Following the Science Seems like a Good Idea

January 5, 2022

Vaccines are not just a good idea, they could save your life. Yet, there remains an astonishing Republican appetite for killing their own.

Below, Ron Johnson, climate and covid denier, at it again.

Raw Story:

During an interview with WCPT, Johnson said that vaccine scientists are wrong to think that they “can create something better than God.”

The Wisconsin Republican recalled that he had tested positive for Covid-19 last year while being free of symptoms.

“Why would we just automatically assume that our natural immunity is going to be awful?” he ranted. “You would think the default position would be, if you’ve already had it, you ought to be pretty well protected. Why do we assume that the body’s natural immune system isn’t the marvel that it really is?”


6 Responses to “Following the Science Seems like a Good Idea”

  1. mboli Says:

    Ron Johnson has just solved the prescription drug cost problem!

    No need for antibiotics for infections, nsaids for pain or inflammation, ACE inhibitors for high blood pressure, and so on. Mother nature’s immune response, endorphins, baroreceptor reflex, and so on are much more effectful than anything mere humans could devise.

    All ye with severe allergies: cast away your epi-pens! Do not be so haughty as to try to improve on your God-given anaphylaxis reaction.

  2. neilrieck Says:

    The why do religious politicians continue to support the American defense industry to the tune of more than $700B per year? What about that quote from Isaiah 2:3-4

    quote: they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation

  3. Bryson Brown Says:

    There’s something happening here… But I suppose it’s been happening for a long time (cf. Richard Hofstadter, “The paranoid style in American Politics,” 1964), but once again (cf. Joseph McCarthy) it’s become the front-operation/advertising for the Republican Party (a successful conspiracy against the public interest, if ever there was one…).

  4. mboli Says:

    The problem with the tweet at the core of this article is that the title and interpretation are lying clickbait.

    The graph does not show whether practices in a state “followed” or “politicized” the science. It shows states where the vote share of Trump + Jorgensen exceeded the share of Biden.

    Further note the somewhat unobvious measure to color the states red vs. blue. It is a good indication that Boslough played around and picked the formulation which was most visually striking.

    Why add in the libertarian candidateinstead of the more usual: who won the state. Why add in only the libertarian candidate, but not other 3rd party candidates? Why convert the quantitative measure to a categorial blue or red? Why vote totals for president, as opposed to, say, composition of legislature?

    It should have been enough for Boslough to frame and publicize his results honestly.

    It is unfortunate that @greenman picked up and repeated the title about “following the science”, rather than framing it about political leanings.

    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      Yeah, they don’t politicize science, they ignore it. The whole point was to make the Dem president fail.

      Cleek’s Law

      Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: