Put the elastic part on your skull. If a mask has two loops, put one over each ear. If it has one, put it around your head.
It’s sad to say, but I guess this label needs to go on all masks, including the protective ones we’ve been instructed to adorn in the pandemic.
As with diphtheria, measles, mumps, rubella, meningitis and polio, we can’t help but step back when science steps forward. We are anti-matter embodied.
The latest dark energy incarnation is our inability to wear masks properly, if at all. We’ve already given up on the dimwits who see masks as political theology, and the argument to wear one a violation of civil liberty.
But even in the most enlightened states — and I consider California one of them — I’m seeing people wear N-95 masks as a coughy filter or, worse, handkerchief. We have turned masks into our own theology of sorts, and sport them as jewelry.
I was in my 7-Eleven recently, where I saw a customer wearing a mask below his nose. Conscientious, I thought. At least he’s wearing one. But that’s no protection against a sneeze.
Another day I was at a drive-thru, where a busy manager was barking directions to her employees. Her mask was essentially a necklace looped behind the ears. I guess that’s technically wearing a mask, but no protection against…breathing.
This is akin to a kid trick-or-treating as Iron Man and wearing his plastic faceplate as a top hat. Or a bank robber using a bandana as a scarf.
Already, California is considering mandating that residents again wear masks outdoors. COVID is on the rise in 20 states, and two of them hit single-day highs for confirmed cases this week.
Maybe we are a half-nation of anti-vaxxers and flat-Earthers. I pray not, but it seems clear we need refresher courses on some of the basics.
Make sure to tune in next week, when we explain how to loop a belt.
It’s tempting to see the murder of Rayshard Brooks through the prism of the murder of George Floyd.
Each are officially classified as police homicides; both Derek Chauvin, the officer in the Floyd death, and Garrett Rolfe, the officer in the Brooks death, face felony murder charges and prison time. Both officers were fired from the job. The victims are black, the cops, white. Both leave us examining how we view race, how we train police, and how police absorb that training.
But it’s equally important to look at the differences in the deaths, because they are stark. From the details of the deaths to the cultural questions they raise, this much is clear: Floyd’s death appears black and white, literally and figuratively. Brooks’ death is far murkier.
The New York Times did a fantastic analysis of the Brooks slaying, and it should be read as urgently as the viral videos should be seen. The Times synced footage from police body cams, dash cams, witness cellphones and Wendy’s security cameras to capture the 27-minute exchange between Brooks and cops. The videos are time-stamped, allowing the Times to recreate a “tick-tock” narrative of the incident, down to the minute.
The first thing you notice is the apparent difference in behavior in the cases. Floyd is heard only gasping out a few faint, last words, including calling for his late mother and “I can’t breathe,” while Chauvin kneels on his neck, hands in pockets.
The exchange between Brooks and Atlanta PD is far calmer, bordering on friendly. Initially, Brooks and police appear to show a mutual respect. When asked if he’d be willing to take a Breathalyzer, Brooks says “I don’t want to refuse anything,” and offers to walk to his sister’s house nearby. “I can just go home,” Brooks says.
According to the Times, another officer, Devin Brosnan, at one point “appears to be unsure whether he should let Mr. Brooks sleep in the car or should take further action.”
Even when a struggle ensues between Brooks and police, Rolfe can be heard saying “Stop that. Stop fighting, stop fighting,” Brosnan can be heard shouting, “You’re going to get Tased.” Brooks responds “Mr. Rolfe, come on man. Mr. Rolfe.”
As Brooks struggles to wrest free of the men, police use the Taser stun gun once on him. Brooks wrenches the Taser off officer Brosnan and takes off with Rolfe in pursuit. Brooks fires the Taser and misses. Rolfe drops the Taser, pulls out his gun and shoots Brooks three times in the back. Brooks dies 14 minutes later.
This is by no means a rationalization or endorsement of that police behavior. Rolfe’s instinct — presumably from adequate training — should have been to not draw down on a fleeing suspect armed with only a non-lethal weapon.
But analysts and protesters appear outraged that Rolfe pulled his gun in the first place.
This is the larger societal question.
Imagine someone you were in a serious fistfight with pulled a knife. You happened to have the exact same knife on your belt. But you also had a gun in your holster. Which would you pull? The one that evened the odds, or the one that put them in your favor?
If we are going to have a society with a police force, we are allowing them to exercise discipline at least a level above everyday citizens. If an officer is empowered to put another person in a jail cell, we tacitly endorse them have a “level up” in armament. If an officer is making a valid arrest of a lawbreaker, he or she must be permitted to level up in a struggle with a suspect. From fists to billy club, billy club to knife, knife to gun, gun to automatic, automatic to tank, etc.
Brooks had leveled up to a stun gun. Rolfe had been trained — in a basic behavioral way — to level up to his gun. My mom likened it to the iconic scene in Indiana Jones, when Harrison Ford dismissively shoots an opponent who grandly shows off his sword skills before the showdown.
This is not to diminish or defend the shooting. Rolfe’s instinct — even with his heart pounding and his pulse racing — had to be reluctance; perhaps the training we all demand of law enforcement should be a re-calibration of the term “last resort.” We may need to redefine the term for ourselves.
Regardless, a distinction should be made within the broad brush stroke of anger. If George Floyd’s death ends in a period, Rayshard Brooks’ death ends in a question mark.
I don’t care what the scientists say; hydrogen is not the most common element in the universe. Neither is helium.
It’s irony.
After all, what darker humor than to bestow the ultimate gift, life, only to saddled it with the ultimate bill, death? Black holes are nature’s knock-knock joke.
And she recently pranked the Tulsa World.
Nearly four years ago, the World, a 115-year old newspaper and an institution in the Sooner state, put this political cartoon above its editorial on who it was endorsing in the upcoming 2016 presidential election.
Its endorsement? No one.
This was its headline: CrimmitschauTulsa World Editorial endorsement: For president? None of the above
“Since 1940, the Tulsa World has consistently endorsed the Republican nominee for president,” the column began. “But we’re not willing to do that this time. Neither are we willing to endorse the Democratic candidate or any other candidate.”
What an utter abdication of the only rule and role of media: to help people make informed decisions. What is media’s reason for being if not that service?
Instead, the World became an avatar for the Country; too cynical about the process to bother trying. Pardon the fury at brethren on this issue, but those assholes should have at least found the best independent candidate, or write-in candidate, or even written in one itself. Nominate a fucking dog. The point is, do something. If you won’t, how can you expect others to?
Here was the astounding fortune cookie wisdom that ended the “editorial”: “We encourage all voters to participate in the election and to follow their consciences in making the best choice from the least acceptable list of candidates for president in modern times. We won’t be endorsing any of them.”
You go ahead and march, the story essentially said. But leave us out of it. The World acted like an average American: disinterested until it’s at the doorstep.
Well, it’s knocking now, particularly for Republicans. After not taking a stand on the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency, the World must now take a stand on a Donald Trump rally.
“We don’t know why he chose Tulsa,” the World editorial board wrote this week, “but we can’t see any way that his visit will be good for the city.”
Come on, dispshits. You know exactly why he chose Tulsa — and it’s not just because it coincides with the 99th anniversary of the slaughter of 300 black people there, though you can bet that’s one of the primary reasons.
But it’s also because of the Tulsa populace, which loves to make America great again. It’s because of the thousands that will chant the great leader’s name — after they’ve signed a waiver pledging they won’t sue him if they contract COVID. That a real prerequisite of the rally.
And it’s because you, the World, did not speak up when you had the chance. So don’t be surprised when your pleas fall of deaf ears. Nor when Darwin thins the herd. Mother Nature is not only sarcastic; she punishes those who aren’t clever.
Looks like the universe punked you, Oklahoma. Twice, actually. You decided to ignore the coming plague, and now you’ve noticed a lesion on your face.
