Now Fauci is an "attention whore" because he did one photo shoot for in style magazine. Really? Come on. I know you are not a Trump fan, but a lot of the things you are saying about him could very easily have come out of Trump's mouth, and probably did.
This is why I made the hero comment... if you're going to act like someone, you should be prepared for people to call you out on it.
Now Fauci is an "attention whore" because he did one photo shoot for in style magazine. Really? Come on. I know you are not a Trump fan, but a lot of the things you are saying about him could very easily have come out of Trump's mouth, and probably did.
He did a photo shoot? I don't read the magazine but I assumed that he's on the cover and there's an interview. I seriously doubt he did an actual sexy photo shoot.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,261
Now Fauci is an "attention whore" because he did one photo shoot for in style magazine. Really? Come on. I know you are not a Trump fan, but a lot of the things you are saying about him could very easily have come out of Trump's mouth, and probably did.
He did a photo shoot? I don't read the magazine but I assumed that he's on the cover and there's an interview. I seriously doubt he did an actual sexy photo shoot.
You're right. It wasn't even the magazine--just their website. It was one picture and the interview was conducted by Norah O'Donnell. People are actually bothered by this? lol
Now Fauci is an "attention whore" because he did one photo shoot for in style magazine. Really? Come on. I know you are not a Trump fan, but a lot of the things you are saying about him could very easily have come out of Trump's mouth, and probably did.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
in this political and hyper-conspiratorial climate we're in, I think it would have been a mistake to even publicly acknowledge the possibility. we already have white on chinese violence from trump calling it the china virus. imagine if Fauci had said "yeah, maybe it is a bio weapon/ originated in a lab" there would have been chaos.
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,261
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
in this political and hyper-conspiratorial climate we're in, I think it would have been a mistake to even publicly acknowledge the possibility. we already have white on chinese violence from trump calling it the china virus. imagine if Fauci had said "yeah, maybe it is a bio weapon/ originated in a lab" there would have been chaos.
This is great point. I have not read the 4,000 emails (and doubt others here have as well, plus I will never take Rand Paul's word for anything) but if some of this stuff turns out to be true, I would suspect the fact that our president at the time was an abhorrent human being looking for any scape goat possible played a role in the initial messaging. Trump's childish words and petulant behavior surely made things much more difficult for the public health officials like Fauci.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
in this political and hyper-conspiratorial climate we're in, I think it would have been a mistake to even publicly acknowledge the possibility. we already have white on chinese violence from trump calling it the china virus. imagine if Fauci had said "yeah, maybe it is a bio weapon/ originated in a lab" there would have been chaos.
& we also already have the anger towards our own leaders and scientists (as evidenced in this very thread), so back to my point from yesterday: what will change if it comes out that this actually did originate in a lab?
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
There is ample evidence of zoonotic diseases, particularly coronaviruses, being transmitted from bats to humans. That's not new. You're looking at this from the benefit of hindsight, but really given the history of virology from the standpoint of knowledge in May 2020 it was far more likely that this was a natural zoonotic disease.
And I think it's naive to think that the average person wouldn't react more strongly to the fact that a highly infectious disease was "created" in a lab and got loose, either accidentally or deliberately, than the idea that it could have could have come from a wild animals.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I understand the point of thinking they were dedicated but they all used the same excuse each time they ended their employment and were asked why they didn’t say something. It was like the first one used that excuse and everyone bought it so it’s all good. Collectively I imagine, with some congressional backing, they all could have stopped him. Just wish once someone would have had the nerve to say “no I need my job for the money”. I’m just not buying that all those who stuck around were doing it solely to protect us. I guess my opinion of everyone associated with politics is shaded.
But I respect your responses because you may be right.
I would certainly welcome that explanation if they were truly being honest and honorable.
This is true for a lot of them. But for Fauci, specifically, him staying on the job quite possibly saved tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of lives. Like Russell said earlier, can you imagine the dipshit Trump would've replaced him with? Wuhan lab or a fucking bat....thank god for Tony Fauci.
I’m not making excuses for my opinion just relaying where I’m coming from Fauci standing up, getting fired, or quitting are all hypothetical scenarios so my opinion is based on my hypothetical - what if he or they stood up and 400,000 lives were saved? They’re both what if’s so both are just a matter of opinion. When it comes to adults I’m more of a glass 1/2 empty person. Children - 100% glass totally full! There’s nothing like a child’s honesty before they’re ruined by adults. I’m just not convinced the guy (Fauci) isn’t loving his 15 minutes a bit too much! Don’t yell at me because I do respect his knowledge, no questions there...I think I just question his, well all their morale compasses.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
that's because you are a rational human being. many, MANY, are not, and would react accordingly.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
that's because you are a rational human being. many, MANY, are not, and would react accordingly.
I'm not necessarily buying the "rational" part today
The large number of science fiction and horror movies and books about diseases escaped from labs tells us something about how terrifying people find this idea.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
that's because you are a rational human being. many, MANY, are not, and would react accordingly.
I'm not necessarily buying the "rational" part today
The large number of science fiction and horror movies and books about diseases escaped from labs tells us something about how terrifying people find this idea.
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,261
I'm seeing it right now from my old friends now qanon dopes on facebook. They are back to their theory that Fauci helped create this and it's intent was to hurt Trump, and they were right that masks were only a tool to get people to fall in line yada yada yada yada yada.
We live in a country where over 50% of one of our two major political parties think the election was stolen from Trump. No wonder Fauci was careful about what he did and didn't put out publicly last year.
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
that's because you are a rational human being. many, MANY, are not, and would react accordingly.
I'm not necessarily buying the "rational" part today
Well that's not what he said on capitol hill when testifying. Mind you, he was sparring with Rand Paul at the time, but still, he wouldn't recommend against hundreds to thousands of people in the streets.
Since you guys seem like big fans of his that take exception to me being judgmental about "The Good Doctor" posing poolside, I'll also remind you that he throws like a pussy....
It’s not “hurt feelings.” He’s been on the cover of Time Magazine, which makes sense. But the nation’s leading infectious disease expert posing poolside for In Style is Trump-like. Just basking in the sun by the pool at the height of a pandemic that killed millions.
Meh... trolling to get a rise out of people is trump like too.
It is. But you’re conceding here that Fauci, the scientist, is Trump-like.
Frankly, while being critical of that magazine picture, and certainly making fun of his first pitch, upsets some of you, I shouldn’t have posted that. It just distracts from the real issue that I was posting about before that; Fauci funding the gain of function research, which I’m sure was done in good faith. But when shit went wrong at the lab, he went to great lengths to discredit the lab theory even though that’s not being transparent. So on the levels of Trumpist behavior, I’d rather troll on a message board than lie to the public about important scientific information.
I believe when all is said & done that Fauci tried to save as many lives as he could, which can't be said about your orange hero. You can whine about magazine covers and BLM and Chinese labs all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that Fauci tried to do his job while our president at the time turned his back on us in the worst pandemic to hit this country in a century. I get it, people need to vilify Fauci to try make trump look less bad. It is what it is. Was the guy perfect? Not at all, but he didn't walk away which would have been the path of least resistance, he stuck around & tried to do his job under absurd and unnecessary circumstances created by that orange fuckstick. I couldn't give a shit about how he throws out a first pitch, or whether or not he was on a magazine cover.
& talk about trump like... when all else fails, just say he throws like a girl.
JFC
Trump’s not my hero. Didn’t even vote for him. I am not vilifying Fauci to make Trump look good. Nothing can make Trump look good. You partisans just can fathom that people be critical of and have dislike for both Trump and Fauci. Or Trump and Biden for that matter.
"You partisans" - pot meet kettle
I'm not a fan of any of them, truth be told, but your criticisms of fauci are piss poor, and when called out on it, you resorted to trolling.
It is what it is.
None of those criticisms were poor at all. He hasn’t been transparent about the possibility of it originating in the lab. And the trolling wasn’t some last resort. It’s just that if people are gonna focus more on me posting the magazine cover (which isn’t all that relevant) than me talking about his lack of transparency, then here’s something else you can focus on that’s irrelevant.
So now the problem isn't that he was lying, it's that he wasn't transparent about something being a possibility.
Got it. Not the strongest point IMO, but take what you can get I guess.
RE: The magazine cover, that was one of your three big critiques of him, calling him an attention whore for it. But now it isn't all that relevant? But at the same time, it ISN'T a piss poor criticism?
Ok.
That lack of transparency is in the same realm as lying. He knew that the lab was plausible, and dismissed people that suggested it as conspiracy theorists.
Attention whore was one three critiques, but not a big one like you’re making it out to be. By far the smallest actually. Certainly not one that is relevant to Fauci’s influence on the public. That’s why I said I regret even mentioning it. It’s small potatoes compared to being a scientist that dismissed the possible (and let’s face it, likely) cause of a disease.
he dismissed it publicly. which is exactly what he should have done, regardless of what his real thoughts were on the matter. it's tantamount to "no comment".
I think he should've said something more along the lines of "we're looking into every possible scenario." Above, Oftenreading made the same argument you made yesterday about acknowledging the lab theory would, as he put it, "fan the flames of xenophobia and irrationality." I still think that if if comes out that, in fact, it was the lab all along, then you might get the same xenophobia (hopefully not), but coupled anger towards our own leaders and scientists for being so gun-ho against the theory. Social media was deleting posts even entertaining the lab theory, based on, presumably, people like Fauci being against the theory. That's almost Orwellian; the person in charge doesn't want this talked about...so it talking about it won't be tolerated.
During major health crises like a global pandemic, health leaders have several jobs, not the least of which are instilling hope and calming anxiety, because the more anxious and afraid people are the less rationally they behave. Downplaying unproven and scary theories about all the possible origins of a virus is a very reasonable part of the job. To the best of my knowledgeable he never said it was impossible, he just didn’t hype it up with speculation. What the social media platforms did after that is up to them. In my opinion he probably took the best approach to it.
While he didn't say it was "impossible," he told National Geographic in May 2020, "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
that's because you are a rational human being. many, MANY, are not, and would react accordingly.
I'm not necessarily buying the "rational" part today
Attacks on Fauci grow more intense, personal and conspiratorial
Conservatives are amplifying attacks on Fauci after the release of his emails. And they’re fundraising off of it too.
Reddit and Facebook lit up with a fresh round of Fauci attacks, some of which called him a war criminal. | Sarah Silbiger/AP Photo
For over a year, Anthony Fauci has been a bogeyman for conservatives, who have questioned his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic and accused him of quietly undermining then-President Donald Trump.
But those attacks took on a whole new level of vitriol this week, to the point that one social media analysis described it as highly misleading and at least one platform pulled down some posts, citing false content.
It all stemmed from a tranche of Fauci’s emails that were published as part of a Freedom of Information Act request filed by variousnews outlets. Within hours of publication, the hashtag #FauciLeaks was trending on Twitter, accusing the nation’s top infectious disease doctor of lying under oath about the origins of Covid. It became a trending topic on Facebook too, where detractors added an inaccurate and more nefarious framing that the emails were secretly “leaked” — drawing on a playbook that has worked for partisans on the right in the past, despite the fact that Fauci's publicly disclosed emails were not state secrets.
Reddit and Facebook lit up with a fresh round of Fauci attacks, some of which called him a war criminal. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), perhaps Fauci’s most prominent bete noire on the Hill, quickly released Facebook ads demanding to “fire Fauci” and requesting a campaign donation.
And a round of conservatives, cherry-picking individual emails out of more than 3,000, argued that Fauci, who leads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, had privately supported a theory that the virus leaked from a Chinese lab and lied about masks in an effort to amass political power. Neither was true. Fauci has said he thinks it’s more likely that the virus spread from animal to human but would not rule out a lab leak, and while he initially downplayed the need for masks, it was, he said, out of fear that medical professionals would lose access to them if the public began panic purchasing.
The veracity and velocity of the new attacks, nevertheless, underscored the growing intensity with which Fauci animates conservatives some five months after Trump has left office. And they raised difficult questions for political and medical professionals about how much they should push back on the anti-Fauci campaign and what the cost would be if it went ignored.
“Targeting Fauci erodes trust in scientific institutions and makes them seem partisan – just as universities are increasingly seen as partisan, the media, the bureaucracy,” said Karen Kornbluh, senior fellow and director of GMF Digital at the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. “These strategies don’t have an easy response. You try to ignore them when they're not that widespread and even if you eventually refute them it can seem he said-she said. The best strategy — which the White House and Fauci seem to be taking — is to push ahead with an alternate positive narrative and action — in this case around vaccinations.”
For the White House, this has created a quandary: to defend Fauci from the incoming and risk elevating it, or to ignore it and assume it only gains traction with an audience that would never trust the Biden administration anyway.
On Thursday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki called Fauci an “undeniable asset” but said the White House would let him speak for himself. In an interview later in the day, Rob Flaherty, the White House’s digital director, would not directly comment on Fauci but said that while the White House regularly pushes back on false information it must also balance out whether its response will exacerbate false information or quash it.
Fauci declined to comment for this piece.
Career government officials don’t often become political lightning rods. But Fauci’s role, the crisis in which he has operated, and the flow of information on social media, has created the perfect conditions for just that. A mild-mannered infectious disease specialist who has earned the admiration of Republican and Democratic presidents alike, Fauci is prone to bluntness. That has served him well as someone communicating to the public about complex and high-stakes pandemics and public health issues. But, starting in the spring of 2020, it has made his life tricky.
Trump insisted that he and Fauci worked fine together. But in the early days of the pandemic, the former president rarely hid his jealousy as Fauci became something of a public deity. Often Trump would proclaim that his judgments on Covid proved more prescient over time, like an early call to shut down travel from China. But Trump also routinely flouted the public safety guidelines that Fauci touted and their divergent approaches became an emblem for the then-president’s much criticized pandemic response, writ large.
The publication of Fauci’s emails only further animated Trump’s animus.
“After seeing the emails, our Country is fortunate I didn’t do what Dr. Fauci wanted me to do. For instance, I closed our Borders to China very early despite his not wanting them closed. The Democrats and the Fake News Media even called me a ‘xenophobe,’” Trump said in a statement Thursday. “In the end, we saw this was a life-saving decision, and likewise with closing our borders to Europe, specifically to certain heavily infected countries. I was later given credit, even by ‘Tony,’ for saving hundreds of thousands of lives.”
Trump’s attack was not particularly pointed compared to the others that have come Fauci’s way in recent days.
n analysis from GMF Digital at the German Marshall Fund provided to POLITICO showed that the online attacks on Fauci have grown more personal and egregious, with claims that he is “corrupt, a war criminal, deserves to go to prison, or is responsible for child abuse circulating on social media.” GMF Digital found four “misleading” themes across social media including that Fauci lied about masks and other public health measures. The organization found that on Facebook, the top posts about Fauci emanated from Paul as well as a host of conservatives, including Ben Shapiro, Donald Trump Jr., Steven Crowder, Dan Bongino and Newsmax.
ccording to data from Bully Pulpit Interactive, Republicans or conservative interests over the last month have spent $300,000 on Facebook ads targeting Fauci.
Nearly seven years ago, during the heart of the Ebola crisis, the Obama administration’s internal motto for handling challenging stretches was “PTFOTV”: Put Tony Fauci on TV. No one had more credibility with the public or was a better spokesperson, said Ron Klain, who acted as Ebola czar under Obama and now serves as Biden’s chief of staff.
But in an ever-polarized nation, Fauci too has fallen victim to tribalism. His advocacy for mask wearing and social distancing — in the face of Trump’s opposition — was met by vocal detractors across the country, who launched anti-mask protests and demanded the economy reopen. His conservative predictions about the pace of vaccine development and the timeline for reopening the country led to criticism that his expertise had been dramatically overstated.
But the attacks on Fauci have increasingly veered into the conspiratorial, experts say. This week, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson questioned why one of the emails involving Fauci was redacted, then speculated that it could mean Fauci was under investigation.
“Republicans employed the same attempts to divide and distract the American people in 2020. We know that these strategies don't work,” said Aneesa McMillan, deputy executive director of Priorities USA, a top Democratic super PAC. “The American people are looking for a concrete policy agenda that speaks to their priorities and improves their communities. The GOP has none of that — so they turn to fear-mongering and misinformation.”
At the heart of the current broadside against Fauci is reporting around — and the investigation into — the Wuhan lab leak theory, which holds that the virus leaked, accidentally or intentionally, from a virology lab in the city where it was first found. Republicans and right-wing media outlets have circulated such theories since the beginning of the pandemic even as scientists, including Fauci, insisted that problematic coronaviruses, from the SARS and MERS epidemics to Covid-19, were becoming increasingly common.
The pressure to probe Wuhan lab leak theories continued to mount, leading Trump’s White House to demand in April 2020 that the National Institutes of Health abruptly cancel a multimillion-dollar grant to EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit studying coronavirus origins that had worked with the Wuhan viral lab in the past. April emails between EcoHealth Alliance CEO Peter Daszak and Fauci, published as part of the recent FOIA, have become a new touchstone for conspiracy theorists, after Daszak thanked the NIAID director for dismissing lab leak theories early in the pandemic.
“I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Daszak wrote to Fauci on April 18, 2020.
“Many thanks for your kind note,” Fauci responded the next day, just over a week before POLITICO first reported that NIH canceled the EcoHealth grant. Daszak did not respond to a POLITICO request for comment.
Theories about a leak from the Wuhan virology lab became a consistent line of questioning for Republican lawmakers by last spring and soon turned into a mainstay of congressional hearings and increasingly contentious exchanges between Fauci and Paul, who sits on the Senate health committee. The longtime NIAID director and Kentucky doctor have exchanged barbs on television after Senate hearings where Paul accused Fauci of moving the goalposts on coronavirus science while the infectious disease scientist has told Paul that “with all due respect,” he was “entirely and completely incorrect.”
Paul was swift to accuse Fauci on Wednesday of knowledge of the Wuhan lab allegedly carrying out controversial “gain-of-function” studies, a field of research that alters viruses in a way that can make them more transmissible or help them hop to new hosts, such as humans.
A senior NIH official insisted to POLITICO that detractors such as Paul are taking Fauci’s emails “out of context.” But the prevailing posture, like that of the White House, was to downplay rather than engage.
“The FOIA articles are discussed like any other issues and then we move on,” the official said. “We're taking it seriously, of course, but it's not changing how we do business or our focus.”
Erin Banco contributed to this repor
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
Yep...it's all about the mid-terms. Their platform is Smear. Smear. Smear. Sadly, they've run on that for decades now. It seems longer.
Let me guess? Fauci also ordered different kinds of pizza in those emails? Sometimes asking for Coke or Pepsi? With a side of fries? We know what he’s all about.
Yeah who gives a shit when/how the virus got started at this point! Many lives could of been saved with a competent president but unfortunately we had an imbecile running the circus hence 100’s of thousand perished..
Well ya should care. How the hell do you prevent future pandemics without knowing how this one started?
We had a total playbook left behind by Obama administration! On how to handle a pandemic guess what Trumps administration did with it dismissed it, most virus start with humans involvement..
I get it, dude. Trump is an idiot. I'm not talking about Trump's handling of things. He was terrible as expected. I'm talking about the origin of the pandemic and how Fauci and others were quick to dismiss the lab theory. You say most viruses start with human involvement, but for quite a while there, Fauci was suggesting you're a conspiracy theorist to suggest the lab was the origin. And Facebook was censoring posts linking the virus to the Wuhan lab.
I already know Donald Trump is a shady asshole. It's Fauci who I'm interested in learning more about. Why be so dismissive of the lab theory? Covering his own ass knowing the NIH gave funding to the Wuhan lab?
fauci has not denied NIH gave funding to the wuhan lab, he denies funding was given specifically on the basis of gain of function research.
i think the pushback on the wuhan lab theory was because they knew full well what would happen (and did happen, to some extent) if it gained traction: racist attacks on chinese people. and because trump was suggesting china did it as a bioweapon. had fauci and others come out and said, at that point, "we don't know anything yet" instead of outright calling it false, people would have gone berserk, calling for WW3 on China. we could easily have had another cold war on our hands, during a pandemic, with trump at the helm.
that's a trifecta for a massive fuck up.
He hasn't denied funding, but in the earliest days of the pandemic (say last March), he wasn't exactly forthcoming with that information. That's why I think at the time, he was trying to minimize the lab theory; trying to get eyes off the lab and the NIH's funding.
I disagree with the second paragraph. I just don't get how it's racist to suggest Chinese scientists fucked up and that might the cause, but it's not racist to suggest that China's filthy, inhumane wet markets might be the cause. Why would one cause racist attacks on Chinese Americans and not the other? I also don't think saying "We don't know anything yet" would have led to people going berserk on China. But even if that was the fear, it's still better to be honest and say "we're not sure yet" than it is to dismiss one of the possible causes (the lab). That makes it looks as if scientists like Fauci were covering for China. So now you get the same anger towards China that you would've gotten a year ago, but coupled with anger towards people like Fauci who we're supposed to trust.
Agree that Fauci is and was a POS. Gutless puke. I’m not even sure the whole bunch of them who allowed that baby to lie month after month shouldn’t be held responsible for their non-actions. If Trump would have handled the whole thing honestly he’d be sitting in the WH right now. He was just too stupid to see it, his last opportunity to do something positive and he was just soooo stupid about it.
Completely agree. Trump had his chance to be a normal president in the midst of a real crisis, and he blew it. If he handled things correctly, he could've cancelled out a lot of the stupid bullshit from the first three years of his presidency.
In fact, if he didn't vilify Fauci and just stayed neutral, maybe everyone would see Fauci for what he is. But nope, Trump made him his enemy, so by proxy, he became an ally of the left.
so what "is" Fauci?
Attention-whore, fraud, partisan hack.
I'm sure you'll want examples.
Attention-whore: What type of "doctor" poses poolside for a style magazine?
Fraud: Well I believe this due to him dismissing the lab theory when he knows it shouldn't have been dismissed. Not to say that the lab 100% definitely the cause of the pandemic, but it shouldn't have been dismissed.
Partisan Hack: Refusing to give recommendations that BLM protests shouldn't occur. Now this guy gave dozens if not hundreds of recommendations of how many people should convene in a place, how far away they should be, who should be wearing masks, etc. But when asked on capitol hill if he'd recommend against BLM protests (with hundreds to thousands of people in the streets), he refused. Well a SCIENTIST shouldn't let the cause of the gathering weigh on his recommendation. If you can't gather for a rock concert because it's not safe due to the virus, then you can't gather for a George Floyd rally because it's not safe for the same reason.
1. I'd venture to guess that the vast majority in the healthcare space live and die largely unrecognized. If one stood up for truth when it was inconvenient for them, and received a glimpse of the celebrity treatment we give to athletes and musicians - I'm happy for him.
2. Given that the source is still unproven to this day, and given the rising hate crimes against Asians (often due to Trump's own rhetoric), it's understandable why Fauci would feel a responsibility to combat that image. Isn't "innocent until proven guilty" a tenet of American society?
3. When asked if protests should happen, I remember Fauci saying only if they could be managed with proper social distancing measures put in place, and with an understanding of the risks. I recall him commenting on how this was the case because the right to protest peacefully is a core element of American society. Is any of this controversial?
Ultimately, if you look for warts on any individual, you'll find them. Just my opinion - but I don't think these warrant a loss of trust.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,709
Saw this car today at the library. Wish I'd had a camera. Some kind of American made Republican looking auto (no, seriously, this very conservative looking sedan), white with gold trim, shiny as can be, with Trump stickers on both doors and two on the back as well as two black and blue police stickers and a bumper sticker that says "Police Lives Matter Too". Oh the irony. Pro Trump AND supporter of the police? Right.
Man, this thing looked like someone's idea of The Official Donald Trump Super Supporter Mobile. Two finger under the nose salute to that guy.
And another Trumper vehicle siting: Big black brodozer pickup with massive Trump flag crossing Calif. Hwy 49 on Pleasant Valley Road hauling ass at around 65MPH in a 25 mile an hour zone to get ahead of some shitty little socialist commie pinko jap import doing about 65 and belching black smoke. WAHHH WAHHH AMERICAHHHH!
Third siting: Corner of Main and Bedford in front of the Courthouse at a four way stop. I take my turn then start to pull out. HOLY SHIT! Here come this big ass while MASSIVE Trumpo brodozer the size of a freakin' house. BWAAAHHHHH, massive Dick cuts in front of my shitty little commie Prius. HAUL ASS, HAUL ASS FOR AMERICAAAHHH!
Fuckers.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Yeah I’m sure the pillow guy would of been perfect at leading the fight against the virus or the other idiot who wanted herd immunity at a cost of 20million dead Americans, so let’s ruin the career of a scientist who has spent 40 + years fighting viruses this country is a shithole!
Comments
This is why I made the hero comment... if you're going to act like someone, you should be prepared for people to call you out on it.
https://www.instyle.com/news/dr-fauci-says-with-all-due-modesty-i-think-im-pretty-effective
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
www.headstonesband.com
& we also already have the anger towards our own leaders and scientists (as evidenced in this very thread), so back to my point from yesterday: what will change if it comes out that this actually did originate in a lab?
In fairness to him, I'm not sure what evidence he is citing. So maybe there was evidence for that. But there also seems to have been evidence to the contrary. Meaning both theories should've been in play. So to lean "very, very strongly" one way in May 2020 seems disingenuous. Especially considering he's familiar with the experiments being done at the Wuhan lab.
As for downplaying unproven and scary theories. I don't see what's so scary about the theory that it could've originated by a lab error. I think it's scarier to think there's disease-ridden bats biting people and that caused a worldwide pandemic.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
There is ample evidence of zoonotic diseases, particularly coronaviruses, being transmitted from bats to humans. That's not new. You're looking at this from the benefit of hindsight, but really given the history of virology from the standpoint of knowledge in May 2020 it was far more likely that this was a natural zoonotic disease.
And I think it's naive to think that the average person wouldn't react more strongly to the fact that a highly infectious disease was "created" in a lab and got loose, either accidentally or deliberately, than the idea that it could have could have come from a wild animals.
Fauci standing up, getting fired, or quitting are all hypothetical scenarios so my opinion is based on my hypothetical - what if he or they stood up and 400,000 lives were saved? They’re both what if’s so both are just a matter of opinion. When it comes to adults I’m more of a glass 1/2 empty person. Children - 100% glass totally full! There’s nothing like a child’s honesty before they’re ruined by adults. I’m just not convinced the guy (Fauci) isn’t loving his 15 minutes a bit too much! Don’t yell at me because I do respect his knowledge, no questions there...I think I just question his, well all their morale compasses.
www.headstonesband.com
I'm not necessarily buying the "rational" part today
The large number of science fiction and horror movies and books about diseases escaped from labs tells us something about how terrifying people find this idea.
www.headstonesband.com
We live in a country where over 50% of one of our two major political parties think the election was stolen from Trump. No wonder Fauci was careful about what he did and didn't put out publicly last year.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Trizzy hitting the road again! Mmmm, hate rallies...
www.headstonesband.com
-https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/04/fauci-attacks-personal-conspiratorial-491896
Attacks on Fauci grow more intense, personal and conspiratorial
Conservatives are amplifying attacks on Fauci after the release of his emails. And they’re fundraising off of it too.
Reddit and Facebook lit up with a fresh round of Fauci attacks, some of which called him a war criminal. | Sarah Silbiger/AP Photo
For over a year, Anthony Fauci has been a bogeyman for conservatives, who have questioned his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic and accused him of quietly undermining then-President Donald Trump.
But those attacks took on a whole new level of vitriol this week, to the point that one social media analysis described it as highly misleading and at least one platform pulled down some posts, citing false content.
It all stemmed from a tranche of Fauci’s emails that were published as part of a Freedom of Information Act request filed by various news outlets. Within hours of publication, the hashtag #FauciLeaks was trending on Twitter, accusing the nation’s top infectious disease doctor of lying under oath about the origins of Covid. It became a trending topic on Facebook too, where detractors added an inaccurate and more nefarious framing that the emails were secretly “leaked” — drawing on a playbook that has worked for partisans on the right in the past, despite the fact that Fauci's publicly disclosed emails were not state secrets.
Reddit and Facebook lit up with a fresh round of Fauci attacks, some of which called him a war criminal. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), perhaps Fauci’s most prominent bete noire on the Hill, quickly released Facebook ads demanding to “fire Fauci” and requesting a campaign donation.
And a round of conservatives, cherry-picking individual emails out of more than 3,000, argued that Fauci, who leads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, had privately supported a theory that the virus leaked from a Chinese lab and lied about masks in an effort to amass political power. Neither was true. Fauci has said he thinks it’s more likely that the virus spread from animal to human but would not rule out a lab leak, and while he initially downplayed the need for masks, it was, he said, out of fear that medical professionals would lose access to them if the public began panic purchasing.
The veracity and velocity of the new attacks, nevertheless, underscored the growing intensity with which Fauci animates conservatives some five months after Trump has left office. And they raised difficult questions for political and medical professionals about how much they should push back on the anti-Fauci campaign and what the cost would be if it went ignored.
“Targeting Fauci erodes trust in scientific institutions and makes them seem partisan – just as universities are increasingly seen as partisan, the media, the bureaucracy,” said Karen Kornbluh, senior fellow and director of GMF Digital at the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. “These strategies don’t have an easy response. You try to ignore them when they're not that widespread and even if you eventually refute them it can seem he said-she said. The best strategy — which the White House and Fauci seem to be taking — is to push ahead with an alternate positive narrative and action — in this case around vaccinations.”
For the White House, this has created a quandary: to defend Fauci from the incoming and risk elevating it, or to ignore it and assume it only gains traction with an audience that would never trust the Biden administration anyway.
On Thursday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki called Fauci an “undeniable asset” but said the White House would let him speak for himself. In an interview later in the day, Rob Flaherty, the White House’s digital director, would not directly comment on Fauci but said that while the White House regularly pushes back on false information it must also balance out whether its response will exacerbate false information or quash it.
Fauci declined to comment for this piece.
Career government officials don’t often become political lightning rods. But Fauci’s role, the crisis in which he has operated, and the flow of information on social media, has created the perfect conditions for just that. A mild-mannered infectious disease specialist who has earned the admiration of Republican and Democratic presidents alike, Fauci is prone to bluntness. That has served him well as someone communicating to the public about complex and high-stakes pandemics and public health issues. But, starting in the spring of 2020, it has made his life tricky.
Trump insisted that he and Fauci worked fine together. But in the early days of the pandemic, the former president rarely hid his jealousy as Fauci became something of a public deity. Often Trump would proclaim that his judgments on Covid proved more prescient over time, like an early call to shut down travel from China. But Trump also routinely flouted the public safety guidelines that Fauci touted and their divergent approaches became an emblem for the then-president’s much criticized pandemic response, writ large.
The publication of Fauci’s emails only further animated Trump’s animus.
“After seeing the emails, our Country is fortunate I didn’t do what Dr. Fauci wanted me to do. For instance, I closed our Borders to China very early despite his not wanting them closed. The Democrats and the Fake News Media even called me a ‘xenophobe,’” Trump said in a statement Thursday. “In the end, we saw this was a life-saving decision, and likewise with closing our borders to Europe, specifically to certain heavily infected countries. I was later given credit, even by ‘Tony,’ for saving hundreds of thousands of lives.”
Trump’s attack was not particularly pointed compared to the others that have come Fauci’s way in recent days.
ccording to data from Bully Pulpit Interactive, Republicans or conservative interests over the last month have spent $300,000 on Facebook ads targeting Fauci.
Nearly seven years ago, during the heart of the Ebola crisis, the Obama administration’s internal motto for handling challenging stretches was “PTFOTV”: Put Tony Fauci on TV. No one had more credibility with the public or was a better spokesperson, said Ron Klain, who acted as Ebola czar under Obama and now serves as Biden’s chief of staff.
But in an ever-polarized nation, Fauci too has fallen victim to tribalism. His advocacy for mask wearing and social distancing — in the face of Trump’s opposition — was met by vocal detractors across the country, who launched anti-mask protests and demanded the economy reopen. His conservative predictions about the pace of vaccine development and the timeline for reopening the country led to criticism that his expertise had been dramatically overstated.
But the attacks on Fauci have increasingly veered into the conspiratorial, experts say. This week, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson questioned why one of the emails involving Fauci was redacted, then speculated that it could mean Fauci was under investigation.
“Republicans employed the same attempts to divide and distract the American people in 2020. We know that these strategies don't work,” said Aneesa McMillan, deputy executive director of Priorities USA, a top Democratic super PAC. “The American people are looking for a concrete policy agenda that speaks to their priorities and improves their communities. The GOP has none of that — so they turn to fear-mongering and misinformation.”
At the heart of the current broadside against Fauci is reporting around — and the investigation into — the Wuhan lab leak theory, which holds that the virus leaked, accidentally or intentionally, from a virology lab in the city where it was first found. Republicans and right-wing media outlets have circulated such theories since the beginning of the pandemic even as scientists, including Fauci, insisted that problematic coronaviruses, from the SARS and MERS epidemics to Covid-19, were becoming increasingly common.
The pressure to probe Wuhan lab leak theories continued to mount, leading Trump’s White House to demand in April 2020 that the National Institutes of Health abruptly cancel a multimillion-dollar grant to EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit studying coronavirus origins that had worked with the Wuhan viral lab in the past. April emails between EcoHealth Alliance CEO Peter Daszak and Fauci, published as part of the recent FOIA, have become a new touchstone for conspiracy theorists, after Daszak thanked the NIAID director for dismissing lab leak theories early in the pandemic.
“I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Daszak wrote to Fauci on April 18, 2020.
“Many thanks for your kind note,” Fauci responded the next day, just over a week before POLITICO first reported that NIH canceled the EcoHealth grant. Daszak did not respond to a POLITICO request for comment.
Theories about a leak from the Wuhan virology lab became a consistent line of questioning for Republican lawmakers by last spring and soon turned into a mainstay of congressional hearings and increasingly contentious exchanges between Fauci and Paul, who sits on the Senate health committee. The longtime NIAID director and Kentucky doctor have exchanged barbs on television after Senate hearings where Paul accused Fauci of moving the goalposts on coronavirus science while the infectious disease scientist has told Paul that “with all due respect,” he was “entirely and completely incorrect.”
Paul was swift to accuse Fauci on Wednesday of knowledge of the Wuhan lab allegedly carrying out controversial “gain-of-function” studies, a field of research that alters viruses in a way that can make them more transmissible or help them hop to new hosts, such as humans.
A senior NIH official insisted to POLITICO that detractors such as Paul are taking Fauci’s emails “out of context.” But the prevailing posture, like that of the White House, was to downplay rather than engage.
“The FOIA articles are discussed like any other issues and then we move on,” the official said. “We're taking it seriously, of course, but it's not changing how we do business or our focus.”
Erin Banco contributed to this repor
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
2. Given that the source is still unproven to this day, and given the rising hate crimes against Asians (often due to Trump's own rhetoric), it's understandable why Fauci would feel a responsibility to combat that image. Isn't "innocent until proven guilty" a tenet of American society?
3. When asked if protests should happen, I remember Fauci saying only if they could be managed with proper social distancing measures put in place, and with an understanding of the risks. I recall him commenting on how this was the case because the right to protest peacefully is a core element of American society. Is any of this controversial?
Ultimately, if you look for warts on any individual, you'll find them. Just my opinion - but I don't think these warrant a loss of trust.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1