Horowitz: Exposing the maskerade: The questions every American should be asking about indefinite mask mandates

The Blaze

Horowitz: Exposing the maskerade: The questions every American should be asking about indefinite mask mandates

JULY 24, 2020


The trope of “just shut up and wear a mask” is not science, ordered liberty, or constitutional governance. It’s what they do in North Korea. We need real debate on the effectiveness of masks, the type of masks, the situations in which they are worn, the duration of time, the benchmarks that need to be met to measure effectiveness, and the process for promulgating these rules. We are no longer 24 hours into an emergency. We are four months into this virus, and it’s time to function like the representative republic that we are.

There are numerous political and scientific questions any thinking person should be asking at this point:

  • Why did the CDC, World Health Organization, and such luminaries as Fauci and Surgeon General Jerome Adams so emphatically dismiss the effectiveness of masks, then flip 180 degrees to the point where they shame people who don’t wear them, without ever explaining what changed? While we learn more about the virus every day, the micro-biology of the particles hasn’t changed, and the premise that non-professional masks worn by non-trained professionals run the risk of counterproductive cross-contamination did not change.

The suggestion that this is needed to protect others raises the obvious question: If me not wearing a mask transmits the virus to others who are wearing a mask, then is that not an admission that masks do not work to stop a respiratory virus that is microscopic and gets through the mask? Garbage in, garbage out. It makes no sense to suggest it doesn’t penetrate the transmitter’s mask from inside-out, especially with the air pressure of a cough or sneeze, but can penetrate the mask of the receiver through suspended molecules that are stagnant without pressure pushing those molecules outside-in to the receiver. If anything, the opposite should be true – it should be more effective for protection of yourself.



Watch the usual dodging of the evidence that Masks don’t stop the spread.

The two studies you gave me, verify masks work as a form of source control.

They block water droplets, and reduce viral load for what aerosols escape out the sides.

This is important. This means masks have a conditional use to them.

Masks can give people false security, and I absolutely agree that’s dangerous. But in the right spaces, just as a third study I quoted from you admitted, masks are useful.

We should use masks, just not everywhere, and should be vigilant from becoming over reliant. Is that not the rational standpoint?

All you did was overlook the fact that Masks DO NOT stop transmission, why continue to deny the evidence of the well established fact?

You even admit it doesn’t stop it:: “and reduce viral load for what aerosols escape out the sides.”

reduce isn’t the same as 100% blocking, that is the reality you need to accept. Viruses gets through masks, that is a fact you need to accept because it is the truth!

It takes only ONE virus to infect, that is a fact!

You have been shown photo evidence that virus DO go through and around the sides of the masks, that was for a single breath/cough, a few minutes of it, the entire room would be filled with virus, also a proven fact.

You also ignored the many statements early on by the WHO and the CDC on them, how come you do things like that so much?

You didn’t read the article because what I didn’t post was even more damning, that is why you ignore them.

Your infatuation with Masks paints you as an ideologist, since you chronically ignore the few fatal expose of their uselessness.


Yesterday, I took my car in to the dealership for scheduled maintenance and an oil/filter change. I had to wait for 2 HOURS for them to do all of that and the dealership insisted that anyone waiting inside MUST wear a facemark–as did all of their employees. After about 30 minutes, I was gasping for breath and had to go outside and take the mask OFF in order to recover. That NEVER happens when I’m at home where I DON’T have to wear a mask.


I have the same reaction, now I just cover the mouth, leave nose uncovered to breathe, wear them only when I shop to keep the mandatory mask hounds off my back.

I have yet to put one on and I am working in the biggest mask Nazi part of the United States (the San Francisco Bay Area).

When people constantly say “where is your mask! You have to wear a MASK!” I say “I am exempt”, they say “why?” and I say “because I know how to read” :rofl:

Masks as they are being used in general population are destructive to the health of those who wear them, breathing ALL of your air through a contaminated mask that is touching your face is a prescription for destroying your health in multiple ways; including this ridiculous virus.


They diminish the rate of transmission because most infection is done through droplets, not aerosols.

Equally, viral load of the infection is important, I mentioned this to you before.

Being infected by one virus particle, is not the same as being infected by say a face full of someone sneezing on you.

Your body is much better able to handle the former, and even if the disease still spreads through your body, you’re likely to have far less severe symptoms.

This is important. How you’re infected changes how the disease affects you.

Mitigation is still important, and that’s what masks do.

Who can say no to less transmission and less severe symptoms?

It’s a mechanical thing; sick people wearing masks put out less droplets and aerosols with less viral load. That’s a good thing.

The point basically is, infections are not made equal, and masks encourage less of the worst ones to occur.

BS, of course.

You should look things up before commenting. This a known trait of viruses broadly; this is also true of flu.

What did I need to “look up” before claiming your post was BS? It’s was BS on its face!

And yet SARS also had this quality:

You should have looked it up Dave. Your impulse posts just tell me you don’t do anything to test the information.

Why would I bother? I have YOU to find esoteric, arcane, dubious “data” FOR me.

Because it fosters good debate? Because it helps rather than detracts from sense-making?
Which our world, our country, sorely needs right now?

Take your post; you didn’t offer a different study, you didn’t offer an anecdote, you didn’t even try to explain what it was I got wrong.

You offered a zero effort response. You can’t even deny that. It was all impulse you gave me there.
There was nothing to that post that differentiates it from a 1,000 others you’ve given here.

When I read one of your posts, my first impulse is ALWAYS to declare it to be BS. 98% of the time, I’ll be dead-bang right about it, too.

1 Like

Because I could never know something you don’t? Well that’s entitled.

Except you’re not, because you don’t look it up, and that always my point to you; why not check first? Why not put in the effort to make sure you’re right?

Laziness is not a virtue. Putting in an effort should be the norm, that’s the moral thing to do. You can’t deny that either.

If I put out my logic, you should be able to offer yours. Otherwise you’re just encouraging a breakdown.

BS, of course. (See how it works?). “Laziness” has nothing to do with it. Actually, 98% of the time, I’m right. You spend too much time and effort engaged in one of the 4 worst, most deadly, logical fallacies–“Appeal to Authority.” You believe that if someone with a PhD writes something, it’s just GOT to be factual, when it most assuredly does NOT.

Except I lay out my logic first.

You don’t respond with any logic of your own. You just impulse respond with “BS.”

That’s lazy, and cowardly.

Why? Because You put no effort, and no risk in putting out your own logic to compare against mine.

That’s an argumentative failing. Being contrarian, just for it’s own sake. Can’t deny it.

And yet, being “contrarian” towards you WORKS, because you’re almost always wrong.

1 Like

They do not diminish the rate of transmission which is why you and your Party of liars are censoring all of the science that has known that for DECADES; wearing a mask in public harms the wearer and provides no protection for anyone else.

No, you make a false claim and then link something that doesn’t establish your claim; then you try to misdirect the discussion toward the linked study in the hope that nobody will realize that your “link” never established the conclusion that you claimed to begin with.

You lie, in every debate on every subject you use these tactics because you know that your claims are indefensible.

1 Like