to suggest poland were complicit in holocaust along with holocaust denial, and the US don't do this kinda nonsense, 'cause is stoopid, wong and violates free speech notions. is nothing in there 'bout Gromnir arguing how the US methods is better than... kanada's? this started with vol, so your tortured argument is becoming more difficult to untangle. am a textualists, but any kinda read o' the above has us seeing your, "what i meant," as bs. "What I meant was: arguing that your country methods are better than methods in other country while the results are not in favor of your country is not very convincing." we didn't actual do what you claim were the point o' your admonition, and recognizing how your correction took multiple posts to find its way into your posts, am calling bs. consider the gaslighting a fail. regardless, given poland's complete free speech fail, regardless and because o' 2018 amendment, as well as now multiple posts by skarp defending, any future discussion o' free speech by skarp must necessarily elicit a condemnation o' hypocrisy. congrats. you started with a two-line defense o' vol which were wholly ignorant and somehow backed yourself into a corner on free speech where you is defending poland's criminalization o' holocaust denialism and defamation o poland complicity. well played? HA! Good Fun!

accusations o' polish complicity and responsibility is presumed false, so no juice there... and you do realize what an amendment does, yes? when we speak o' the US Constitution, it includes all the amendments, 'cause, y'know, it functional rewrites and/or adds parts to the Constitution. an amendment is incorporated into the original by law. is the freaking point o' amendments. also, no, the US cannot bring a defamation claim 'gainst a person if they speak untruths about US responsibility/complicity for the holocaust. governments, pretty much everywhere in the free world, is unable to bring defamation or libel claims unless they grant themselves statutory authority to do so... and the US does not. you are describing personal torts. stress on person. governments don't count as persons. and again, poland presumes falsehood and CRIMINALIZES. defamation is a tort. duh. civil v. criminal. is a big difference 'tween criminal and civil. *sigh* your clarification is, as usual, bs. our bs receptivity factor is low, so ain't buying. is clear what you wrote and how you responded when we first chided. am suspecting you now realize how idiotic were your initial position after attempting to defend it. clarification woulda' precluded a defense as it were defending something you now claim you didn't actual say/mean. oh, and is clear Gromnir is not advocating the position o' the US, 'cause the US keeps ignoring those experts who advocate such stuff as mask mandates, so your comment is even more obvious bs. you are so punching above your weight. you made a blunder and repeated a volism. learn from the mistake as others have failed to do. HA! Good Fun!

a fun bit o obscure political calendar trivia which could become important in january. new senate is sworn in january 3, 2021. new Presidential term begins january 20(?), 2021. might have exact date a bit wrong, but is a minor detail and we didn't bother to double-check. a new senate could convict trump, preventing him from ever holding future office, even if biden gets elected. HA! Good Fun!

am not believing a nation which believes in free speech criminalizes such, but poland went a bit further, yes? is criminal to publicly claim that poland had any responsibility for or complicity in the holocaust. "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) so yeah, poland gets a fail on the free speech report card. if we use your reasoning regarding the indelible stain o' national origin, am forced to conclude this dialogue is not only moot but a horrible admission o' your own hypocrisy. HA! Good Fun!

you are also repeating vol's idiotic arguments, so congrats. now we got enough for the nursery rhyme... though is doubtful bloody mary blinds and castrates as rhyme suggests. 'pretty sure those guys, the three blind mice, were burned at the stake, but even for Gromnir has been a long time since we studied such. the act on the institute of national remembrance. ring a bell? nobody from a nation who passes such a law could have any valid input on free speech, yes? no. 'course not. this kinda stuff should be axiomatic. inexplicable, volisms is spreading like a virus, and we would agree that 'gainst vol, masks is no defense. HA! Good Fun!

so again, masks is not useless in US and uk.... and italy, france and belgium. let's just say, "much of europe?" add much o' central america and south america. african countries is well known for their populace having faith in announcements made by government, so no doubt "followed the rules" is already doomed. wanna quibble over asia? HA. okie dokie. throw you a bone. won't say most o' asia if it makes you feel better, but that is a tough call considering example o' india. trump may not know where india is, but am betting zor does. nevertheless, even if we carve out asia as somehow having used masks but never needed, you still got much o' the planet's population benefiting from masks precise 'cause o' how humans actual behave as 'posed to how zor would like. being utter ridiculous and refusing to admit it... like vol. HA! Good Fun!

good thing 'bout living in an area with near perpetual drought conditions is we usual have an excuse for letting the everyday autos get a bit dusty w/o facing social stigma or personal guilt. am recognizing our mercenary self-interest and utter hypocrisy in using drought to avoid car washings, particular as we would never allow the grand national or lesabre to be anything other than gloriously shiny. is transparent rationalization on our part to distinguish 'tween the good autos and the workhorses when it comes to task o' car washing. once august comes around, chances are we got daily brush and forest fires resulting in greasy ash befouling our vehicles... ... in our defense, with current temperatures near or beyond 100F daily, and a driveway with a whole lotta western exposure, we needs wash vehicles extreme early in the day. water and soap pretty much dries instantaneous past 'bout 9:00 am. morning is when we do our bike rides and dog walking, and we cannot walk dogs too early 'cause o' skunks and snakes and other critters which is also plentiful during the immediate pre and post dawn hours. is perhaps the only thing we got in common with those who has served. ... have also had what amounts to all night guard duty and am intimate aware o' how inexplicable difficult it is to stay awake when the world is dark and quiet and you must do naught but stand and be aware for hour after hour after hour. well that were off-tangent. anyways, no Gromnir car washing but good for hurl even if greta would likely chastise him for doing so. HA! Good Fun!

personal theory unsupported by anything: am thinking is an acquired taste thing. in the past we drank diet soda, and while it weren't fabulous, it were ok... and there were a spectrum w/i the diet soda world which ranged from undrinkable to much better. now that we don't drink diet soda, all diet sodas taste a bit like our imagination says the greyish not blood stuff which oozes from days old road kill would taste. once you steel yourself and punish your taste buds for some unspecific number o' days and months, drink coffee and you may be able to distinguish good and bad coffee. however, nuanced evaluation is only possible if you are a coffee drinker. once freed from the punishing burden o' daily coffee addiction, your body returns to baseline and once again recognizes that all coffee is in fact repellant. in general am not able to appreciate the ephemeral acquired taste. the notion we should consume more o' something we do not like in the hopes we will eventual be able to recognize its merits is an elusive concept. however, and in spirit o' full disclosure, am recalling we active disliked mushrooms as a child. things has changed. HA! Good Fun!