Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Reblogged:Whoppers to the Left, Whoppers to the Right

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I recently heard someone -- Kira Peikoff during an interview with Yaron Brook, I believe -- say to the effect that journalistic outlets on both "sides" of the political divide often display bias so blatantly as to be embarrassing.

And if my memory fails me on that score, someone should have said it: Yesterday, without even really looking for either of these, I found them -- examples from left and right -- on separate glances at my Twitter feed.

news.jpg
Instructions: (1) Read between the lines. (2) Ignore insults. (3) Consult other sources. (4) Actively apply your mind, knowledge, and experience to any claims of knowledge. (Image by Roman Kraft, via Unsplash, license.)
First, from the left came a nearly audible sigh of great relief at Joe Biden's timely remarks against the rioting. Up until that point, this had received his tacit support and was beginning to threaten his poll numbers. Even people I know not to be Democrats -- but, like me, wish there were a viable alternative to Trump in this election -- were praising the speech.

That sounds like something a Republican would say, I thought. Indeed, the Vice President had himself said something very similar previously. It is tempting to bring up Biden's history as a plagiarist, but what is much more relevant to this story are (1) the political pressure he was under, (2) the current policies of the Democrat-run jurisdictions where most of the rioting is happening, and (3) the very recent past behavior of his running mate. Kamala Harris has been encouraging people to bail rioters out of jail. (Knowing the revolving door policies of certain jurisdictions, I am amazed Harris even found such a measure necessary.)

So, yeah. Amazing speech -- if it was his, if he meant it, and if it ultimately makes sense in some future context.

Second, I found the latest dose of wishful thinking about the pandemic from the right: An obvious misinterpretation of a recent CDC report on the role of comorbidities in the pandemic has some people gloating to the effect that 94% of corona deaths are really due to something else. Naturally, President Trump buys into this, but I beg to differ:
The fundamental flaw of this new conspiracy theory is the assumption that the only "true" coronavirus deaths are ones that list only COVID-19 as the cause of death. But listing comorbidities alongside COVID-19 does not make those deaths any less attributable to the virus. Some of those comorbidities are caused by COVID-19; for instance, according to the CDC's data, more than 14,000 people died also of sepsis, which is known to develop in COVID-19 patients. And over 54,000 people -- around 30 percent of the total U.S. deaths -- have respiratory failure listed as a comorbidity; it's well established that COVID-19 causes major respiratory issues. [links omitted]
Cue embarrassment with claims such as those bolded. I looked at the report when I saw that claim -- which reminds me of the left's equally ridiculous claim that 97% of scientists are with them on global warming -- and recall thinking, The virus causes lots of these.

And speaking of embarrassing, let me call out that Slate article I just linked about that 94% baloney: I understand the temptation to use a term like "COVID-19 denier," but I'll again ask the question: "[W]hat [is] such a term is supposed to accomplish?" Sure, it applies to the people doing the cherry-picking. But to the people who are just looking for good news, or don't have the luxuries of a solid science background or time to unravel such things? This is alienating and so, harmful to the cause of truth.

(And this is especially so because the politicization of masks has all but made wearing one into a badge of allegiance to the immoral and unscientific policy of indefinite universal incarceration, aka "lockdowns." I wear a mask (and often a face shield) in public, but I have opposed lockdowns from the beginning.)

A Soviet-era saying played on the names of the news outlets of the Communist Party and the government, Pravda (meaning truth) and Iszvestiya (meaning news): "In Pravda there is no news, and in Izvestiya there is no truth." We have the same thing going now, although with some ability to use each side to debunk the other at the small price of the truth-seeker enduring insults.

May fellow advocates of liberty possess thick skins and great endurance while we find our voices.

-- CAV

Link to Original

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...