S20.E23: Ross Douthat; Piers Morgan; Nikki Schlott

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Quote

This week, Bill interviews columnist Ross Douthat about his recent experience with Lyme disease. For the panel he's joined by journalist Piers Morgan and GenZ columnist Nikki Schlott.

Original air date 2022.08.12

[munchiewoman]

Piers Morgan (who actually said a couple of things I agreed with but still) and another rant about people wearing masks.  Plus a "college is unnecessary" thing? For some people, yes, Bill, but education is invaluable for some people and please don't feed into the Republican "elitist" bullshit.

I think I'm done.

[sugarbaker design]

I watched the intro routine, Ross Douthat, but when I saw Piers Morgan was on the panel I turned it off.

Bill, when you find yourself agreeing with world-renowned asshole Piers Morgan, there's a problem.

[RealHousewife]

Look, I don't know how some people breathe in those masks when it's so hot out, but they're not bothering anybody. 

[WendyM]

3 hours ago, munchiewoman said:

Piers Morgan (who actually said a couple of things I agreed with but still) and another rant about people wearing masks.  Plus a "college is unnecessary" thing? For some people, yes, Bill, but education is invaluable for some people and please don't feed into the Republican "elitist" bullshit.

I think I'm done.

Same. I was going back and forth between the Red Sox/Yankees game and this and saw Piers Morgan and heard something about "this generation" and its "anxiety" and that's it. A baseball aftershow is more enjoyable at this point.  

[realityplease]

What is it about a mask-wearing 20 year old that gets Bill's goat?  How does he know their reasons? Why does he care? It doesn't affect him personally but he's so offended by the mere visual.  Must mask-wearing 20 year-olds wear signs so Bill understands? "I'm young but undergoing cancer treatment - prefer to wear mask" or "Trying to protect impaired grandparents/parents/children, etc. - prefer to wear mask" or even "Wearing mask to f-k with the mask-adverse. Eat it.")  He can do as he pleases but who is he to bully or scoff at others' choices? It's obnoxious.

Bill seemed to expect that 22-year old woman to speak for an entire generation(s). (Speak to one, speak to all?) Bill continues to lump together ALL generations younger than himself.  X, Y, Z - all the same to him.)  She seemed intelligent but of limited experience - as expected of one with only a few adult years under her belt and so, understandably due to mere time on earth alone, limited in experience, formal education (college drop-out) & historical knowledge/application.  In fact, she excused certain attitudes among the young because they were teenagers when the events took place. Oh right - if it didn't happen on their watch - they're not expected to know of it/consider it?) Doesn't mean she's not smart or capable of intelligent ideas & input.  She just lacked perspective - whether due to experience or depth of knowledge.  For example, she surmised that her generation dismisses Biden's accomplishments because he is - migosh - as old as a gramps.  (Trump's but a few years younger than Biden but Biden always the one singled out for this.)  Bill tried to explain that perhaps Biden's experience led to his recent accomplishments but she looked as if the thought never crossed her mind.  And maybe it hadn't.  Youth (not experience) & appearances (not ability) are often valued by the young - until they get old & ticked off that their experience/abilities are discounted. Such is life. 

Anyway, Bill continues to be Bill.  Doctors (& their knowledge, or lack thereof) were put into perspective by the first guest. Young adults (as personified by this guest) were shown to be naive in certain respects, but nevertheless, should be encouraged to participate & voice their views.  And Piers, well, he seems to have "calmed down" a bit.

[DoctorAtomic]

2 hours ago, realityplease said:

For example, she surmised that her generation dismisses Biden's accomplishments because he is - migosh - as old as a gramps. 

That's where she lost me. I didn't mind her talking about her experience at NYU. It didn't seem to work out for her or just not the right fit; that's no problem. I don't particularly subscribe that college isn't for everybody more than you need to find the right college for you. That aside, after ranting on Biden because he's old, Bill did call her out on it correctly by pointing out Biden being old really was what got the bill crafted in the first place. I think he stuck the landing in saying, 'well, the younger generation is always saying their concerned about the climate. Here's really a sweeping climate bill. What do you want?' Of course, nothing is ever going to go far enough, but that's not an argument imo. 

2 hours ago, realityplease said:

Doesn't mean she's not smart or capable of intelligent ideas & input.  She just lacked perspective - whether due to experience or depth of knowledge.

You know what's good for that? College. That's where you can do internships and learn from people who do. 

I was disappointed in Morgan (I mean) taking Bill's justified ire at religion because his friend was brutally attacked and turning into something about wokism. That wasn't Bill's point. There was a much larger context I inferred Bill wanted to talk about. 

I'm getting a little over everyone piling on Fauci too. Not that he's above criticism. The problem isn't that Fauci et al. don't know what they're talking about; they're reporting what they know at that moment. One part is that they didn't (or weren't allowed) to communicate uncertainty. "We're 70% confident wearing the mask *right now* will help." I never felt Fauci was speaking in absolutes though. He was always saying 'we're processing the data, it's going to take some time, we're always 2 weeks behind.' I get that Bill wants to point out that doctors don't know everything, but I never experienced a 'I'm the doctor do what I say' so I don't know where he's coming from there. 

The guest though parried some of that well enough. 

[The Solution]

Well, that was certainly a hour's worth of anti-intellectual bullshit. Yes, doctors can be full of it (and themselves) but what's the alternative? A faith healer?

The young lady was certainly attractive and well-spoken. She might be interesting once she's finished college. She'll be sorry later on if she doesn't take advantage of the opportunity now.

I agree that Biden is not the most exciting President. However, he has great experience and knows what he's doing and is willing to wait for results to materialize. That is what will eventually prove him to be an outstanding President. Plus, he has enough taste not to live in an overgrown Olive Garden that the FBI felt the need to raid.

Finally, Bill needs to stop arguing all sides of any argument without taking a breath. That's what his panel is supposed to provide.

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't know how well spoken she is if she can't say 'nuclear' right. 

[DXD526]

I did like Piers Morgan's story about how he got the 45 interview: appealing to his well-known vanity. At first, he refused to do it, but then there was an exchange that went something along these lines -

45: You're a bad man! I don't like you! I'm not talking to you!

PM: I wanted to discuss your hole-in-one. People have been telling me how awesome it was.

45: Ok, I'll do the interview!

[opus]

43 minutes ago, DXD526 said:

I did like Piers Morgan's story about how he got the 45 interview: appealing to his well-known vanity. At first, he refused to do it, but then there was an exchange that went something along these lines -

45: You're a bad man! I don't like you! I'm not talking to you!

PM: I wanted to discuss your hole-in-one. People have been telling me how awesome it was.

45: Ok, I'll do the interview!

I don’t remember that. Was that on Overtime ? (which I don’t watch)

[The Solution]

58 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't know how well spoken she is if she can't say 'nuclear' right. 

That's one of the things that college would fix.

[aghst]

Islam is most fundamentalist?

meanwhile American fundamentalists are demanding that 10 year old girls who were raped go on and deliver the babies.

Lyme disease is often misdiagnosed.  But there sUpposedlY is an effective treatment, whicH probably went through CDC and FDA processes.

But Maher wanted to take another shot at Fauci.

NY Post columnist?  Bill just trying to fuck her.

[heatherchandler]

7 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

Look, I don't know how some people breathe in those masks when it's so hot out, but they're not bothering anybody. 

But why do they do it?  I’m genuinely curious why they are wearing a mask outside.  I don’t see anyone wearing them where I live, but I saw many 20 somethings wearing them in CA.  I know some people are immunocompromised, but that doesn’t account for most of them.  I’m not bothered by it, like Bill is, but I am just very curious why it is “a thing.”

[DoctorAtomic]

Morgan correctly pointed out that the seizure of the documents needs to really land a big punch because it could blow up in Trump's favor, so we shouldn't be declaring any victories yet. I think that's fine, but he kind of undercuts himself by calling it a 'raid'. It wasn't a raid. A warrant was lawfully obtained after presenting it to a judge. There was a list of inventory that they were allowed to collect. The FBI didn't just tear into the residence and take whatever they could get their hands on. This all occurred *after* agents were sent months ago to request cooperation in having the documents returned. So, in calling it a raid, he's almost setting the operation up to fail because unless there's a video of Trump ordering the Code Red, then it's 'overreach', when that isn't the case. 

To be fair, Morgan did say that if there's evidence of violation of the espionage act, then this is really serious. I don't know how that's going to land in the public discourse though. 

I think Bill also has a point saying that Trump probably just took the boxes without knowing what's in them. 

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, The Solution said:

That's one of the things that college would fix.

Excellent work there. 

[arachne]

As others have pointed out already, there were many things to object to about this show, but IMO Bill's final New Rule was right on the money. All actors should be allowed to play whatever roles they appear to be good in, regardless of what they may be IRL. 

It kind of hits home with me personally. Many years ago I acted in a play about the Holocaust. I'm not Jewish, but my character was. Other people in the cast played Jews and gay men, and they weren't necessarily either of those. I had a good time doing what I did, and it disturbs me to think some people would object to that today. 

[Hedgehog2022]

5 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

That's where she lost me. I didn't mind her talking about her experience at NYU. It didn't seem to work out for her or just not the right fit; that's no problem. I don't particularly subscribe that college isn't for everybody more than you need to find the right college for you. That aside, after ranting on Biden because he's old, Bill did call her out on it correctly by pointing out Biden being old really was what got the bill crafted in the first place. I think he stuck the landing in saying, 'well, the younger generation is always saying their concerned about the climate. Here's really a sweeping climate bill. What do you want?' Of course, nothing is ever going to go far enough, but that's not an argument imo. 

You know what's good for that? College. That's where you can do internships and learn from people who do. 

I was disappointed in Morgan (I mean) taking Bill's justified ire at religion because his friend was brutally attacked and turning into something about wokism. That wasn't Bill's point. There was a much larger context I inferred Bill wanted to talk about. 

I'm getting a little over everyone piling on Fauci too. Not that he's above criticism. The problem isn't that Fauci et al. don't know what they're talking about; they're reporting what they know at that moment. One part is that they didn't (or weren't allowed) to communicate uncertainty. "We're 70% confident wearing the mask *right now* will help." I never felt Fauci was speaking in absolutes though. He was always saying 'we're processing the data, it's going to take some time, we're always 2 weeks behind.' I get that Bill wants to point out that doctors don't know everything, but I never experienced a 'I'm the doctor do what I say' so I don't know where he's coming from there. 

The guest though parried some of that well enough. 

Fauci is a popular target of Fixed News hosts and the far right podcasters etc…you know the target audience that Bill is trying so hard to engage with these days. With all that’s going on in our country, it just shows how disconnected and repetitive Bill is by using up airtime to still whine about masks and Fauci. 

[Avaleigh]

5 hours ago, The Solution said:

That's one of the things that college would fix.

I dunno, nuclear was a word Yale grad George W. Bush failed to pronounce properly on a regular basis.

[RealHousewife]

4 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

But why do they do it?  I’m genuinely curious why they are wearing a mask outside.  I don’t see anyone wearing them where I live, but I saw many 20 somethings wearing them in CA.  I know some people are immunocompromised, but that doesn’t account for most of them.  I’m not bothered by it, like Bill is, but I am just very curious why it is “a thing.”

Prior to vaccines and even more so when I didn't know the exact outdoor risk, I'd wear them outside sometimes. If you just carry a mask around, it can fall. It's also tricky to keep it clean in a purse. So if I am going somewhere that has a risk, I'd just put it on ahead of time, also helps with not forgetting to mask. 

As far as now, I'm not entirely sure. I have a friend who's barely in his 30s and not immunocompromised. He's super healthy, fit, has had vaccines, but still masks up everywhere. Where we live, he's often the only one who still does. He's someone who hates being sick. He'll ditch going to things over stuff that's minor, so maybe for him he'd just rather deal with masks than be sick. I haven't asked him because I don't want to mask shame or anything. I experienced that myself before when I wore them constantly, and I'd also rather have people in my life who take an abundance of caution than the ones who don't care about getting or spreading covid at all. 

[realityplease]

3 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

But why do they do it?  I’m genuinely curious why they are wearing a mask outside.  I don’t see anyone wearing them where I live, but I saw many 20 somethings wearing them in CA.  I know some people are immunocompromised, but that doesn’t account for most of them.  I’m not bothered by it, like Bill is, but I am just very curious why it is “a thing.”

Just guessing:  Until this week, Omicron transmission was high in CA - so high that L.A. was VERY close to re-instituting a mask mandate - but didn't at last minute.  Also,  CA in general & L.A. in particular, hosts many tourists & has a high population.  Many tourists come by airplane.  So more chance of strangers in our midst - who just encountered an airplane full of strangers - to spread it around.  More so in touristy areas & lines where folks stand closer than 6 feet or brush past.  Also, except right on the coast, not as much wind or breeze that some cities get, especially in areas of high heat/very low humidity - so less germ dispersal.   (Just being outside doesn't automatically "neutralize" germs tho there's a better opportunity for dispersal. Still, if a runner huffs on you as they run by or someone stands close by & coughs/sneezes on you, or you're waiting in a crowd for an hour waiting to get into a restaurant, you're not home-free just because you're outside.  (Yes, better chance of avoidance than if you're inside, but not home free.)  Also, CA has a shit-ton of health nuts.  And lots of anti-vax folks.  Better safe, for little effort.

[aghst]

Omicron is way more transmissible so it’s riskier than previous variants, even outside.

Most of the time I don’t wear outside especially in the summer with heat causing perspiration.  But now I wear N95 masks when I go inside and because they’re harder to put on and take off, sometimes I keep it on when I know in a few minutes I’m going inside.

Whatever it’s none of Bill’s business what others do.

[ahpny]

On 8/13/2022 at 9:10 PM, arachne said:

All actors should be allowed to play whatever roles they appear to be good in, regardless of what they may be IRL. 

That's hard to argue against and fair-minded people would seem to need to agree. But there's more to this issue. From the perspective of a Latino actor who's been rejected for years for "being too ethnic," or Jewish actress who's been repeatedly rejected for "being too Jewish," it can be a bit tough to see some of the few "ethnic" roles that do exist going to "non-ethnic" people. Even Bill's good friend Sarah Silverman has been quite vocal about this. See https://time.com/6101055/jewish-women-not-cast-in-jewish-roles/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=entertainment_identity&linkId=133135980

He should have her back to discuss it. Sarah's well-nuanced point, as I understand it, isn't that "ethnic" roles should never be played by non-ethnic people, but that at least when casting those, ethnic actors should have the same shot as others to get the part. Given the number of suitable Jewish actresses, her supposition is that the underrepresentation of Jewish actress for quintessentially "Jewish" roles is essentially a marker for prejudice. What to make of Zachery Levi - of English and Welsh ancestry devoid of any connection with Judaism - being turned down for several roles for being "too Jewish?" See https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/confidential/zachary-levi-loses-work-jewish-article-1.2511750 However, I do agree with Bill that this issue can easily devolve into a "wokeness" competition that no one will ever win, as with the remake of West Side Story.

Regarding Lyme disease, I had it a while back and my experience mirrored Ross Douthat's, though fortunately less severe. I had been at a beach area known for Lyme disease risk and shortly after got an extremely high fever - the highest I've ever had. It was so high that I was shivering while wearing a business suit on a NYC subway platform in August. I immediately suspected Lyme disease, but like Ross, found no tell tail bullseye mark. The first doctor I went to dismissed it as some prosaic and temporary illness that would clear itself in a few days. After that didn't pan out, I went to another doctor who hospitalized me that same day. After a week's worth of intravenous antibiotics, I seemed to be "cured," but the confirmation of Lyme came only after that course of antibiotics had begun. At least at that time in NY, all Lyme tests were sent to Stonybrook and they had a backlog of many days. To this day, I still don't know if I can get it again. There appears to be no consensus regarding that issue and I've spoken with several epidemiologists about that. Despite my experience, I don't condemn the medical establishment to the same degree that Bill does, but I certainly agree with Ross that you have to be your own best advocate,  speak up, and disagree with doctors at times.

Edited August 16, 2022 by ahpny

[DoctorAtomic]

I think Hanks' statement is a little disingenuous. Sure *today* he probably wouldn't take a role like in Philadelphia because there's lots of really good gay actors who could play that part. Back then, what's he going to do? He wasn't in a position that he is in now to turn down roles. There weren't any out gay actors of his quality then. I mean, you do want, fundamentally, a *good* actor to cast. The flip is also true; gay people should play straight parts if they're a good fit for the role. Clearly, you don't want a John Wayne cast as Ghenkis Khan; that's way out of line. 

I don't think there's anything wrong with Franco playing Castro because in the picture Bill showed, he kind of looks like him. Sometimes it's ok to cast based on that. With real life figures, that is a factor. They're not casting Franco to play Mike Tyson. 

38 minutes ago, ahpny said:

He should have her back to discuss it. Sarah's well-nuanced point, as I understand it, isn't that "ethnic" roles should never be played by non-ethnic people, but that at least when casting those, ethnic actors should have the same shot as others to get the part.

I don't think anyone would argue that. But, you need a more diverse cohort of casting directors. Is there some sort of policy that you have to take auditions from as many actors as you can or something? Maybe that's what's needed. 

I think the error with Hanks is that it's read too broadly; acting isn't like any typical profession because you're essentially marketing yourself, and not, like, I'm a good coder and you want to hire a good coder so it really doesn't matter if they're black, gay, trans. 

Acting is a profession where 70% of the workforce is unemployed at any given time. I don't think it's fair to put it on the actor as to whether they should decide the morality of taking a part. There aren't a lot of actors that have the luxury of turning down roles on principle. 

[sistermagpie]

6 hours ago, ahpny said:

That's hard to argue against and fair-minded people would seem to need to agree. But there's more to this issue. From the perspective of a Latino actor who's been rejected for years for "being too ethnic," or Jewish actress who's been repeatedly rejected for "being too Jewish," it can be a bit tough to see some the few "ethnic" roles that do exist going to "non-ethnic" people. Even Bill's good friend Sarah Silverman has been quite vocal about this. See https://time.com/6101055/jewish-women-not-cast-in-jewish-roles/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=entertainment_identity&linkId=133135980

Yeah, it's disingenuous to pretend that standard policy for decades wasn't that white people could play anything, but everyone else could at best be a supporting ethnic role. Many of the same people who today get violently angry over a known character being cast as somebody non-white or male are the first to argue for colorblind casting when it goes the other way.

Edited August 15, 2022 by sistermagpie

[aghst]

Bill's complaining about the ethnic actors complaining about ethnic roles going to white actors.  Just another complaint about Hollywood being too woke.

Unfortunately, casting decisions are based on what the producers and studios think will produce the greatest ticket sales.

Often that's a box office star who's usually white.

Moviegoers have to decide if it's fair that white actors get roles for ethnic characters when there are ethnic actors available.

Of course there's a history with white actors playing black and other ethnic roles which many now view as a racist portrayal, like the white actor playing Charlie Chan or actors in black faces.

OTOH, Black Panther was a huge hit and Boseman at the time was relatively unknown.  Certainly not a proven box office star.  But if Disney cast a white actor to play that part, there would probably have been a huge backlash and the movie wouldn't have become a hit.

[ApocalypseThen]

While one could make the claim that Democrats tend to overemphasize the need for people to go to college, the reality is that employers will look at college degrees as a plus even if they're not necessarily needed for the specific job they're recruiting for. That's the reality of today's job market. Jobs that used to require only a BA degree are now asking for a Master's degree and so on. That puts people in a tough situation and under a lot more pressure to take on loans to complete degrees that they don't necessarily need. It would be great if the US had a system with stronger pathways to success in the job market with vocational training degrees like Germany does for example, but that won't be happening in the near future. 

Regarding that whole discussion about the lack of knowledge in the medical industry, Bill really takes it too far by implying that the science isn't settled on any medical issue. I think this is a slippery slope similar to the "alternative facts" people in politics like Alex Jones or the flat Earthers in Science. I know that health science tends to be more unreliable than other types, as so many of its claims have been debunked in a relatively short time period - the food pyramid, the supposed dangers of eating eggs, pharmaceutical products, etc. But Bill extrapolates that to dangerous levels. At times he sounds like Steve Jobs at his worst with his holistic medicine nonsense. I wonder what Bill would do if he actually gets a disease like cancer - fruit juice therapy and acupuncture? 

[shok]

2 hours ago, ApocalypseThen said:

I know that health science tends to be more unreliable than other types, as so many of its claims have been debunked in a relatively short time period - the food pyramid, the supposed dangers of eating eggs, pharmaceutical products, etc.

Health science is NOT more unreliable than other types - if it was, an awful lot more people would be dead. Instead, they're living many many years longer than they used to. Science isn't static. It is constantly being tested and updated and new discoveries are being found daily.

[DoctorAtomic]

8 hours ago, ApocalypseThen said:

Regarding that whole discussion about the lack of knowledge in the medical industry, Bill really takes it too far by implying that the science isn't settled on any medical issue. I think this is a slippery slope similar to the "alternative facts" people in politics like Alex Jones or the flat Earthers in Science.

I think the problem is the lack of understanding the process of science, and that's largely on the scientific community to communicate that better. Again, I think the key point is being able to communicate uncertainty effectively. That's the problem. People aren't reading the New England journal of Medicine in their free time. It's hard to put it all on Fauci, who I do think did the best he could, but his primary job is figuring out how to beat Covid and that was changing by the day. On top of that, he's got to be on every tv show explaining everything. You'd think there would be a public health secretary like a press secretary to just deal with that. 

It's not entirely fair to say, 'well, they got this wrong, so who's to say their not wrong now?' What are they supposed to do? If you're acting in good faith, conducting the experiments right, you get what you get and that's what you act on. Again, though, you have to talk about uncertainties in the findings and recommendations. I honestly think if they did during covid much of this derision wouldn't have happened. 

[RealHousewife]

8 hours ago, ApocalypseThen said:

While one could make the claim that Democrats tend to overemphasize the need for people to go to college, the reality is that employers will look at college degrees as a plus even if they're not necessarily needed for the specific job they're recruiting for. That's the reality of today's job market. Jobs that used to require only a BA degree are now asking for a Master's degree and so on. That puts people in a tough situation and under a lot more pressure to take on loans to complete degrees that they don't necessarily need. It would be great if the US had a system with stronger pathways to success in the job market with vocational training degrees like Germany does for example, but that won't be happening in the near future. 

Yeah, that's why I wonder about free college. Even if you're on the progressive side, understand life isn't fair, especially when it comes to certain communities, and want everyone to have access to education, what happens when everyone gets a bachelor's? Then it becomes about a master's, and then it would become doctorate's. I don't have the answers on what's the best way to approach the issue. 

I agree. There are folks who say not just free college but vocational degrees as well. That way, everyone would have help with a pathway to their goals. 

[ShadowKnight2]

Fucking! Garbage! Show!

[PrincessPurrsALot]

11 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I think the problem is the lack of understanding the process of science, and that's largely on the scientific community to communicate that better. Again, I think the key point is being able to communicate uncertainty effectively. That's the problem. People aren't reading the New England journal of Medicine in their free time. It's hard to put it all on Fauci, who I do think did the best he could, but his primary job is figuring out how to beat Covid and that was changing by the day. On top of that, he's got to be on every tv show explaining everything. You'd think there would be a public health secretary like a press secretary to just deal with that. 

It's not entirely fair to say, 'well, they got this wrong, so who's to say their not wrong now?' What are they supposed to do? If you're acting in good faith, conducting the experiments right, you get what you get and that's what you act on. Again, though, you have to talk about uncertainties in the findings and recommendations. I honestly think if they did during covid much of this derision wouldn't have happened. 

I would add to this the issue of junk science being promoted in the press.  While not related to covid, there is a major issue of a single experiment that is not peer reviewed or verified making a major media splash.  There are many examples.  One that I recall was a geneticist who came up with both the "religion" gene and the markers that someone is gay.  Check which way your hair swirls at the crown. Neither held up to peer review or additional testing.  Weight management work is rife with this level of science; it is promoted in the press and held up as real, then people lose confidence in science because these promoted items don't work. 

[aghst]

Republicans have been undermining science for decades, mostly to dispute the findings and warnings of climate scientists.

So they went to the same playbook to undermine Fauci, since he wouldn't go along with Trump trying to minimize the dangers of covid, because all Trump cared was that the threat of the pandemic caused the stock market to plunge in February and March 2020.

He didn't want case numbers to go against his record when he stood for re-election -- same rationale for why DeSantis suppressed Florida pandemic stats.

So the whole party got on board to vilify Fauci and anyone else whom they deemed a threat to their electoral chances.

Republican anti-intellectualism has been around for at least half the 20th century.  Democrats after WWII promoted the GI Bill, not only so vets could go to college but learn to think critically and be better citizens for democracy.  GI Bill wasn't used to get vets to vocational school, not that that wouldn't have been useful but they wanted more rounded citizens.

McCarthy's targets often were academics.

When Reagan was governor of CA, he didn't like independent thinkers who were usually college graduates.  He tried to undermine the University of California, said famously that the state wasn't going to pay for the "intellectual curiosity" of people who might oppose him.

He eventually got enough power to force fees (University of California didn't have tuition per se) to be raised and appointed lackeys to the university board.

That playbook was used in other states with Republican governors.

Scott Walker tried to really weaken the University of Wisconsin, tried to change the mission statement to exclude general pursuit of knowledge, only to limit it to meeting vocational needs.

https://budget.wisc.edu/walker-proposal-would-modify-uw-mission-language/

So anti-intellectualism is deep in the GOP DNA because most educated people see through their tactics to court low-information voters.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Good GOD!

I stopped watching this shitshow three years ago, I think? But what the fuck has happened to Bill?

He used to believe in Science. I just...no words.

[deirdra]

A significant number of rich kids whose parents gave them "free college" back when I was a student spent much of their time getting drunk or stoned and skipping classes.  Taxpayers don't want to pay for that.  We need more scholarships that require recipients to earn their scholarships & degrees and become future taxpayers.  I don't recall Bill ever talking about how hard he worked to put himself through Cornell. He probably used pocket money from his parents to start his dope-dealing business, which is the only 'work' he has mentioned doing while in college.

Edited August 15, 2022 by deirdra

[sistermagpie]

7 minutes ago, deirdra said:

A significant number of rich kids whose parents gave them "free college" back when I was a student spent much of their time getting drunk or stoned and skipping classes.  Taxpayers don't want to pay for that.  We need more scholarships that require recipients to earn their scholarships & degrees and become future taxpayers.  I don't recall Bill ever talking about how hard he worked to put himself through Cornell. He probably used pocket money from his parents to start his dope-dealing business, which is the only 'work' he has mentioned doing while in college.

Prioritizing making sure rich people don't get tax payer money just punishes the poorer people. The rich stoners are going to go to college regardless. The other people will be means tested out of anything. That's how that always works. It's happening now with discussions of student loans obviously now too. And any other kind of help really. That's why there's always stories about the hippie using food stamps to buy caviar. 

[heatherchandler]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Good GOD!

I stopped watching this shitshow three years ago, I think? But what the fuck has happened to Bill?

He used to believe in Science. I just...no words.

He does.. he was pointing out that science changes, which is true.

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, RealHousewife said:

Yeah, that's why I wonder about free college. Even if you're on the progressive side, understand life isn't fair, especially when it comes to certain communities, and want everyone to have access to education, what happens when everyone gets a bachelor's?

I think a free two years worth of community college is fair. You can earn professional certificates, like for CAD, Autodesk, etc., and that's all you need for a skilled job at an engineering firm, for example. Or, you can get all the basic classes, chemistry, physics, whatever, and transfer those to a 4 year place and save a ton on tuition. Incorporate that into the equivalent of vocational. That levels up a ton of people for technical and skilled jobs. 

1 hour ago, PrincessPurrsALot said:

I would add to this the issue of junk science being promoted in the press.

In general, this is not a scientifically literate country. That starts from the ground up, but I still think the scientific community as a whole needs to work on communication. 

[ShadowKnight2]

22 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

He does.. he was pointing out that science changes, which is true.

Not from logical to boneheaded stupid, which is what Bill Maher is pushing out there!

[Soapy Goddess]

14 hours ago, ShadowKnight2 said:

Not from logical to boneheaded stupid

Isn't 'boneheaded stupid' subjective though?