Tag Archives: party

Bad Medicine: Fauci’s HCQ Waterloo

Dr. Anthony Fauci has been hailed in the press as the nation’s top infectious disease expert.  He’s been feted with presidential honors and high praise for his medical acumen.  His policy disagreements with President Trump, supposedly as the voice of “science,” have made him a hero on the left.  Such laurels and the implied power conveyed have led to some weird side-effects — such as his image featured on ladies’ underwear and declarations that he’s the sexiest man alive.

He’s still being posterized on the left with calls to “Thank Dr. Fauci.”  Here’s one:

Screenshot, banner ad.

Fauci: The Bernie Mado…
Ortleb, Charles
Buy New $5.99
(as of 02:55 EDT – Details)

But it’s about time this idol topples, based on this summary about Fauci’s startlingly bad medicine and bad medical policy on COVID, which has in fact cost thousands of lives.  And yes, he is very specifically to blame.

Virologist Steven Hatfill, writing in RealClearPolitics, summed up just how disastrous Fauci has been for America’s COVID response, based on Fauci’s suppression of evidence about hydroxychloroquine, the safest and most effective treatment for COVID based on all reputable studies, and the political power he’s used to halt its treatment even as the rest of the world got well from the inexpensive medication’s use.

The “Fauci Strategy” was to keep early infected patients quarantined at home without treatment until they developed a shortness of breath and had to be admitted to a hospital. Then they would they [sic] be given hydroxychloroquine. The Food and Drug Administration cluelessly agreed to this doctrine and it stated in its hydroxychloroquine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that “hospitalized patients were likely to have a greater prospect of benefit (compared to ambulatory patients with mild illness).”

Plague: One Scientist…
Mikovits, Judy
Best Price: $29.55
Buy New $17.99
(as of 04:10 EDT – Details)

In reality just the opposite was true. This was a tragic mistake by Fauci and FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn and it was a mistake that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in the days to come.

Other countries got well from COVID.  But America didn’t.  America today is still floundering around on lockdowns, re-lockdowns, its schools shut, its election growing dubious.  And the persistence of the pandemic can directly be traced to the incompetent, bad medical decisions of Dr. Anthony Fauci, which have left America a COVID wasteland while the rest of the world got well.

Read the Whole Article

Charges Dismissed in Prosecution for Re-Tweeting Request to Identify Police Officer

Once Marginalized, Homeschooling Hits the Mainstream

DIY approaches to education—including homeschooling, learning pods, and microschools—are gaining popularity as public schools fold under pressure.

| 8.7.2020 1:30 PM

You can read the rest of this article at: https://reason.com/2020/08/08/charges-dismissed-in-prosecution-for-re-tweeting-request-to-identify-police-officer/

Will the Marks Rule Inter Two of Justice Kennedy’s Decisions from OT 2015?

At the end of Blue June, I wrote that the Roberts Court was slowly interring Justice Kennedy’s ephemeral “Jurisprudence of Doubt.” Specifically, the Court buried Boumediene, Whole Woman’s Health, and Trinity Lutheran Footnote 3.

Now, an Eighth Circuit panel has used the so-called Marks Rule to find that there were five votes in June Medical to overrule the cost/benefit framework from Whole Woman’s Health. In effect, WWH overruled Casey in part, and June Medical restored the Casey framework. When abortion caselaw reaches the Supreme Court, the Chief could credibly argue that part of WWH is already overruled, and that Casey is the governing precedent–only burdens, and not benefits will be considered. That sort of holding would be so confusing that no one would really understood what happened. I don’t envy newspaper headline writers: Roberts Court upholds Roe and Casey, but finds that June Medical already overruled Whole Woman’s Health.

I think the Chief will pull a similar move on affirmative action. Fisher II was decided by a seven-member Court. Justice Kagan recused, and Justice Scalia passed away. The majority had only four votes. In the Barnett/Blackman casebook, we pose the question of what is the value of a four-member majority? Not much. Indeed, Fisher II effectively expanded upon Grutter. In a way, Fisher II overruled part of Grutter by watering down the strict scrutiny standard. Likewise, according to the Chief, WWH made a similar move, and overruled part of Casey by strengthening the standard of review. Arguably, Casey and Grutter without taking any further action to overrule precedent.

In July, I hinted at this future:

In short, the Chief’s judicial humility requires standing by decisions that he thinks lack humility. But only some of those decisions. Roberts will stand by Planned Parenthood v. Casey, but will not stand by Whole Woman’s Health. In the future, I suspect he will stand by Grutter v. Bollinger, but will not stand by Fisher v. University of Texas, Austin II. And so on.

And the Marks rule could help the Chief reach that conclusion. I am not sure where Justice Gorsuch would fall with this question. His Ramos opinion raised some difficult questions about stare decisis and the Marks rule. See my post from April.

You can read the rest of this article at: https://reason.com/2020/08/09/will-the-marks-rule-inter-two-of-justice-kennedys-decisions-from-ot-2015/