Yes and no. Many protections we enjoyed went away bc “updated CDC guidelines”. Remote working, local mask mandates, telehealth, onsite testing, eviction moratoriums, stimulus checks etc.
If he “had to” for economic reasons that’s a different argument, but the gap isnt that stark of a contrast IMO
If he “had to” for economic reasons that’s a different argument, but the gap isnt that stark of a contrast IMO
Reposted from
Patrick Devaney
Both are enraging, but imo there is still a distinction between "you don't have to protect yourself anymore! 🥳" and "we're not going to let you protect yourself anymore".
Comments