Image 01 Image 03

Delta Kicks Masked Man Off Flight, Threatens No-Fly List Over Anti-Biden Sweatshirt, Not Wearing Mask

Delta Kicks Masked Man Off Flight, Threatens No-Fly List Over Anti-Biden Sweatshirt, Not Wearing Mask

Yes, they threw off a man who wore a mask for not wearing a mask. He lowered it to talk to the stewardess and when he removed the sweatshirt. That’s it.

A Delta stewardess and captain threw off a masked man for wearing a F*** Biden sweatshirt and not wearing a mask.

The man took off the sweatshirt. He lowered the mask to speak to the stewardess and took it off when he removed the sweatshirt.

He never raised his voice. He never became physical.

“If you do not turn your shirt inside out then I have to deplane the whole aircraft. I’m sorry sir. It’s Delta policy. You cannot wear it. They also advised me you’d be on the no-fly list.

The man asks for proof that Delta has a policy he cannot wear a shirt with the word f*** on it.

The stewardess said once they get off they can look it up on the computer.

The man takes off his sweatshirt and points out the stupidity of everything. “You guys force me to wear a mask, I can’t wear my hoodie…”

Then the stewardess said they’re asking him to leave because he’s not wearing his mask. He was wearing a mask at first but they made him talk. It’s so hard to understand people when they wear a mask so he was actually helping them out.


She said she’s just relaying a message from the captain that he doesn’t want the guy on his aircraft.

I hear someone sticking up for the man, telling the stewardess that Delta makes movies available that are inappropriate for his children.

The lady at the desk said the man refused to wear a mask and wore a sweatshirt that was not allowed.

The man took off the sweatshirt. He wore the stupid mask.

@LibsofTikTok spokes to Ashli, a Delta representative. Ashli confirmed Delta does not have any clothing policies.

A man responded with this sentence on the Delta website: “8) When the passenger’s conduct, attire, hygiene or odor creates an unreasonable risk of offense or annoyance to other passengers.”

Did anyone complain about the sweatshirt? Next time I’m going to complain when I see someone wearing anything associated with the St. Louis Cardinals and Green Bay Packers. Those offend and annoy me.

Next time do this:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



I guarantee that the attendant is a leftist bitch that has been abusing her powers the last 2 years.

Subjective and selective rules and policies are now the norm.
You will comply or else……
Welcome to paradise, now sit down and shut up!

Lawsuit and make it hurt. Otherwise, bend the knee forever.
Make sure to name the stew and the captain personally. They flat out fucking lied.

    You mean use force of law and government instead of Ayn Rand nonsense? I agree.

      henrybowman in reply to Danny. | March 10, 2022 at 5:20 pm

      As usual, you know nothing about the subject.

        Danny in reply to henrybowman. | March 11, 2022 at 2:41 am

        Think if your stupid enough nobody will call you out? Think again. Your source for I know nothing is that an archived article from 2005 about a supreme court case that today means nothing (would I trade the Texas GOVERNMENT regulation that stopped hospitals doing transgender surgery for the Texas Supreme Court having models of the ten commandments inside? HELL NO) was in favor of having the ten commandments in court as a religious symbol. By the way every single generation of Americans up till RIGHT NOW have been governed in the public square by rules set down by the United States government. Your MUH GOVERNMENT BAAAAD rhetoric has nothing whatever to do with American law or history, and regulating social media exactly the way we do other common carriers would increase freedom (Your only argument is “MUHHH GOVERNMENT BAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD REEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!”)

        1. Actually I do know the subject either you are a liar or you know nothing about it. A lawsuit depends on something called a law, which is a regulation by a state government or a federal government. To sue a corporation you use government power against a private entity by definition. If a judge/jury is on your side what it means is the government is punishing a company for an action it chose to take. There by the way is no law against discriminating against Republicans so in truth for your suggested lawsuit to win you would need new regulations passed by Republican state houses.

        2. So a couple of fringe libertarians decades ago wanted the Supreme Court to rule pro-ten commandments. Who gives a dam about that? I am living in 2022 not 2005. I am not going to discuss if we should vote Bush or Kerry or an irrelevant supreme court case from 2005

        Being pro-Laissez Faire (“MUH BUILD YOUR OWN GOOGLE!!!!”) means you are a squish on every issue including this one.

        If you think a lawsuit doesn’t involve the United States government your an idiot. A lawsuit by definition involves government and is based on rules set down by the government.

          Plato in reply to Danny. | March 11, 2022 at 10:59 am

          Allow me to give you a pro-tip, Danny—calling people “stupid” when you have an inability to differentiate between “your” and ‘you’re” (something the private-school kids learn in third grade) is laughable and reflects poorly on your *moms*.

          …but the irony is delicious nonetheless.

          Danny in reply to Danny. | March 11, 2022 at 11:47 am

          Plato allow me to give you a pro-tip

          Condescending assholes like you have nothing to say and your insults are duly ignored STFU and GTFO I am not proofreading comments I make here I am so so soooo not sorry you are a condescending asshole.

          Danny in reply to Danny. | March 11, 2022 at 11:49 am

          To add to this if your proofreading internet comments for “Is he treating this as a paper or quickly writing a refutation” congratulations that means you have no argument and are an asshole.

      Barry in reply to Danny. | March 11, 2022 at 12:20 am

      Danny the marxist brings the nonsense.

      What a surprise.

        Danny in reply to Barry. | March 11, 2022 at 2:42 am

        Quick Barry the moron without any brain power tell me one example of a lawsuit that doesn’t involve the power of the government.

          Barry in reply to Danny. | March 11, 2022 at 12:02 pm

          Quick danny the marxist makes a request that gets denied.

          No need to discuss anything with idiots or marxists. And you fit the bill on both descriptors.

It’s well past time for the populist right to develop and implement the same sorts of coordinated responses that the leftists use. When the pressure only comes from one direction members of the corporate leadership and/or management, many of whom are predisposed to that direction, act to eliminate the issue causing the faux outrage.

When the right creates just as big a stink / squeaky wheel as the left then the corporate leadership faces a choice of which half of the population to ignore. The only rational way for them to escape the dilemma is to go back to a position of neutrality by refusing to take sides.

The leftists have a head start in the establishment and use of activism. We should ramp up our efforts in that space but most of us are by nature not inclined to join organizations. Our side must use our advantage in control of State Legislative assembly and State wide elective offices, particularly control of State pension funds to make corporations feel the burden and consequences when they stray from a neutral position.

    The Gentle Grizzly in reply to CommoChief. | March 10, 2022 at 11:24 am

    “It’s well past time for the populist right to develop and implement the same sorts of coordinated responses that the leftists use.”

    ^^^^ This! ^^^^

    Danny in reply to CommoChief. | March 10, 2022 at 12:12 pm

    I agree 100%.

    Just understand what the result will be. It will NOT be neutrality. Not in the long run.

    I don’t mind adopting the tactic, as the progressive religionists need to be punched (metaphorically, at least). But it will not work in the long run – it will simply break our society down entirely.

    As long as that’s understood, you can use it the same way the progressives use Cloward-Piven, and use the breakdown to remold America in the image required to re-establish our free republic. But you have to be prepared for what will actually happen and plan for it.

      CommoChief in reply to GWB. | March 10, 2022 at 8:14 pm

      The path of least resistance for these corporations once faced with an equal or greater push back from the right is to return to a position of neutrality. IOW all they have to do is put out a statement that in essence says ‘ We at Widget Corp make widgets and leave the politics to the politicians. I don’t see any realistic alternative under circumstances I describe.

    maxmillion in reply to CommoChief. | March 11, 2022 at 10:29 am

    Conservatism, by its very definition, is antithetical to activism for any kind of change.

      bhwms in reply to maxmillion. | March 11, 2022 at 11:17 am

      I would add “except to reverse change that never should have happened.”

      I have no problem agitating for and working towards an agenda that sets back progressivism 120 years, up to and including Constitutional Amendments. They’ve been making change after change to the way things are supposed to work – away from the original intent. It is time we pushed it back and then teach our kids how to keep it that way.

        CommoChief in reply to bhwms. | March 11, 2022 at 3:35 pm

        Reversing the damage progressives have wrought since the Wilson Admin is change we can all get behind.

      CommoChief in reply to maxmillion. | March 11, 2022 at 3:39 pm

      So were going to allow progressives and other political opponents to veto policy initiatives from our side because ‘nu uh you guys are conservatives and conservatives don’t get to make changes’? I’m a hard pass on that. Allowing our opponents to frame the debate means we will always lose under Calvin ball rules.

2smartforlibs | March 10, 2022 at 12:01 pm

At this point, we are past hypocrisy and we moved to hierarchy. They never took issue with Love Trump’s hate.

“We’ll rewrite the definition of fascism to describe our political opponents.”

Who was that masked man?

I flew Delta 4 times in February and made mental notes of steward pre-flight instructions for each flight. Twice the steward said “masks must be worn at all times” and twice the steward said “masks must be worn at all times, removed only long enough to take a bite or drink. Masks must be over the nose and mouth between bites and drinks”. The steward also cited “Delta policy” and “Federal Government Law”.

They’re just dictators of the sky. I’d really appreciate if like the police are required to do on every citation for a moving violation, the stewards were required to cite the applicable DOCUMENTED Delta policy or Gov’t Law by number, title, and paragraph. Or if the Airlines, together with the airplane information card in the seat back pockets, were required to place a printed copy of applicable airline policy and Gov’t laws – to prevent the sky dictators from going off-script with petty – tyranical demands.

The requirements ought also be printed / disclosed at the time of ticket purches as part of the “contract of carriage”. Or at least provide a link to where a purchaser can read up on them – and agree to them prior to making final purchase. I fear however, this boils down to the “obey crewmember instructions” clause – which stewards use to force their views on passengers.

    nordic_prince in reply to MrE. | March 10, 2022 at 2:04 pm

    They play word games. There never was a “federal government LAW” about masks – only diktats.

    Color of law.

    Any federal LAW has to be passed by Congress. That’s what the Legislature is supposed to do.

    Chicklet in reply to MrE. | March 10, 2022 at 2:49 pm

    From a Delta flight 2 weeks ago- The flight attendants totally know that all the TVs freeze for their phony “federal law” announcements. On patrol during meal service, they made the same announcement a dozen times, to put the mask on between bites. They watched us sip water.

    After a while, enraged passengers started playing with them, putting their little face covers up and down and watching the “New York based crew” get crazier and crazier. They walked up and down the aisle hoping they could intimidate you to simply stop moving. It was a 2 hour flight so absolutely nobody cared, they gave this crew what they deserved.

    Now back to the crew’s purpose- Delta tells us they’re there for our safety, in case the plane is in trouble or something. So why destroy all confidence in the crew’s sanity and strip away their authority by management allowing them to behave like angry nasty children? Nobody would follow these people’s instructions after the way they treated us. Nobody.

    GWB in reply to MrE. | March 10, 2022 at 5:58 pm

    required to place a printed copy of applicable airline policy and Gov’t laws
    Do you know how big that document would be? Even if it just included FARs applicable to airlines? The FARs usually come published in really tiny print in a largish paperback book. And that was 30 years ago.

    The requirements ought also be printed / disclosed at the time of ticket purches as part of the “contract of carriage”.
    Pretty certain they are. But you will have to hunt for the link in that tiny print.

      Key word “applicable” – i.e., pertaining to customer attire. I only had minimal need of FARs as a retired QA auditor. More familiar are Mil-Std’s and -Spec’s, ANSI, Fed-Std’s, etc. It used to be said of building a 747 – the paper work documenting it’s design and construction outweight the aircraft itself.

      Mostly GWB, I tire of those air-tyrants, the mask Karens, et al, of saying “it’s a law!” when it’s just a mandate or public health order. As a former QA professional, I’m a show me kind of guy. Use a computer and look it up is BS – the steward cited the “requirement”, and ought be able to point out the authoritative document.

I flew with a HUGE black man wearing BLACK Supremacy sweatshirt on , before BLM, amd hat. I mean a 300 pound 6’5 monster amd nobody said anything

The stewards mask is not covering her nose appropriately in the first picture…
Thought I’d point that out

Oh, the horror

And yes, Stewardesses are power throwing Karens. I remember just a few before 9/11, now it seems they are all nuts

I haven’t flown since Covid….

    Barry in reply to gonzotx. | March 11, 2022 at 12:22 am

    Yep, I noticed it right off. The marxist karen wasn’t wearing the mask properly. She should be fired by delta no longer airlines.

E Howard Hunt | March 10, 2022 at 1:21 pm

Remember when stewardesses were sweet young things recruited from modeling agencies? Now they have all the looks and charm of prison matrons. These broads are so tough they kick start their vibrators.

nordic_prince | March 10, 2022 at 2:06 pm

I know it’s a different carrier, but…

Forget about flying the “friendly” skies.

LongTimeReader | March 10, 2022 at 2:15 pm

Well, Ashlie is probably due for some counseling. In Delta’s contract of carriage it allows for refusal to carry for offensive attire. It’s vague enough to allow for the flight attendants to pick and choose who they target for offensive attire. Usually it’s some scantily clad female that stirs up the hornet’s nest. Had that hoodie said F Trump, it probably would have been fine.

Time for a little test: one passenger wears a FJB mask/shirt and another wears a FDJT mask/shirt

This should be a cure for anyone still beating the “Laissez Faire build your own google NO REGULATION MUH GOVERMENT BAAAADDDD!!!!” folks, I don’t want Delta to be in charge of anything.

    henrybowman in reply to Danny. | March 10, 2022 at 5:24 pm

    Right. A little bit of totalitarianism is good for the digestion.
    As long as you only do it until you need glasses.

      Danny in reply to henrybowman. | March 11, 2022 at 2:27 am

      You sir are a complete and utterly vapid person.

      I am for regulating big business, I am for regulations on DELTA the only other option is you support Delta and believe because they are a private company this is fine.

      So you want the oligarchs in charge of DELTA to rule you? You don’t want conservative employees at DELTA to be protected by law? You don’t want customers flying DELTA protected from abuse?

      There is nothing you could do about DELTA if you don’t believe in regulation.

      Enjoy your brainless “MUH GOVERNMENT BAD GOVERNMEEEENT BAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” reeeing from 30 years ago, today the only victories of the conservative movement are happening via government for example I know I know Texas is a hellscape it is so so so totalitarian after Putin is overthrown we need to dismantle Texas so totalitarian the way the Texans just declared regulation against transgender surgery for minors resulting in a private company (hospital) being forced to stop offering those yes yes I agree we need to nuke Austin….alternatively move into the dam 21st century you Randian oligarch loving reactionary.

        Barry in reply to Danny. | March 11, 2022 at 12:07 pm

        “I am for regulating big business…”

        Ha, ha, ha. No kidding. If you were honest you’d tell the truth and say you are for government ownership of all business.

        Oh, by the way, marxist moron, big business is highly regulated as are small business’s. Of course, when your only job is as a minimum wage employee of Marxist Trolls Inc you might have missed that.

          Danny in reply to Barry. | March 11, 2022 at 1:28 pm

          Quick come up with a free society that doesn’t regulate big business.

          Is it Sweden (Nope) is it France (Nope) is it UK (nope) is it Italy (Nope) is it America (we have always regulated big businesses and the public square so hell no) is it Spain (no) quick a nation that doesn’t regulate businesses.

          You are a squish who will give anything for Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos et all to be in charge of everything because you can’t let go of outdated rhetoric from 30 years ago.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | March 12, 2022 at 1:53 am

          Baloney, you dope.

          I would change the law regarding internet publishing such that big tech uses to censor those they disagree with. Either they are a publisher and responsible for the content or they are not and may not censor the content.

          As for your dimwitted views about regulating business, no where have I stated that regulations are not used in all countries. Nice strawman, but no dice. You’re a dopey marxist.

      By the way just to emphasize the point

      This wonderful news brought to you by Texas State Government regulating a private corporation.

      Too bad 5 Randians find that totalitarian, feel free to nuke us after you bump off some more dictators and spread more democracy in the middle east.

A cargo cult and viable legal indemnity. That said, for the true believers, they are out there, viruses, bacteria, prions, and all manner of pathogen that will either abort your, leave you less than viable, or use you as a safe sanctuary. You can never drop your mask, and don’t forget your goggles, the eyes are windows to viral and social contagion.

Most horrific–his tee shirt had ARs on it. Is that preferable to FJB?

I hope he got her name and sues all.

Another Voice | March 10, 2022 at 7:02 pm

I see the stewards pulling the same bull crap as the teachers.
In the same way that teachers don’t want to get back in the game and do the job their paid to do; So goes the stewards. Bedsides the safety of customers, the other half of the job is customer service which is inclusive of the inflight comfort amenities, serving from specialty beverage carts and on many flights, serving mini meals in 1rst class. Oh for the shame of it. To actually have do the job they were hired to do when they know they can stiff the corporate policy and still collect the same paycheck for crap service and self-anointed powers (not policy) do it.

And he was black to boot. Boy did they open themselves to a lot of grief.

Loved the shirt under the hoody. That man can move next door, he’d be a great neighbor.

George_Kaplan | March 10, 2022 at 10:57 pm

The article of clothing uses the most offensive word in the English language – well technically the most offensive is a variant of the aforesaid, but lets not get complicated. I can thus see why the air hostess required the gentleman turn the top inside out or remove it.

Kicking him off for lowering his mask to communicate with her is however an absurd pretextabuse of power. She appears to be the classic intolerant Leftist who preaches full freedom and rights, except for those who disagree with her.

Reason #432 why I won’t get getting on a plane until both the airlines and the Feds come to their senses and stop requiring masks.

Delta can kiss my several million mile ass.