Friday, June 4, 2021

The Refuge Of A Scoundrel?

I'm disappointed. I thought I could rush this post out and be the first to draw the parallel, but I've seen others have done so already. I guess it was just too obvious.

In Fauci's interview with Rachel Maddow he claimed that "attacks" on him--by which word it seems he means all criticism of him--are "very much attacks on science." And, he claims, the people criticizing him--including, we presume, Doctor Rand Paul--are taking an "anti-science approach." Senator Paul, of course, has an M.D. from the Duke University School of Medicine.

We've all heard of people wrapping themselves in the flag to avoid accountability. That certainly seems to be what Fauci is attempting. It's nonsensical and quite pathetic. It's also quite transparent and smacks of desperation.

Here's the Breitbart account:

On Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” White House Chief Medical Adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci stated that the recent criticisms of him are “really very much an attack on science,” and “the thread going through what’s happening now is very much an anti-science approach.”

Host Rachel Maddow asked, “Am I building you up to be thicker-skinned about this than you are? Are you actually worried about this new sort of re-upping of attacks on you?”

Fauci responded, “Well, I’m concerned about that, more because it’s really very much an attack on science, I think, Rachel.”

He then discussed his conflicts with AIDS activists in the past, and stated that those activists “were fundamentally good people. They were not anti-science. What is — the thread going through what’s happening now is very much an anti-science approach. ..."




  1. Mr. Wizard meets PeeWee's Playhouse, Part Deux. Or, if you prefer, the Peter Principle meets the Dunning-Kruger Effect. This is so pathetic that Fauci makes Bill Nye look good. How can this person, the highest-paid official in the U.S. federal government, be so stupid as to assume that we, the general public, are so stupid? He is a sad indictment of what our government has become and a tragic example of the damage it is now capable of doing. In the end, in the best case, that will have been his only positive purpose.

    1. @diss

      Not necessarily. Reason it out. If you were going to set up a criminal enterprise masquerading as the federal government (or more precisely, take over the federal government and turn it into a criminal enterprise), what sort of person would you choose to occupy the positions of influence and power? *Exactly* this kind of Fauci troglodyte. I submit that the federal government must be filled of necessity by such tools in order to make the bloated bureaucracy yield up the benefits to the Oligarchy.


  2. What a liar and coward. But I'm sure he takes these as compliments to his "intellect".