• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Really annoying to see folks defend this guy when he was famously shit at his job going all the way back to the 1980s.

    Nevermind his more recent boneheaded proclamation that masks don’t prevent disease spread.

    Rand Paul is an absolute parasite, a crank, and a neo-confederate pos. But because he lives in the No Man’s Land between Red MAGA and Blue MAGA (along with a handful of other out-of-style reactionary shits like Massie and MTG), he’s the only Congressman who seems willing to get on a soapbox over this shit.

    Just like with his father, fearmongering over Social Security while denouncing the Iraq War. Or their spiritual ancestor Barry Goldwater suggested we perform nuclear strikes on Communist countries while criticizing the cost and risk of ground invasions.

    Annoying that we’re caught between Nixonian neoconservative Realpolitik and McCarthy Red-Baiters as the full scope of our political discourse. They’re both awful.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Nevermind his more recent boneheaded proclamation that masks don’t prevent disease spread.

      That was an attempt to get people to stop hoarding masks so that there would be enough for hospital workers etc. until production had a chance to ramp up. Deliberately trying to mislead the public like that was a bad idea in retrospect, but the goal behind it was good.

    • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Am I missing something because the link about masks seems to contradict what you are saying.

      From the link

      "Social media posts cite a February 2020 email in which Dr Anthony Fauci advised against mask use as evidence that face coverings do not prevent the spread of Covid-19. But the email from the top US infectious disease specialist reflected the consensus among health authorities early in the Covid-19 emergency, before it was determined that widespread mask use helps curb transmission of the disease. "

      • TheGoldenV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I’m just waking up, so not clearly understanding.

        From what I recall Feb 2020 was so early on that most people thought it was some nonsense limited to a far away land.
        I’d be surprised if anyone had any good choices right at the start. Very limited data to draw from.

        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Exactly, the article shows that he, like many others understood something, but that his opinions changed as time progressed?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        shrug It’s Factcheck.org so they put their own spin on it. But the fact that widespread mask use curbed transmission of disease was well established during the SARS and MERS outbreaks of prior years. Nevermind the well-known benefit against influenza, established at least as early as 2013.

        The claimed need for restraint was driven by Fauci’s belief that public demand would cut into professional medical supply. But this was largely an economic concern, not a medical one. Same shit we saw with the AIDS epidemic, where the Federal response was bungled with poor consideration of actual scientific study.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            7 hours ago

            He changed his tune when he received a bunch of push-back from the medical community.

            But by then the damage was done. Anti-maskers (and AIDS-fearmongers) continued to quote his original releases as evidence. Same as with the “Vaccines cause Autism” study that continues to be relentlessly flogged, long after it was thoroughly debunked.

            • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              7 hours ago

              He changed his tune when he received a bunch of push-back from the medical community.

              Isn’t that what science is about? Its a good thing no?

        • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Same shit we saw with the AIDS epidemic, where the Federal response was bungled with poor consideration of actual scientific study.

          Because Republicans rejoiced at the idea of a Gay Disease. They changed their mind when some in congress died from it.

    • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Alright let’s check that first link because that pretty interesting to hear he has a history of being bad. The source is the daily economy? Never heard of it but maybe they’re a reliable source I’m not familiar with.

      Let’s look at Wikipedia to see if they’re a trusted source… And they aren’t even listed… Ok I’ll proceed to assume this guy that’s been working on the government for 40 years, working across both D and R admins, who’s work had been some of the most cited in viral infections in the 2000s isn’t actually shit.