First of all, my thoughts and prayers are with the dozens of security cameras and police body cams that would have captured what happened at Pelosi’s house if only they had not all malfunctioned at the exact same time.
I want to start with something about Ivermectin because I know everyone secretly misses arguing with fascist psychos about totally inert medicines.
CNN was really at the forefront of endangering people’s lives with science-denier medical disinformation. I personally don’t really think Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine work that well. Maybe they do. But if I ever got COVID I would gladly take them because, who cares, they are both totally inert and not dangerous at all, so why not. It’s like taking echinacea. Maybe it does nothing but whatever.
But CNN’s coverage of Ivermectin was not inert and it actually was a threat to the lives of Americans. They called it horse medicine which is not true. Why? Because they were talking about the human formulation that people like Joe Rogan took which is not horse medicine. Now they will say that it is also used as horse medicine and that is false. The human formulation of Ivermectin is NOT used on horses.
So when CNN tells its viewers that the human formulation is also used on horses, what they are really telling their viewers is that these two substances, human Ivermectin and horse Ivermectin, are the same, which is the exact sort of thing that would cause people to think it’s okay to take veterinary Ivermectin, which is not okay.
Basically CNN was telling people that it’s okay to go to Tractor Supply and buy the horse paste and use it because it’s the same as the drug you doctor might prescribe you. So that’s actual dangerous disinformation. I am annoyed that no one else has made this argument given all of the coverage.
Anyways, David French just wrote an extremely retarded piece about how we need to have a nuclear war over the Donbas Region and the logic is so flawed I thought it would be useful to dissect it.
The thing you will notice through the article, titled ‘The Diabolical Logic of Nuclear Blackmail’, is that it is utopian single-factor analysis that totally excludes cost benefit assessments just like the COVID regime.
Here’s the first quote:
“But why would we stop supplying Ukraine? At present American aid to Ukraine (roughly $54 billion, including close to $14 billion in direct military assistance) represents one of the most cost-effective security investments in modern American history.”
First you have your Shyster Alert System sirens going off because of the word “investments” which is the known Marxist code word for profligate central government imbecility. But it’s much more dumb than just that. Pursuing this path has already resulted in the near total destruction of Ukraine. Is destroying the rest of Ukraine worth it in order to make sure Zelensky runs Donbas as opposed to Putin running Donbas? I don’t know. But you kinda have to factor in ‘total destruction of a country’ when you are assessing costs.
Not mentioning the fact that you have totally destroyed a country and kinda crashed the global economy in addition to the $54 billion, when describing the costs, is like saying how much your trip to Mexico cost without including what you spent on drugs and alcohol and without mentioning that you broke both legs and got AIDS.
Also, the idea that these utopian internationalist imbeciles are actually bragging about the wisdom of their strategy when their strategy has already destroyed a nation and brought us to the brink of nuclear exchange……….it’s truly galling. “Oh look at how shrewd we are with our Warren Buffet-like $54 billion investment. We are so wise!!” Fucking morons. It’s like telling your wife the fireworks were a great investment when you just burned the house down with the fireworks and you are currently facing criminal charges that could send you away for life. Oh yes, David, what a bargain!!
But there are 1,000 other reasons why it’s intellectual rape to claim that the cost is $54 billion. First of all, we know that number will keep going to hundreds of billions in the best case scenario, which is an endless war. Unfortunately, there is also the scenario where the $54 billion causes, ya know, $60 trillion in losses, plus a decade of global economic depression, when there is a nuclear exchange. Bit of an oversight, ehh? Forgetting to mention that you might create an unparalleled global catastrophe with your little $54 billion “investment”? Probably should include that.
Next quote:
“House progressives fortunately faced an immediate backlash from their own party and hours later climbed down. They retracted the letter. Good. But I wonder. How much damage was done? Does Vladimir Putin now see sufficient cracks in the American coalition to press his perceived advantage?”
Oh are you worried about Vladimir Putin pressing his advantage when he sees cracks??? Are you worried about that, David? YOU ELECTED BIDEN. This is literally all happening because you and a bunch of feckless fucking cocksucking pussies elected Joe Biden as revenge because Trump made you sad. And so Biden won and Putin saw “cracks” and here we are. You, David, and your friends, are the crackheads who created theses “cracks” with your juvenile and frivolous allegiance to Joe Biden’s transparently fake empathy and his Pharisee-style faux decency. And so now we are here. Congratulations, you dangerous buffoon.
Also worth noting David’s not-so-sneaky fascist orientation as he celebrates the withdrawal of a letter written by elected representatives, because they received enormous pressure, which we will never know the extent of, from people who are NOT the ones they were elected to represent. Super creepy and gross.
Next quote:
“This, friends, is one reason why we pray for our presidents. This is one reason why it is Grade A idiocy and lunacy to argue—as so very many people now do—that character is somehow optional in leaders. Only “policy” matters. But consider the sheer amount of wisdom, prudence, and intelligence required in this moment.”
I don’t think I’ve even seen such judgmental preening from someone who is accidentally explaining why they are dumb at the same time. Consider the sheer amount of wisdom and prudence required?? Yes but why are we in this tricky spot allegedly requiring wisdom and prudence?? Oh that’s right it’s because you ELECTED JOE BIDEN…….who by the way totally lacks wisdom and prudence, you preening dickwad.
I just imagine David convincing his wife to have a pack of raccoons babysit the kids because he doesn’t trust the family dog to babysit. Understandable to not trust the dog but you’ve chosen raccoons as the alternative. So they come home and of course the raccoons have destroyed everything and David says
“No, honey, this is where my raccoon plan really starts to work!! I have chosen the raccoons for such a time as this!! We must rely on their wisdom and prudence now. In fact, not relying on the raccoons at this critical juncture is pro-Putin!!”
It’s just astonishing to watch this guy operate. Biden is the only man alive who is wrong with greater frequency and aggression.
So how is all of this like ‘Zero COVID’? Well, first and foremost, it is utopian idiocy. It is an ideological belief that the world should be a certain way and *no matter the cost* we must pursue that ideal with government force. So far all they’ve done is destroy a country which is still going to be right next door to Putin’s Russia no matter what, with the added benefit of nuclear exchange being on the table.
Oh but they are fighting for Ukraine because they love and respect Ukraine………..which has been destroyed.
But the real ‘Zero COVID’ part of this is their stated objective. They want to “stay in the fight” to send a message to deter other bad actors who might get bad ideas from bad Putin. Okay so we have destroyed a country and killed 100,000 people and created an energy crisis that is going to get way worse, all because we are hoping that this will maybe send a message to specific Asian people who have totally lost their minds and possibly influence them to not do anything nutty? Now THAT is the foreign policy version of closing the schools for two years because it might just save one life. Same thought process. A benefit which is difficult to determine and vague vs. a cost which is extraordinary and potentially catastrophic.
As I said on the day of the invasion, before everything was destroyed and all of the people died and/or fled, we should give Putin the Donbas and turn Eastern Europe into a weapons depot. You don’t want deterrence to fail, that’s why you don’t elect Biden. But when it fails, the worst available option is getting in a slap fight with a crazy person who has nukes.
And obviously I’m not willing to hear any criticism of my approach because we *didn’t do it*. So you’re just speculating that my approach wouldn’t go well, as opposed to the disastrous reality right in front of us which came as a result of the opposite approach. It’s possible my approach would have gone worse, but I don’t see how.
I needed this today. Thanks!
It’s not “temperate”, but there are times when you (that is, I) really need to hear the forthright expression of indignant astonishment at the perilous mess we’re in. Thank you.