Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...


Everything but tech support.

1439, 20 Aug 21

People Want Open Schools

The framing of this story is very, very slanted. Here’s the headline:

Many Wisconsin School Boards, Overwhelmed By 18 Months Of Community Pushback, Aren’t Taking Up Mask Issue
One could also say, “Schools Boards Respond to Community Demands to Not Require Masks for Kids.” But no… when people push back on liberal initiatives or the nanny state, the story is framed as if those who oppose such things are radicals. Just notice the word choices:

School board members around the state who supported phased returns to the classroom and disease mitigation efforts like masks and social distancing have faced vitriolic school board meetingsrecall attemptselection challenges and threats over the past 18 months.


Now, as COVID-19 is again surging around the state and hitting kids harder, many boards aren’t putting any mask requirements or precautions into place, to the distress of some parents who are worried their kids will get sick — and despite clear guidance from state and federal agencies that say universal masking is the best way to keep students safe and prevent schools from having to shut down.

People who support masking kids when the science is clear that it is almost worthless in terms of mitigating the spread of the virus but incredibly damaging to kids are simply “supporting phased returns” and “disease mitigation efforts.” Those who oppose those things are “vitriolic” and engaging in “threats.” And school board that aren’t abusing kids by unnecessarily masking them are doing so “despite clear guidance.”

The good news is that, thankfully, the public is speaking up and at least some school boards are listening. It’s taken a lot of hard work and organizing, but representative government is working.


1439, 20 August 2021


  1. jonnyv

    You keep mentioning that masking kids is damaging to them. I have been unable to find studies on that. Can you direct me to what you have read.

  2. Kevin Scheunemann

    This pushback aginst crazy leftists is a good thing.


  3. jonnyv

    I do find it interesting that there is a 5.8% chance (5864 / 100000) a child gets COVID. And of that 5.8% about a 2% chance that the child is hospitalized due to severe symptoms. 117 / 100000 cases, .0011% chance.

    Yet, there were about 27 possible voter fraud cases out of 3 million votes in WI. .000009% chance. And you CHEER to make voting more difficult and “safer”.

    Ultimately you care LESS about children’s health than voter fraud. When it is WAY more likely a child will get severely sick with COVID than a voter fraud case will actually happen. Good to see where your priorities are at.

  4. Mar

    Apples and oranges, JohnnyV.
    You are better than that.

  5. Mar

    Then listen to the fake doctor Fauci who says masks don’t work

  6. Jason

    27 possible cases of voter fraud…. discovered. Prove there were only 27 people who committed fraud. Hint you can’t. The bills you’re lamenting as “making voting harder” might actually make it easier to detect fraud. You don’t care about that?

  7. Mar

    JohnnyV, you also compared a nation statistic vs the State of Wisconsin state.
    And those are just the cases that were prosecuted.
    As Jason says, you cannot honestly say there was not more fraud than that.
    My guess is that more kids get the flu, diarrhea and other ailments that put them in hospital.
    We don’t make kids wear rubber gloves, do we?

  8. dad29

    Was in Michigan yesterday and some “MD” defended masks-for-kids by citing a story about a hair salon with 54 customers and 5 stylists. Because they ALL wore masks, NONE got the ChiCom Flu.

    Now THAT is SCIENCE, man. C’mon!!

    There is NO science which proves the typical mask works. None.

  9. dad29

    In the TWO Covid seasons to date, 144 children died with Covid nationally.

    In ONE flu season (09/10) 358 children died with the flu.

    Note well: no co-morbidities are listed in childrens’ CoVid deaths.

  10. MjM

    @ Daddio…

    From 1/04/20 thru f 8/14/21 430 “children” have died (ages 0-18)
    2018/19 flue season (Oct-Mar) saw 477 child deaths (ages 0-17) from various flu strains.
    In 2020 800+ died from pneumonia.

  11. dad29

    2018/19 flue season

    My reference was to the 2009/2001 season. And of course, there’s the question of whether they died OF Covid or FROM Covid in your sample…..

  12. dad29


  13. MjM

    Daddio growls:” Aaarrgghhh….”

    Heh. You workin an iPad, too?

    Understood about your dates. Just pointing out the flux. Our points are the same. The common flu is about 1/3 more deadly to kids than CCPVirus and pneumonia about 2.5 times as deadly yet doorknobs like JV never called for mandatory masks until the overlords told him to.

    And yes, all CCPVirus deaths are suspect: from or with. And given the way CCPvirus tests are run vs. influenza tests, we know CCPVirus case counts are also inflated. All this goes w/o saying, but the stats we get are the stats gotta use.

  14. dad29

    Not an iPad. Really, really, old keyboard.

  15. dad29

    JVanDoorknob suspiciously quiet about latest CDC release that masks are–at best–10% effective at stopping ChiComCooties.

  16. Tuerqas

    I read from a recent liberal site that masks were at best 20% effective and of course the commentary was that 20% is 20% better than nothing. Is it? Even at 50% effective on a daily basis virtually every kid would get it over a relatively short time even if masked. The reason that real doctors have said it is ‘completely ineffective’ is because the POTENTIAL transmittal is effectively 100% over time whether a mask is worn or not. The bullied and programmed doctors have said quite a few levels of effectiveness over the last year and a half, and from what I have seen in the few case studies I could find the % of effectiveness directly correlates to the amount of time the cases were actually in the presence of infected individuals. If the chance of transmission over a 1 hour period of exposure (1 class) were 50% for individuals sitting within 6 feet , a 20% decrease of transmission would be 40%. Now multiply that by the number of hours the person would actually be exposed giving the maskless a 50-50 chance of getting it each hour and the masked a 40-60% chance every hour and the number that don’t get infected goes down to near zero for both categories at just about the same rate. Now of course, there are many factors that go into reality, but keeping all those factors constant the addition of a 20% effective mask would only be significant in a single instance event like Summerfest, not effective in a continually repeated scenario like a school or workplace. And that is if you believe 20% in the first place. Liberals have listened to manipulated data from the beginning.

Pin It on Pinterest