Democrat Liespeak Proves Orwell and Monroe got it right

Grokmaster

Well-known member
Contributor

It will be years before we undo the damage democrat policies and mandates and done to us, especially to our children.







Orwell and Monroe got it right

George Orwell, call your office. That’s my initial and slightly out-of-date response to news stories about the Biden administration’s efforts to stamp out “misinformation.” It’s an interesting irony that covert censorship should be undertaken enthusiastically by those who call themselves “liberal” or “progressive” and who claim the opposition would threaten the survival of liberal democracy.


But Democrats seem unembarrassed by his reelection campaign’s program for blocking “misinformation” on outfits like Facebook and Google. It’s being run, as my Washington Examiner colleague Byron York points out, by the same folks who systematically pressured social media “to curb the spread of misinformation” during the COVID pandemic.

Some of that pushback is designed to improve Biden’s dreadful job rating on the economy, and many in media are happy to help. As radio talk host Erick Erickson writes, “Every major news organization except Fox News has done multiple stories on how great the economy is.”

But as numbers cruncher Nate Silver points out, citing an egregious Washington Post story co-authored by reliable liberal cheerleader Taylor Lorenz using an apples-and-oranges comparison of McDonald’s, the administration line is contradicted by voters' own eyes and government statistics: inflation is up 16% and personal consumption expenditures up 25% since Biden took office. No American under 60 has experienced such inflation in their adult lifetimes, and they reasonably conclude that Biden’s gusher of government spending is at fault.

One reason is people have had some experience with the administration’s suppression of “misinformation” on COVID. Health officials Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins, for example, set about suppressing the theory that the pandemic resulted from a COVID virus leak from the lab in Wuhan, China, that their organizations had lavishly funded.

For a while, that suppression worked. The lab leak explanation was labeled a “conspiracy theory,” and no one went back to examine Fauci’s support of Wuhan’s virus-strengthening “gain-of-function” research. Only in the past year have intelligence agencies and some science reporters determined that the lab leak is the likely, though not proven, source of the pandemic.

The government also clamped down hard on “misinformation” about mandatory masking and extended lockdowns initiated in this country. Once again, inconvenient truths were suppressed.

Thus, in February 2023, a leading research institution, Britain’s Cochrane Library, released a study of 78 randomized control trials with 610,000 participants that concluded, as the lead researcher put it, “there is just no evidence” that masking “made any difference” in the transmission of COVID.

Similarly, “there was never any science behind lockdowns — not a single study had ever been undertaken to measure their efficacy in stopping a pandemic,” as Joseph Nocera and Bethany McLean write in New York magazine, in an excerpt from their new book The Big Fail.

~ There was little or no reporting on the ancillary results — undetected cancers, postponed surgeries, increased depression, and alcohol and drug abuse. Nocera and McLean point out that “excess deaths,” as compared to recent years, were up just 4% in no-lockdown Sweden, compared to 19% in the U.S.

Most negatively affected were children. Though it was clear from the beginning that COVID posed almost no risk to children, pressure from the teachers unions which staff and fund the Democratic Party resulted in extended school lockdowns and unenforceable mask mandates in Democratic constituencies.

These were hailed — perhaps at the urging of administration “misinformation” operatives — by writers in the New York Times: solidarity forever. But last week, as the New York Post gleefully notes, a New York Times editorial admitted, “the startling evidence on learning loss is in.”

~





https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/o...1&cvid=270573c6f3364564cb00047a3ba2ea8d&ei=15



22JULY21COLOR-jpg-1627510401.jpg
 
Opinion piece from The Washington Examiner which is a U.S. conservative news outlet based in Washington, D.C.
 
Guno צְבִי;5873166 said:
Opinion piece from The Washington Examiner which is a U.S. conservative news outlet based in Washington, D.C.

Well then, let's see you refute the points made and the FACTS CITED, instead the pussyass Saul Alinsky bullshit attempt to hide behind the publisher and source.
 
Guno צְבִי;5873166 said:
Opinion piece from The Washington Examiner which is a U.S. conservative news outlet based in Washington, D.C.

Guano, figure it out yet. Your "friends" are not your friends. They are in the street marching against you.
Stupid is as stupid does.
 

It will be years before we undo the damage democrat policies and mandates and done to us, especially to our children.







Orwell and Monroe got it right

George Orwell, call your office. That’s my initial and slightly out-of-date response to news stories about the Biden administration’s efforts to stamp out “misinformation.” It’s an interesting irony that covert censorship should be undertaken enthusiastically by those who call themselves “liberal” or “progressive” and who claim the opposition would threaten the survival of liberal democracy.


But Democrats seem unembarrassed by his reelection campaign’s program for blocking “misinformation” on outfits like Facebook and Google. It’s being run, as my Washington Examiner colleague Byron York points out, by the same folks who systematically pressured social media “to curb the spread of misinformation” during the COVID pandemic.

Some of that pushback is designed to improve Biden’s dreadful job rating on the economy, and many in media are happy to help. As radio talk host Erick Erickson writes, “Every major news organization except Fox News has done multiple stories on how great the economy is.”

But as numbers cruncher Nate Silver points out, citing an egregious Washington Post story co-authored by reliable liberal cheerleader Taylor Lorenz using an apples-and-oranges comparison of McDonald’s, the administration line is contradicted by voters' own eyes and government statistics: inflation is up 16% and personal consumption expenditures up 25% since Biden took office. No American under 60 has experienced such inflation in their adult lifetimes, and they reasonably conclude that Biden’s gusher of government spending is at fault.

One reason is people have had some experience with the administration’s suppression of “misinformation” on COVID. Health officials Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins, for example, set about suppressing the theory that the pandemic resulted from a COVID virus leak from the lab in Wuhan, China, that their organizations had lavishly funded.

For a while, that suppression worked. The lab leak explanation was labeled a “conspiracy theory,” and no one went back to examine Fauci’s support of Wuhan’s virus-strengthening “gain-of-function” research. Only in the past year have intelligence agencies and some science reporters determined that the lab leak is the likely, though not proven, source of the pandemic.

The government also clamped down hard on “misinformation” about mandatory masking and extended lockdowns initiated in this country. Once again, inconvenient truths were suppressed.

Thus, in February 2023, a leading research institution, Britain’s Cochrane Library, released a study of 78 randomized control trials with 610,000 participants that concluded, as the lead researcher put it, “there is just no evidence” that masking “made any difference” in the transmission of COVID.

Similarly, “there was never any science behind lockdowns — not a single study had ever been undertaken to measure their efficacy in stopping a pandemic,” as Joseph Nocera and Bethany McLean write in New York magazine, in an excerpt from their new book The Big Fail.

~ There was little or no reporting on the ancillary results — undetected cancers, postponed surgeries, increased depression, and alcohol and drug abuse. Nocera and McLean point out that “excess deaths,” as compared to recent years, were up just 4% in no-lockdown Sweden, compared to 19% in the U.S.

Most negatively affected were children. Though it was clear from the beginning that COVID posed almost no risk to children, pressure from the teachers unions which staff and fund the Democratic Party resulted in extended school lockdowns and unenforceable mask mandates in Democratic constituencies.

These were hailed — perhaps at the urging of administration “misinformation” operatives — by writers in the New York Times: solidarity forever. But last week, as the New York Post gleefully notes, a New York Times editorial admitted, “the startling evidence on learning loss is in.”

~





https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/o...1&cvid=270573c6f3364564cb00047a3ba2ea8d&ei=15



22JULY21COLOR-jpg-1627510401.jpg

And yet we've heard the misinformation over and over again. If Orwell was right, we wouldn't have heard anything.
 
Well then, let's see you refute the points made and the FACTS CITED, instead the pussyass Saul Alinsky bullshit attempt to hide behind the publisher and source.

Radical hyperpartisan sources cannot be trusted to be honest brokers of information and facts.

Get a more trustworthy source.
 
Radical hyperpartisan sources cannot be trusted to be honest brokers of information and facts.

Get a more trustworthy source.

He didn't post from WaPo or the Voice of the Reich (NY Times)

He used a legitimate source.

Of course you just use the this logical fallacy because you are unable to refute the facts. Ad Hom is all you have.
 
The deployment of massive lies and anti-truth is part of a well organized psychological war mission, which is winning and will continue to win.
 
Get a more trustworthy source.

how about this one.....
We included 12 trials (10 cluster‐RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full?utm_source=mp-fotoscapes
 
Back
Top