SNL to Liberals: It’s OK To Question Nonsensical Mask Mandates


SNLCOVID3

The best Saturday Night Live sketches feel like funhouse-mirror versions of real life—echoes of conversations or situations we’ve experienced, but with comedic exaggerations. I mean, who hasn’t seen lobster on a menu in a diner and wondered: “Why?”

The best sketch in last night’s show, hosted by former SNL writer and recently out-of-rehab standup superstar John Mulaney, is a perfect example. It could have been yanked out of probably thousands of conversations around the country this week after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) finally loosened their guidelines for masking—guidelines that have been used to justify all sorts of local and state polices that often make little sense. Like, say, the rules in D.C. and several other major cities requiring you to wear a mask to enter a restaurant even though you’re going to take it off as soon as you sit down to eat.

That’s where the sketch begins, with six friends gathered for dinner. One of them, Keenan Thompson, is still wearing his mask when we join the group mid-conversation. After he removes it, fellow diner Heidi Gardner cautiously mentions an article she’d read suggesting that “mask mandates had, I don’t know, little to no effect on COVID.”

“It’s not like I’m anti-mask or anything,” Gardner quickly clarifies, “I just sometimes wonder if any of the things we did actually helped.”

That sets off a chain reaction around the table, with each member of the group rest of the table reacting in exaggerated, GIF-tastic horror—before slowly, even painfully admitting that they, too, are questioning the effectiveness of the pandemic theater that we’ve endured over the past two years.

It’s an unexpectedly subversive sketch from a show that rarely aims its fire these days at the liberal political consensus. It’s five minutes of saying aloud thoughts that a lot people have been condemning as off-limits.

Kate McKinnon’s character is “personally so relieved to be vaccinated” but then wonders aloud whether those who are vaccine-hesitant might not have a valid reason for refusing the shot? Mulaney timidly suggests that maybe “we”—read: the show’s liberal audience—have been too quick to demand that the unvaccinated lose their jobs and get shunned from public life.

From there, it becomes a rapid-fire unraveling of the logic behind much of what’s happened in the past year. Outdoor dining? “Oh, you mean when they built a smaller restaurant in the street, how is that outdoors?” asks Mulaney. The CDC’s ever-changing and confusing guidance? “When I make a mistake at work, I don’t get to say ‘the science changed,'” complains Thompson.

But it’s McKinnon who delivers the final blow with a long story about how she attended a child’s birthday party in which all the kids were masked while doing gymnastics—and then took off the masks to eat pizza.

“So did they really need the mask?” she says, looking like she’s about to vomit simply by stating the question out loud. “Did any of us ever need the mask?”

These are, of course, questions that a lot of us have been asking for months, even years. And while masking in some circumstances helps slow the spread of coronaviruses, it’s also true that mask mandates are mostly about virtue signaling and haven’t been shown to work. As McKinnon points out, there’s little logic behind masking in some settings and then immediately unmasking in the same setting. And officials’ disregard for their own COVID policies has only further demonstrated how silly many of these rules were in the first place.

Good on SNL for telling viewers that it’s fine to question, and to laugh at, all this.

The post <i>SNL</i> to Liberals: It's OK To Question Nonsensical Mask Mandates appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/lrf5Ed3
via IFTTT

SNL to Liberals: It’s OK To Question Nonsensical Mask Mandates


SNLCOVID3

The best Saturday Night Live sketches feel like funhouse-mirror versions of real life—echoes of conversations or situations we’ve experienced, but with comedic exaggerations. I mean, who hasn’t seen lobster on a menu in a diner and wondered: “Why?”

The best sketch in last night’s show, hosted by former SNL writer and recently out-of-rehab standup superstar John Mulaney, is a perfect example. It could have been yanked out of probably thousands of conversations around the country this week after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) finally loosened their guidelines for masking—guidelines that have been used to justify all sorts of local and state polices that often make little sense. Like, say, the rules in D.C. and several other major cities requiring you to wear a mask to enter a restaurant even though you’re going to take it off as soon as you sit down to eat.

That’s where the sketch begins, with six friends gathered for dinner. One of them, Keenan Thompson, is still wearing his mask when we join the group mid-conversation. After he removes it, fellow diner Heidi Gardner cautiously mentions an article she’d read suggesting that “mask mandates had, I don’t know, little to no effect on COVID.”

“It’s not like I’m anti-mask or anything,” Gardner quickly clarifies, “I just sometimes wonder if any of the things we did actually helped.”

That sets off a chain reaction around the table, with each member of the group rest of the table reacting in exaggerated, GIF-tastic horror—before slowly, even painfully admitting that they, too, are questioning the effectiveness of the pandemic theater that we’ve endured over the past two years.

It’s an unexpectedly subversive sketch from a show that rarely aims its fire these days at the liberal political consensus. It’s five minutes of saying aloud thoughts that a lot people have been condemning as off-limits.

Kate McKinnon’s character is “personally so relieved to be vaccinated” but then wonders aloud whether those who are vaccine-hesitant might not have a valid reason for refusing the shot? Mulaney timidly suggests that maybe “we”—read: the show’s liberal audience—have been too quick to demand that the unvaccinated lose their jobs and get shunned from public life.

From there, it becomes a rapid-fire unraveling of the logic behind much of what’s happened in the past year. Outdoor dining? “Oh, you mean when they built a smaller restaurant in the street, how is that outdoors?” asks Mulaney. The CDC’s ever-changing and confusing guidance? “When I make a mistake at work, I don’t get to say ‘the science changed,'” complains Thompson.

But it’s McKinnon who delivers the final blow with a long story about how she attended a child’s birthday party in which all the kids were masked while doing gymnastics—and then took off the masks to eat pizza.

“So did they really need the mask?” she says, looking like she’s about to vomit simply by stating the question out loud. “Did any of us ever need the mask?”

These are, of course, questions that a lot of us have been asking for months, even years. And while masking in some circumstances helps slow the spread of coronaviruses, it’s also true that mask mandates are mostly about virtue signaling and haven’t been shown to work. As McKinnon points out, there’s little logic behind masking in some settings and then immediately unmasking in the same setting. And officials’ disregard for their own COVID policies has only further demonstrated how silly many of these rules were in the first place.

Good on SNL for telling viewers that it’s fine to question, and to laugh at, all this.

The post <i>SNL</i> to Liberals: It's OK To Question Nonsensical Mask Mandates appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/lrf5Ed3
via IFTTT

‘Question All Of It’ – The Current Western Propaganda For Ukraine Is Epic In Scale

‘Question All Of It’ – The Current Western Propaganda For Ukraine Is Epic In Scale

Authored by ‘Sundance’ via TheConservativeTreeHouse.com,

When we shared yesterday that all interested observers should be very wary of the information from media sources around Ukraine, there was a reason for that.  Question everything. Take nothing at face value.

If you have never experienced the propaganda push surrounding war, the totality of the inbound bullsh*t can be destabilizing, overwhelming and unnerving.  It’s one of the reasons why CTH doesn’t share immediate information.  Everyone has an agenda.

Everything we are seeing in U.S. media surrounding U.S. interests in Ukraine is a massive propaganda operation with the headquarters in the U.S. State Department and U.S. intelligence community.  The sense of sympathy you are feeling is part of an intentionally manipulative operation from within this DC matrix.

The images, pictures, videos, speeches, soundbites and the cinematography broadcast by U.S. corporate media are all purposefully intended to create a very specific outlook within the American people toward the issues in Ukraine.  The leftist United Nations, and the leftist U.S State Dept, will work together on this just like they have done in the prior examples (Ukraine 1.0, Libya, Egypt, etc.).

It is very easy to become a victim of psychological warfare intended to manipulate our opinions.

The neocons, war promoting agents working on behalf of the UniParty and the collective globalist interests, are all united in their effort.

Unfortunately, almost everything being transmitted from corporate news into our psyche is part of a battle for your mind.  The goal is to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This is why people who are familiar with these types of tactics often tap-out when the drumbeats get loudest.

{SEE HERE}

The White House, which means the total globalist effort, tipped their hand earlier last week when they defined “strategic power” and their outlook toward winning the battle for the mind.  Everything is about writing a script, creating a narrative, building a “better story,” where the globalists are the heroes.   In essence, the “strategic power” battle is for your mind…

…”Ultimately, the goal of our sanctions is to make this a strategic failure for Russia; and let’s define a little bit of what that means. Strategic success in the 21st century is not about a physical land grab of territory; that’s what Putin has done. 

In this century, strategic power is increasingly measured and exercised by economic strength, by technological sophistication and your story – who you are, what your values are; can you attract ideas and talent and goodwill? And on each of those measures, this will be a failure for Russia.”

Everything in modern warfare is storytelling.

Question all of it.

The stories of the 13 guards on an island telling the Russian naval ship to fuck off… yeah, it was a lie (turns out they surrendered). The “Ghost of Kyiv” pilot, the lady with the sunflower seeds etc., now all recognized as lies and propaganda.  And do not expect it to stop, because it won’t. Thus, the nature of warfare for your mind.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 02/27/2022 – 13:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/cy3iUbl Tyler Durden

Guest Posts on “The Trials of Rasmea Odeh: How a Palestinian Guerrilla Gained and Lost U.S. Citizenship”

I’m delighted to report that Prof. Steven Lubet (Northwestern) will be guest-blogging about this new book of his:

Here’s the publisher’s summary:

On February 21, 1969, a bomb exploded in the largest supermarket in Jerusalem. The blast killed two and injured many more, triggering an intense search for the terrorists behind the plot. Israeli security forces quickly apprehended, tortured, tried, and eventually convicted twenty-one-year-old Palestinian Rasmea Odeh for murder. Twenty-five years later, however, Odeh was not serving a life sentence in an Israeli prison but instead starting a new life in the United States, first in Detroit and later in Chicago, eventually becoming a naturalized citizen and working as a community organizer. Her arrest by U.S. federal authorities in 2013 on charges of unlawful procurement of citizenship and subsequent trial ignited defenders and detractors, even as the facts of the case, the previous conviction, and those of Odeh’s life were obscured or ignored.

Based on extensive research, The Trials of Rasmea Odeh separates fact from fiction as it follows the remarkable twists of this story, even―or especially―where those facts subvert one political narrative or another. The result is that rare book that is both an extraordinary achievement of scholarly research and a gripping, accessible, and engaging narrative, making it an invaluable resource for discussion of the issues of citizenship, statehood, and the limits of legality this story engages.

And some blurbs:

“What an exemplary gem of scholarship. Combining thorough inquiry with critical empathy, Lubet has written a superb classic that young scholars whatever their field will benefit from reading. The Trials of Rasmea Odeh is truly one of the most impressive books I’ve ever read.”―David J. Garrow, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama

“Professor Lubet takes no shortcuts with this book, unflinchingly examining the record of Odeh’s life … Professor Lubet is able to explain the underlying law and legal strategy in a way that is clear and comprehensible without losing any technical nuance. He brings the courtroom alive to the reader, showing how both political and legal strategies influenced how the case was litigated. [It] is beautifully written and will be of interest to a wide audience. “―Cassandra Burke Robertson, John Deaver Drinko – BakerHostetler Professor of Law and Director, Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

The Trials of Rasmea Odeh weaves together an intricate historical and legal account of Middle Eastern conflict and U.S. denaturalization. Rasmea Odeh’s story, told with nuance and in crisp prose, grips the reader every bit as much as a fictional thriller would. A highly informative and fascinating book of great value to scholars and general readers alike. “―Irina Manta, professor at Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University

I much look forward to Prof. Lubet’s posts!

The post Guest Posts on "The Trials of Rasmea Odeh: How a Palestinian Guerrilla Gained and Lost U.S. Citizenship" appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/G3txcNf
via IFTTT

Guest Posts on “The Trials of Rasmea Odeh: How a Palestinian Guerrilla Gained and Lost U.S. Citizenship”

I’m delighted to report that Prof. Steven Lubet (Northwestern) will be guest-blogging about this new book of his:

Here’s the publisher’s summary:

On February 21, 1969, a bomb exploded in the largest supermarket in Jerusalem. The blast killed two and injured many more, triggering an intense search for the terrorists behind the plot. Israeli security forces quickly apprehended, tortured, tried, and eventually convicted twenty-one-year-old Palestinian Rasmea Odeh for murder. Twenty-five years later, however, Odeh was not serving a life sentence in an Israeli prison but instead starting a new life in the United States, first in Detroit and later in Chicago, eventually becoming a naturalized citizen and working as a community organizer. Her arrest by U.S. federal authorities in 2013 on charges of unlawful procurement of citizenship and subsequent trial ignited defenders and detractors, even as the facts of the case, the previous conviction, and those of Odeh’s life were obscured or ignored.

Based on extensive research, The Trials of Rasmea Odeh separates fact from fiction as it follows the remarkable twists of this story, even―or especially―where those facts subvert one political narrative or another. The result is that rare book that is both an extraordinary achievement of scholarly research and a gripping, accessible, and engaging narrative, making it an invaluable resource for discussion of the issues of citizenship, statehood, and the limits of legality this story engages.

And some blurbs:

“What an exemplary gem of scholarship. Combining thorough inquiry with critical empathy, Lubet has written a superb classic that young scholars whatever their field will benefit from reading. The Trials of Rasmea Odeh is truly one of the most impressive books I’ve ever read.”―David J. Garrow, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama

“Professor Lubet takes no shortcuts with this book, unflinchingly examining the record of Odeh’s life … Professor Lubet is able to explain the underlying law and legal strategy in a way that is clear and comprehensible without losing any technical nuance. He brings the courtroom alive to the reader, showing how both political and legal strategies influenced how the case was litigated. [It] is beautifully written and will be of interest to a wide audience. “―Cassandra Burke Robertson, John Deaver Drinko – BakerHostetler Professor of Law and Director, Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

The Trials of Rasmea Odeh weaves together an intricate historical and legal account of Middle Eastern conflict and U.S. denaturalization. Rasmea Odeh’s story, told with nuance and in crisp prose, grips the reader every bit as much as a fictional thriller would. A highly informative and fascinating book of great value to scholars and general readers alike. “―Irina Manta, professor at Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University

I much look forward to Prof. Lubet’s posts!

The post Guest Posts on "The Trials of Rasmea Odeh: How a Palestinian Guerrilla Gained and Lost U.S. Citizenship" appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/G3txcNf
via IFTTT

Traders Brace For Chaotic FX Market Open As Ruble Set To Collapse

Traders Brace For Chaotic FX Market Open As Ruble Set To Collapse

A great deal has changed for Russia (and Ukraine) since the close on Friday and traders are bracing for chaotic movers in bond and FX markets.

Amid ATMs drying up, Central and Commercial bank sanctions (as well as personal sanctions), and talk of SWIFT-constraints; combined with significant credit ratings downgrades, capital flow from Russian assets could accelerate fast as we suspect most traders will live by the ‘Margin Call’ maxim of “be first, be smarter, or cheat” and sell-first before asking questions (despite some potential silver lining from talk of Ukraine being willing to talk).

As Bloomberg reports, sanctioning Russia’s central bank is likely to have a dramatic effect on the country’s economy and its banking system, Elina Ribakova, deputy chief economist for the Institute of International Finance, said before the latest round of penalties was announced.

This would likely lead to massive bank runs and dollarization, with a sharp sell-off, drain on reserves — and, possibly, a full-on collapse of Russia’s financial system.

S&P Global cut Russia’s credit rating one notch to BB+ (and Moody’s said it was reviewing for a potential downgrade, which could take Russian debt into junk). Additionally Ukraine was also downgraded to CCC from B.

The economic impact of the various sanctions are significant…

There may be less turbulence there since bond prices in both nations have already utterly collapsed…

As we noted earlier, there are indications that the ruble could fall sharply when trading opens.

Exchange rates being offered by lenders (retail) are already varying widely on Sunday, from 98.08 rubles per dollar at Alfa Bank to 99.49 at Sberbank PJSC, 105 at VTB Group and 115 at Otkritie Bank in Moscow.

Those are all dramatically worse than the 83/USD close on Friday…

“Safe havens will likely remain bid in the current environment,” Geoffrey Yu, senior strategist for EMEA Markets at BNY Mellon.

“In currencies, we note that last week the yen and Swiss franc did not materially outperform, so we would just focus on dollar demand for the time being.”

Finally, before US futures open, traders should consider if the ‘relief rally’ – driven by hedge unwinds on the basis that Biden didn’t pull the SWIFT trigger – may be moot since Europe seems hell-bent on some form of SWIFT-restriction for Russia, and the knock-on effects of that liquidity-suck are hard to fathom.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 02/27/2022 – 12:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/lq6i24O Tyler Durden

“I’m In Shock”: Russians Scramble To Pull Money From ATMs As Bank Runs Begin

“I’m In Shock”: Russians Scramble To Pull Money From ATMs As Bank Runs Begin

In his brief assessment on the impact exclusion from SWIFT would have on Ukrainian banks, hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman said that “once a bank can’t transfer or receive funds from other banks, its solvency can be at risk. If I were Russian, I would take my money out now. Bank runs could begin in Russia on Monday.

He may have been off by one day, because in the hours following the western announcement to suspend some Russian banks from SWIFT and to launch sanctions on the Russian central bank, we have seen scenes across Russia reminiscent of a bank run as locals lined up at cash machines around the country to withdraw foreign currency amid growing fears the ruble could collapse when it resumes trading on Monday.

“I’ve stood in lines for an hour, but foreign currency is gone everywhere, just rubles,” said Vladimir, a 28-year-old programmer who declined to give his last name, while waiting in a long line at an ATM in a Moscow shopping mall. “I got a late start because I didn’t think this was possible. I’m in shock.”

There are indications that the ruble will fall sharply when trading opens on Monday. Exchange rates being offered by lenders are already varying widely on Sunday, from 98.08 rubles per dollar at Alfa Bank to 99.49 at Sberbank PJSC, 105 at VTB Group and 115 at Otkritie Bank at 3:30 p.m. in Moscow. The spot ruble price on the Moscow Exchange closed at 83 per dollar on Friday.

“I can’t see a scenario where it doesn’t get hammered,” said Paul McNamara, a fund manager at GAM Investments. “I don’t expect effective intervention in terms of pricing, but in terms of reducing legal grounds to sell rubles.”

The rush for foreign currency came despite Bloomberg reporting that some lenders selling dollars at more than a third higher than the market’s close on Friday, and well past the psychologically important level of 100 rubles per dollar that many economists said would trigger an interest-rate hike by the Bank of Russia. The shock came as Russians were still digesting news that Europe was closing its airspace to them and popular payment systems like ApplePay would stop working.

Late on Saturday, the U.S. and the European Union agreed to kick some Russian banks off the SWIFT financial messaging system and freeze the central bank’s reserves. On Sunday, the EU announced it would close of its airspace to Russian carriers, which could make it difficult to physically transport cash into the country.

The central bank said last week it was increasing supplies of cash to ATMs to meet the demand and issued another statement Sunday vowing to provide banks “uninterrupted” supplies of rubles. The release made no mention of possible foreign-currency support or the sanctions.

Russia last faced a major run on cash in 2014, when plunging oil prices in the wake of western sanctions triggered a crash in the exchange rate. Sberbank, Russia’s biggest bank, ran through 1.3 trillion rubles ($16 billion) in a single week, according to Bloomberg.

“The situation is completely unstable, and sanctions and restrictions on the central bank can only get worse,” said Alexandra Suslina, a budget specialist at the Moscow-based Economic Expert Group. “There’s already a bit of a rush to take money out of ATMs, but no cash machine is designed for the lines that will appear at sanctioned banks.” 

Meanwhile, on Sunday the Russian central bank said it would resume purchases of gold and precious metals from the domestic market starting Monday, although it wasn’t immediately clear who the sanctioned central bank would buy gold from. Furthermore, in light of the upcoming liquidity scramble, it is more likely that Russia will need to start selling some of its gold reserves which according to Credit Suisse calculations amount to a little under $150 billion.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 02/27/2022 – 12:49

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/QHWAsjT Tyler Durden

BP Will Exit 20% Stake In Russian State Oil Giant Rosneft

BP Will Exit 20% Stake In Russian State Oil Giant Rosneft

Following days of intense pressure from the U.K. government, UK energy giant BP Plc said it will exit its 19.75% stake in Russian oil company Rosneft, a dramatic reversal after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as Western nations are trying to inflict as much economic pain as possible on Moscow. BP had held its stake in Rosneft since 2013. BP is Rosneft’s biggest private shareholder, according to the Russian company.

Additionally, BP chief executive officer Bernard Looney is resigning from the board of Rosneft with immediate effect. The other Rosneft director nominated by BP, former BP group chief executive Bob Dudley, is similarly resigning from the board.

BP chair Helge Lund said: “Russia’s attack on Ukraine is an act of aggression which is having tragic consequences across the region. bp has operated in Russia for over 30 years, working with brilliant Russian colleagues. However, this military action represents a fundamental change. It has led the bp board to conclude, after a thorough process, that our involvement with Rosneft, a state-owned enterprise, simply cannot continue. We can no longer support bp representatives holding a role on the Rosneft board. The Rosneft holding is no longer aligned with bp’s business and strategy and it is now the board’s decision to exit bp’s shareholding in Rosneft. The bp board believes these decisions are in the best long-term interests of all our shareholders.”

BP chief executive officer Bernard Looney added: “Like so many, I have been deeply shocked and saddened by the situation unfolding in Ukraine and my heart goes out to everyone affected. It has caused us to fundamentally rethink bp’s position with Rosneft. I am convinced that the decisions we have taken as a board are not only the right thing to do, but are also in the long-term interests of bp. Our immediate priority is caring for our great people in the region and we will do our utmost to support them. We are also looking at how bp can support the wider humanitarian effort.”

Bernard Looney has been a director of Rosneft as one of two BP-nominated directors since 2020. Bob Dudley has been a director of Rosneft since 2013.

According to the Rosneft website, Putin chairs the board, which includes Looney as well as heads of Russian banks and other entities that have been subject to Western sanctions. The organization supports arts and other cultural causes, according to the website, which says trustees serve voluntarily.

In December 2021 Rosneft reported that BP is the “leading British investor in the Russian economy with a total investment of $18 billion.” The figure fluctuates based on Rosneft’s value, which has been hammered by the Russia-Ukraine conflict and Western sanctions.

BP said that the resignations will require BP to change its accounting treatment of its Rosneft shareholding and, as a result, it expects to report a material non-cash charge with its first quarter 2022 results, to be reported in May. The company didn’t give details but said the carrying value of the asset stood at $14 billion.

And with BP set to spark a firesale in the already depressed shares, the next question as the FT’s Chief Political Correspondents Jim Pickard notes, is “who will the buyer be and at what price.”

Here, all eyes fall on Beijing which will be happy to snap up Russian assets at firesale prices.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 02/27/2022 – 12:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/opTJWKU Tyler Durden

The CDC Discovers Actual Public Health, Just In Time

The CDC Discovers Actual Public Health, Just In Time

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

One day I’m reading an internal memo commissioned by the Democratic Party to provide advice to dealing with Covid policy.

The next day I’m reading headlines about how the CDC has drastically altered its advice on how to deal with Covid.

Is there a relationship? At this point, only the hopelessly naive would think otherwise.

Let’s look at the memo produced by Impact Research. Some excerpts:

  • Democrats have a tremendous opportunity to claim an incredible, historic success—they vaccinated hundreds of millions of people, prevented the economy from going into freefall, kept small businesses from going under, and got people back to work safely. Because of President Biden and Democrats, we CAN safely return to life feeling much more normal—and they should claim that proudly.

  • Six in ten Americans describe themselves as “worn out” by the pandemic. The more we talk about the threat of COVID and onerously restrict people’s lives because of it, the more we turn them against us and show them we’re out of touch with their daily realities.

  • [I]t means recognizing that the threat of COVID is no longer what it was even a year ago and therefore should not be treated as such—shutdowns, masks, and lockdowns were meant to save lives when there was not yet a vaccine that could do that. Voters know we now have the tools in the toolkit to be responsible in combatting and living with COVID—vaccines and boosters to minimize illness, and masks and social distancing around vulnerable groups.

  • They think the virus is here to stay, and 83 percent say the pandemic will be over when it’s a mild illness like the flu rather than COVID being completely gone, and 55 percent prefer that COVID should be treated as an endemic disease. And that’s what most Americans are dealing with—a disease with fatality rates like the flu—because most of us took the personal responsibility to protect ourselves and our families by getting vaccinated.

  • Stop talking about restrictions and the unknown future ahead. If we focus on how bad things still are and how much worse they could get, we set Democrats up as failures unable to navigate us through this. When 99 percent of Americans can get vaccinated, we cause more harm than we prevent with voters by going into our third year talking about restrictions. And, if Democrats continue to hold a posture that prioritizes COVID precautions over learning how to live in a world where COVID exists, but does not dominate, they risk paying dearly for it in November.

A few points.

This memo is not epidemiology but politics, most strongly illustrated by the idea that polling should make the difference as to whether a pathogen is pandemic or endemic. The constant incantation of “vaccines” here has nothing to do with the known data: they have nowhere stopped infection or spread, a point which the memo obscures with the line about how they “minimize illness.” They minimize serious outcomes for some strains so long as they last.

From a policy point of view, there are two main features that stand out: Covid is here to stay and “most people in the US will eventually get COVID-19” (thereby hinting at the reality that vaccines are not effective in the way that Biden/Fauci/Walensky promised) and therefore the focus should be on protecting the vulnerable.

There is nothing new about this. It was always true! You can shout “Omicron” all day but it was also true with Alpha and Delta as well. The virus should have been treated rationally the entire time and policies that have wrecked public health should have been off the table from 2020. The memo writers did not cite the Great Barrington Declaration but they might as well have.

As for how the Democrats somehow prevented an economic freefall, the worst economic outcomes are very clearly in Democratic-controlled states that retained restrictions for nearly two years in some places, including keeping schools closed. There is a reason for the mass migration that this has inspired.

If we are looking for thriving economies, look to the states that never closed up or opened earliest: South Dakota, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and so on. So none of this is remotely true but, hey, this is politics, right?, so it doesn’t have to be true.

The real problem that the Democrats need to solve is revealed in this chart:

Now, let us consider the dramatic turnaround at the CDC that came out the very next day. [The full PDF can be seen here.]

Here are the talking points handed to the director. It’s not just about masking, which is being relaxed. The CDC says there needs to be a dramatic shift away from endless monitoring of cases that are overwhelmingly mild and instead focus only on actual sickness that lands people in the hospital and threatens life. We need to stop obsessing about cases and start looking mainly at “medically significant disease.” The focus should be on “protecting the most vulnerable.”

This makes all of us want to say, shout, scream: THANK YOU!

In order to justify this change, the CDC posts four sets of charts on Covid prevalence during episodes of the pandemic. The last chart illustrates the point that an exclusive focus on controlling the spread is utterly preposterous at this point. Under the old protocols, the whole country should be back in lockdown. It’s unimaginable what attempting this now would cause.

To be sure, all of this is enormously frustrating for those of us engaged in this battle for two years. Instead of focusing on getting sick people well, the CDC experimented with wild guidelines that imagined some kind of society-wide solution that seemed designed to crush the virus while vast amounts of social and economic activity were shut down by law. This necessitated a crushing of freedoms, including of travel, association, commerce, religion, and, eventually even speech.

The CDC nowhere admits this much less apologizes for it. Two years in, the CDC seems to have rediscovered the traditional practice of public health, and has justified this new wisdom based on changed conditions, while never even bothering to claim that its previous measures and guidelines achieved anything along the way.

We’ve seen a massive collapse in public health, economic vitality, and essential rights, while closing schools and wrecking education and so much more, all in the name of virus control, even as the evidence is now overwhelming that the entire enterprise was not only a distraction from what should have happened (therapeutics and protecting the vulnerable) but also an astonishing failure.

Why the change? It had to happen at some point. The entire machinery of lockdowns and mandates were destined to fail. As to the timing of the reversal, it’s hard to resist the speculation that it is entirely political. See the memo above.

Still, there is a worrisome aspect to the CDC’s announcement. They reserve the right to do it all over again. “We want to give people a break from things like mask-wearing, when these metrics are better, and then have the ability to reach for them again should things worsen,” she said.

No one should be satisfied with a politically motivated change in the messaging. We need fundamental regime change so make sure that nothing like this can ever happen again.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 02/27/2022 – 12:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2fdN516 Tyler Durden

ECB’s Lagarde Urges Immediate Crypto Regulation To Stop Putin Evading Sanctions

ECB’s Lagarde Urges Immediate Crypto Regulation To Stop Putin Evading Sanctions

Update: Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank (ECB), has called on lawmakers to approve a regulatory framework on crypto, hinting at potentially preventing Russia from getting around economic sanctions.

In response to a question on Russia potentially using crypto to evade some of these measures, the ECB president urged action on an existing proposal for a regulatory framework on digital assets.

“Whenever there is a ban or prohibition or a mechanism in place to boycott or prohibit, there are, always criminal ways that will try to circumvent the prohibition or the ban” said Lagarde.

“It’s so critically important that MiCA is pushed through as quickly as possible so we have a regulatory framework within which crypto assets can actually be caught.”

Notably, the European Parliament has delayed a vote on the Markets in Crypto Assets Directive (MiCA) due to fears that it would be “misinterpreted as a de facto Bitcoin ban” over questions surrounding the industry’s energy demands. 

*  *  *

As Daniel Roberts and Jeff John Roberts detailed for Decrypt earlier, the largest European military conflict since World War II is raging in Ukraine, and Bitcoin could shape the outcome.

In the words of the Washington Post, the battle between Russia and Ukraine is “the world’s first crypto war” as both sides discover the advantages of a borderless, permissionless currency.

People around the world have already donated millions to NGOs trying to defend Ukraine from Russia’s savage invasion. Meanwhile, some in Ukraine are turning to Bitcoin as the panic of war is depleting the country’s ATMs. In one case, Danish journalists reportedly used Satoshi’s currency to buy a car and flee the country. Twenty years ago, gold might have been used to barter in a conflict zone—today it’s Bitcoin.

Meanwhile, leading crypto figures—many of whom are as rich as Russia’s loathsome oligarchs—are lending their influence to the conflict. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin took to Twitter in his native Russian to decry the invasion. Sam Bankman-Fried tweeted that FTX gave $25 to every Ukrainian on the platform.

These are inspiring stories of how crypto is helping the Ukrainians who are clearly the good guys in this conflict. But the open nature of crypto is a two-way street: experts predict Russia and its leaders will turn to crypto as a way to circumvent the economic sanctions piling up on them. Bitcoin might help the good guys, but it can also help the bad guys. As many in crypto like to say, the tech is agnostic.

In some ways, none of this is new. Rogue states like Iran and North Korea have long turned to alternate forms of finance when they are shut off from the global banking system. And diaspora communities have always found a way to support their side in an overseas conflict. Think of the IRA collecting money in Boston taverns, or Sri Lankan Tamils fundraising in Toronto temples.

What is new and different is how easy it is to fund such activities almost instantly with crypto. The latest example, aside from Ukraine, is the Canadian trucker protests, which were sustained by Bitcoin donations. Many on Crypto Twitter cheered on these activities, but I heard a very different perspective from my family and friends in Canada. Like most of their countrymen, they were exasperated by a radical minority blockading the border, and angry that foreign money was funding much of the chaos.

The point is that crypto has become instrumental in funding conflict, violent or otherwise. With Ukraine the moral case is clear-cut, but that won’t always be the case. There is a risk that the crypto community—out of conviction or just for the pleasure of shit-posting—will use its wealth to meddle in political or military conflicts it doesn’t understand.

This risk is greater given how crypto itself is becoming politicized. As Coin Center’s Jerry Brito noted in an astute essay, crypto used to have a handful of supporters in the Democratic and Republican party, while the majority of politicians didn’t know or care about it. But in today’s hyper polarized environment, crypto has become yet another partisan issue that has led people to form opinions based on what party leaders think—even if they don’t understand the first thing about Bitcoin.

This mix of partisanship and crypto to fund conflicts is a dangerous brew. Fortunately, the former is something that we can control: level-headed people, like those at Coin Center, can help persuade our politicians that crypto is first and foremost a technology that can be used for good or evil. Blockchains don’t care about politics. As Vitalik tweeted this week, “Ethereum is neutral, but I am not.” The sooner people realize crypto is not itself partisan, the better it will be for crypto and society.

As for people and government using crypto to fund conflict, that is here to stay. Just as the Internet is now part of war—think of Russia’s cyber-attacks and the Anonymous hacker collective’s recent counter-attacks—crypto is too. The fight between Russia and Ukraine may be “the world’s first crypto war” but it it is definitely not the last.

*  *  *

This is Roberts on Crypto, a weekend column from Decrypt Editor-in-Chief Daniel Roberts and Decrypt Executive Editor Jeff John Roberts. Sign up for the Decrypt Debrief email newsletter to receive it in your inbox every Saturday. And read last weekend’s column: How To Get Fined $100 Million And Call It a Win.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 02/27/2022 – 11:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/R6ckXxZ Tyler Durden