by William Skink
Partisan Democrats who believe any conspiracy theory involving Russia (to avoid responsibility for their candidate losing to Trump in 2016) are gleefully writing about sex with demons.
Why, you ask?
Because equating mask skepticism with conspiratorial absurdities creates a guilt by association deterrent for weak-minded people who are more afraid of ridicule than they are of the possibility they are being lied to by their trusted media sources.
From the link:
Montana Republican leaders, who refuse to believe Dr. Anthony Fauci, the physician and immunologist who has served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since the Reagan Administration, are convinced that the social media giants and globalists who run the world are hiding the truth presented by a doctor named Stella Immanuel, a viral sensation in the right-wing world who claimed that pharmaceutical companies are lying when they say hydroxychloroquine isn’t effective and declared that we don’t need to wear masks to stop the spread of COVID-19.
And here is the fun list of crazy this Immanuel apparently subscribes to:
- “gynecological problems, such as endometriosis, cysts and infertility, are caused by individuals having sex with demons and witches in their dreams.”
- reptilians run the government.
- Alien DNA is used in medical treatments.
- researchers are working on a vaccine to turn people away from religion.
Magic 8 Ball toys are a gateway to witchcraft.
While it’s easy to tar and feather Republicans with this tactic, it’s a little more challenging to extend this guilt-by-association technique to an entire government of a foreign nation, like the Dutch government and it’s decision to NOT advise its citizens to wear masks everywhere:
The decision was announced by Minister for Medical Care Tamara van Ark after a review by the country’s National Institute for Health (RIVM). The government will instead seek better adherence to social distancing rules after a surge in coronavirus cases in the country this week, Van Ark said at a press conference in The Hague.
“Because from a medical perspective there is no proven effectiveness of masks, the Cabinet has decided that there will be no national obligation for wearing non-medical masks” Van Ark said.
The decision bucks the trend as many European countries have made masks mandatory in stores or crowded outdoor areas.
No word on Van Ark’s opinions on the origin of vaginal cysts. And yet somehow the article continues:
RIVM chief Jaap van Dissel said that the organization was aware of studies that show masks help slow the spread of disease but it was not convinced they will help during the current coronavirus outbreak in the Netherlands.
He argued wearing masks incorrectly, together with worse adherence to social distancing rules, could increase the risk of transmitting the disease.
“So we think that if you’re going to use masks (in a public setting) … then you must give good training for it,” he said.
As I go about my daily life in Missoula I see all manner of stupid when it comes to masks. There is also plenty of stupid emanating from the “smart people” on social media.
I saw one tweet claiming only men are dumb enough to not cover their noses with masks, but yesterday (as I was buying ammo) the female clerk at the sporting goods store had her schnoz exposed, and guess what I did to unleash my superior knowledge on her reckless ignorance?
Nothing. I did nothing. The only muffled words that came from my masked face was THANK YOU as she handed me my purchase.
Despite the best efforts of partisans to mock and ridicule anyone who doesn’t mindlessly accept their preferred dictates from their preferred media sources, skepticism about the array of solutions being presented to us is trickling into places like Democracy Now!.
I don’t normally listen to Democracy Now!, but I caught some of this episode on KBGA while driving around. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Amy Goodman use the Republican urge toward deregulation and Big Pharma’s profit motive to exhibit some vaccine skepticism, but the question put to Chomsky was almost totally ignored. Here is the exchange:
AMY GOODMAN: Do people have reason to be afraid, Professor Chomsky, about a vaccine that has been developed, in Trump’s words, the name of the program “Warp Speed”? That in his zeal at deregulation to get a vaccine, which so many people want around the world, that there would be a danger in the original vaccines?
NOAM CHOMSKY: If vaccines are rushed through, there is always a danger. It means that many of the possibilities simply haven’t been tested. That’s what happens when you rush things through. Maybe the balance of costs and benefits says you should do it anyway. But what are we going to do? We are talking about the United states, how to distribute a vaccine. What about Africa? What about Yemen? What about poor areas of Latin America? And what about the huge mass of deeply impoverished people in India? What is going to happen to them? That’s most of the population of the world.
While I haven’t written much about masks, I have been reading and listening to various sources. I can’t say I have any firm conclusions, but I will say this: I won’t be mocked and ridiculed away from my well-founded skepticism when it comes to mask mandates, vaccine safety, and the financial incentive driving Big Pharma.
As my wife and I prepare for whatever school is going to look like, the prospect of my children being forced to wear masks all day has me GREATLY concerned, so I expect I’ll be writing more about this topic in the days and weeks ahead.
What I WON’T be writing about is sex with demons. For that lurid content, you’ll have to read the journalist wannabes at The Montana Post.
Here’s some of Fauci’s testimony in front of congress.
Well, asking a doctor to make a call on a constitutional question — limiting first amendment rights — is just playing politics to score points. It’s kinda like asking a constitutional lawyer or a policeman to recommend if a covid-19 patient should get hydroxycloroquine or not. Just dumb.
This is the kind of stupid shit — and it happens all over congress — that renders political discourse meaningless. It’s all just show for the elections.
I wear a mask at indoor retail venues and think that is a reasonable request by public health officials but, I “refuse to believe Dr. Anthony Fauci”…
Quoting myself from Ian Welsh’s Blog:
“Fauci’s continual lies throughout this pandemic and…..his long history of lying to the AIDS community in the 80’s and 90’s in order to receive funding for himself/his agency is disgrace. Fauci is a charlatan and likely…singularly responsible for the pandemic itself*”
*Dr. Fauci Fauci, used US taxpayer dollars to fund WUHAN Lab’s work on “gain-of-function” research on coronaviruses. – https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
Watched a UC Davis sponsored video last night on infection and prevention Covid-19, it was geared towards informing the medical community about recent research in the areas of aerosol particulate and protection. It was interesting in that there appeared to be no political actors, each person who spoke seemed to distribute inconvenient truths to both unscientific Ds and unscientific Rs in fair portion.
Long story short:
1] Covid-19 creates the most serious infections in the aerosol groups with particulate small enough to reach the lung tissue directly. This means that the 6 feet rule while helpful, in that the source’s distribution follows the cube of the distance rule, meaning it’s slightly better than nothing but, close to useless in confined spaces, because, the particulate size that results in the most serious infections can reach far beyond six feet.
2] We now have good evidence to show that the initial dose of covid-19 is a VERY LARGE determinate in the seriousness of the illness and every indication that if the initial dose is low enough, the person is prone to be asymptomatic. [Spoiler alert; This has been known to be the case in numerous other viral infections and most informed people may have already surmised this might be the case here.] Masks, when worn by OVER 80% are useful at reducing serious infection. When the % of mask users drops below 80% masks appear to have much less value unless, they are of the highest grade. When the usage of masks was over 90%, the percentage of known cases were asymptomatic 85% of the time.
So both sides are right, masks CAN BE EFFECTIVE if high enough of a % of the population wear them but, masks are NOT EFFECTIVE if high enough of a % of the population prefer their personal freedom over their biblically prescribed obligation “to love thy neighbor as thy self”. It being Sunday, it’s probably a good day to ask, am I to be my brothers keeper?
very interesting, thank you for the comment.
my wife and I were talking earlier today about what it would be like to have a positive and trusting relationship with a well-run government that was actually concerned about public health.
in this imaginary utopia there would be free and reliable testing from a nationalized effort to identify the scope of the infection. when someone tests positive they get direct quarantine financial/logistical support to ensure any needs are directly delivered for the time period they must quarantine.
since this would be huge challenge for employers, imagine a state employment agency that could coordinate temporary replacement staff to help ease the stress on employers with outbreaks.
but no, that is not the world we live in. we live in a world where a former State Rep. writes an essay like this, which will be the focus of tomorrow’s post.
I should probably edit out some of the profanity first, though.
If it were me, instead of Nancy Pelosi, I would be calling for national health coverage for Covid-19/pandemic infection treatment…and you know what, this being a political year, Trump would sign it…and so it would begin.
But Nancy knows Donald would sign such a bill and that would be the camel’s nose inside the tent…
Soon the cries would be…if the evil Trump, the most evil man of all time, could sign such a bill, why don’t Ds propose…and everything that the DNCers have struggled so hard to do since 1974 would be lost. There will be no return to the party of FDR so long as likes of the current “leadership” remain.