politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
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. "
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.
It was exactly that. I traveled to Mexico the last week of Feb, came back first week of March and the world was totally different.
What a fucked up week to be unplugged.
Exactly, the article shows that he, like many others understood something, but that his opinions changed as time progressed?
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.
But he changed his tune as data come about right?
Also known as "practicing good science"
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.
Isn't that what science is about? Its a good thing no?
Because Republicans rejoiced at the idea of a Gay Disease. They changed their mind when some in congress died from it.