From the New York Times:
“In the pandemic’s early days, Dr. Fauci tended to cite the same 60 to 70 percent estimate that most experts did. About a month ago, he began saying “70, 75 percent” in television interviews. And last week, in an interview with CNBC News, he said “75, 80, 85 percent” and “75 to 80-plus percent….In a telephone interview the next day, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he had slowly but deliberately been moving the goal posts. He is doing so, he said, partly based on new science, and partly on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks. Hard as it may be to hear, he said, he believes that it may take close to 90 percent immunity to bring the virus to a halt — almost as much as is needed to stop a measles outbreak.“
No, what is hard to hear, though at this point hardly a shock to anyone with a functioning brain, is that Fauci now admits he’s been lying….you know, “for our own good.”
Don’t heed the spin, the double-talk and the euphemisms: when someone tells you something other than what he or she knows to be true or believes to be true, that individual is deliberately attempting to deceive you by communicating what they believe to be untrue as true. That’s lying. No debate. No defense. That’s what it is, by definition. “I did it for your own good” is a rationalization.
Now, lies can occasionally be judged ethical in according to non-absolutist ethical systems, like utilitarianism. However, lying is not an option for someone who has been held up for almost a year as the epitome of an expert representing “science,” who must be believed and slavishly obeyed by policymakers because, after all, scientists only convey cold hard facts. If that’s the basis for your authority, if that’s the reason the news media and the President-elect lecturing us about the virtues of obeying experts and following what the “science” says, no matter how difficult, painful and counter-intuitive it might be, then a high profile expert cannot, must not, and dare not announce later that he withheld facts for our own good. That’s not the role that we have been told anexpert fills. Not telling the public the truth for the greater good is a pubic servant’s tool, and one that is perilous to use at best. We do not expect politicians to always tell us the truth, and we even accept the troubling reality that sometimes they may be right not to tell us the truth. As Pelt, the character played by the late Richard Jordan in “The Hunt for the Red October” says,
“Listen, I’m a politician, which means I’m a cheat and a liar, and when I’m not kissing babies, I’m stealing their lollipops, but it also means that I keep my options open.“
But scientists, we have been told, over and over again, regarding climate change and the pandemic just to name two of the most egregious examples, aren’t politicians. They deal in facts only. They have no agendas, they aren’t shading or outright hiding the truth to manipulate us. We are told this by people arrogantly treating us like children and fools. Oh, you poor ignorant dolts who a skeptical of what these learned, good men and women know!
Right. Anthony Fauci, the current symbol of the integrity and reliability of science, lied to the public (and probably to policymakers: who can be sure?) by his own admission.
He cannot be trusted. He can never be trusted. And, having been held up as the unimpeachable representative of experts and science generally, they can’t be trusted either.
Of course, the news media will now excoriate him the way they attacked that habitual liar President Trump for admitting that he downplayed the pandemic to avoid panic.
No, of course they won’t. They won’t because just as “science” is too often used as a tool by “experts” to forward their agendas, experts are used as tools by the news media to advance theirs.
15 thoughts on “Ethics Dunce, Rogue And Fool To Be Held Up As An Example Forever More: Dr. Anthony Fauci”
Actually wore his mask on the pitcher’s mound, with nobody standing within 50-60 feet of him. But then took it off in the stands, while sitting right next to a friend.
Piece of human dreck can’t even do virtue signaling right.
Oh, come on, Jack. Those were and are all estimates. Some things in science are immutable. Some are like shifting sands and must be adjusted over time, especially anything that is a mere estimate. The virus was new. Now it’s not, but scientists and epidemiologists are far from knowing everything they need to know. In the meantime — are estimates useful? Heck if I know. Maybe he shouldn’t have made those statements. Maybe he thought at the times that he made them that they would be helpful for some people to know. Lying? I guess it’s possible. I guess it’s also possible that 45 is actually the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man left in the oven too long.
By the way, Merry Christmas!
Baloney. Epidemiology appears to be nothing but junk science. Here’s an epidemiologist on what he does:
“You tell me what numbers to put in my equations, and I’ll give you the answer,” said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “But you can’t tell me the numbers, because nobody knows them.”
Good to know.
But read the interview. If he says now that he deliberately didn’t tell the public what he really believed, estimate of not, then he’s admitting he was lying. You’re spinning for him.
The quotes from Fauci remind me of that “architect” of Obamacare who admitted to lying about it. These guys are arrogant menaces.
“that ‘architect’ of Obamacare who admitted to lying about it.”
We got Grubered©™® to beat $#!t….
Happy/Merry HoliChanaKwanzaRamaPanchaFestivasGanapatiSolstisMas Days!
This is the same as Fauci claiming throughout March that masks were not effective in preventing spread. Trump suggested they provide advice to use a scarf, but that messaging isn’t what went out.
I don’t see any reason to trust this guy when he doesn’t understand that there are tens of millions of sewing machines and crafty Americans that can make masks with supplies already in their homes before the next shipment of N95s leaves China.
Of course, Jack will excoriate that habitual liar Donald Trump the way he did Anthony Fauci for admitting that he downplayed the amount of herd immunity required to end the pandemic.
No he won’t.
And I don’t give the President of the United States leeway to lie just because he’s a politician. People remain hungry and on the verge of homelessness because of his lies.
I don’t characterize Trump as a habitual liar, but you definitely have a point here. Most of the things I heard Trump denouncing were undoubtedly things his administration requested for the spending bill and had worked out with Congress.
Now whether these things are the best use of our foreign aid money — that’s a different debate but one that few people are really interested in having, it seems to me.
If the Congressional leaders had passed separate appropriations and Covid relief bills and sent them to Congress, they could have stood or fallen on their own. It’s been, what, generations since Congress routinely passed appropriation bills for the various departments before the start of the fiscal year.
And, on a side note, if we are so obligated to say Covid and not coronavirus or Chinese virus or whatever — why does my spell checker still flag only the word ‘Covid’?
You’re right, I won’t, and didn’t. Presidents are leaders, and leaders make those judgments, routinely. That’s part of their toolbox as leaders. Scientist are not leaders. They are professionals whose job is to find and reveal the truth to the extent they know it. Winston Churchill didn’t divulge to the British public how dire their situation was, and it was the right decision.
I would like to ask Representative Gozalez who is cited in the link provided why the State of Ohio or other states are not extending UE benefits or extending loans to citizens hard hit by the edicts of local politicians. Unemployment benefits is a state issue; they make the rules on eligibility and amounts received. This representative also complained that the eviction ban would expire leaving millions at risk of becoming homeless. I believe that landlord – tenant issues are a state court issue not a federal one so why doesn’t the Ohio legislature pass a bill to effect the outcome of no evictions? Why doesn’t this Congressman demand that property taxes on rentals affected by the no eviction rule be waived because of the conditions created by the various governors. I own one rental property in MD and I have to pay 17.5 % of that rental income to the property tax collectors. Every expense on that property not covered by rental income reduces my retirement income by that amount. Rents are time based so I can never make that lost income up. I also have to pay separate fees to both the state and city to register the property as a rental unit. Why are these fees not waived? I have been lucky my tenant was not furloughed. Nonetheless that property will be going up for sale next week and the occupants will need to find other housing in the near future. These are the outcomes of the possibility of such future edicts.
I really want to know why every person should get free money when only about 10-12% of the WORKING population are put out of work because of the rules established by local politicians on the advice of unelected but still paid public health officials? Why are state and local politicians so fearful of using their power to tax later income so they may provide for it citizen’s needs today. The answer is that we believe the federal government will never, during our lifetime, have raise taxes to pay back the debt we are running up today. What we are saying to future generations is that our wants outweigh any fairness to them.
Do you really believe that an working school teacher making as much as 90 grand a year should get any free money from the Federal government whether it is $600 or $ 2000 and if so why now and not every year from here on out. Here is an idea why not tell suppliers, retailers and landlords to cut their prices in half that will effectively double people’s incomes.
It is likely that Trump is vetoing Republican initiatives but without knowing which Congressman or woman added the pork it cannot be said that Trump scuttled things he wanted. We know a great deal about what is in the Covid Relief bill and over 80% has nothing to do with Covid relief. That means that technically the bill is being sold as a lie by Congress.
As to whether Trump lied early on about the pandemic is debatable. His initial inclination was ridiculed by Fauci and Birx where they stated unequivocally that a travel ban from China was unwarranted. That desire was, of course, the new basis of media claims that Trump is a racist.
Trump takes information provided to him and makes the call. He is responsible for sorting through the thousands of documents, making multi-faceted assessments, and decides the best course of action based on his understanding of the issues. You can question his judgement but to to say he lied without saying that he knew that his advisors which included Fauci and Birx also lied to him and include them in the not to be trusted group is disingenuous.
And yet, one of “them” has just been elected President. God help us all.
This just makes me even more angry with Fauci. We don’t — or shouldn’t — hire scientists to tell us what they think would make us happy or comfortable. We hire them to tell us the truth, whether it is palatable or not.
This is similar to what some of the climate change scientists did. When it is documented (or you admit) that you’ve been lying to the public, why should we then believe anything you say or have said? It is one thing to change your mind as more evidence accumulates — that’s actually how science is supposed to work. But to deliberately mislead us? No.
How are we supposed to ‘follow the science’ when the science is lying through its teeth?
The public — and our leaders — need the most accurate information to decide on a course of action. If we get that and subsequently decide not to follow the scientist’s recommendations 100%, well they’ve still done their job to inform us.
Look back at Winston Churchill in a truly existential time for his nation. He fed his countrymen the raw, unvarnished, unpalatable truth — and then led them to overcome all those obstacles. I recall one of his phrases — ‘If necessary, for years. If necessary … alone.’
Not everyone can be Winston Churchill, but I think we can aspire to be Harry Truman.
That video is even better the second time — you hear about some horses you didn’t pick up on the first time around, like Toilet Paper and My Bank Account…..
Hope whoever did that made a bit of money from it. 🙂