Several Democrats and public health officials are calling now for an end to most pandemic restrictions, including rules requiring indoor and outdoor masking.
Yet it wasn’t too long ago these same COVID-19 fanatics were banging away on the “wear a mask, you mouth-breathing grandma-killer” drum.
What changed?
The “science,” according to CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen. This isn’t true, but her cynicism knows no bounds.
“The science has changed,” she said this week during an interview with anchor Anderson Cooper. “There was, and is, a time and place for pandemic restrictions. But when they were put in, it was always with the understanding that they would be removed as soon as we can. And, in this case, circumstances have changed.”
She added, “the responsibility should shift from a government mandate imposed from the state or the local district of the school … it should shift to an individual responsibility by the family, who can still decide that their child can wear a mask if needed.”
This is a remarkable, and sudden, about-face for one of the biggest proponents of top-down, overreaching COVID-19 restrictions.
Just last fall, Wen said the United States was “nowhere near” ready to lift school mask mandates. She said that day would come only when all schoolchildren are vaccinated.
Later, in December, she said, “We should require masks that are most effective to prevent disease transmission. Everyone, including children, should be wearing at least a 3-ply surgical mask when indoors & around others of unknown vaccination status.”
By the way, when she said in December that we needed to triple down on masking rules, citing “high levels” of COVID-19, daily cases averaged about 168,500. Daily cases currently average at about 253,782. Why the change of heart, even despite the high case numbers?
Even more recently, just three weeks ago to be exact, Wen announced excitedly, “BREAKING: CDC finally updates mask guidance to highest quality mask that can be worn consistently. We’ve known for [more than a year] that COVID-19 is airborne. By now, N95/KN95s should be widely distributed & required in crowded indoor public settings.”
Today, she recommends the exact opposite.
On Tuesday, Wen tweeted, “Before, there were 2 camps, for & against pandemic restrictions. Now, there’s a 3rd: pro-restrictions earlier but recognizing it’s a different time now. This group wants to move from vitriol & divisiveness to nuance & compromise.”
“Divisiveness”? “Nuance”? “Compromise”? This from the same medical “expert” who suggested last summer that life “needs to be hard” for the unvaccinated? This from the medical “expert” who said last September the unvaccinated should not be allowed to leave their homes?
If you find Wen’s abrupt and inexplicable pivot as shameless as it is maddening, know that she has company.
Reliably blue strongholds, including New York, New Jersey, and even California, have announced plans to ease their onerous COVID-19 regulations — just like that, with case numbers basically unchanged, and just mere weeks after haranguing their residents to comply with pandemic protocols. In response to news that Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom plans to loosen the state’s pandemic restrictions, Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu of California responded with praise.
“Democrats like Gavin Newsom are leading the way in returning America safely back to normal again,” the congressman said.
Curiously, it wasn’t too long ago Lieu tweeted, “Please get vaccinated when you can, wash your hands frequently, and wear a mask in public.”
The reason the difference between these two messages is curious is this: Lieu’s note urging everyone to mask up came when California’s case numbers were one-tenth their current level. Cases in California are much higher now than they were then, yet the congressman is cheering a relaxing of the guidelines.
Case numbers are a weak metric that doesn’t really tell us a lot about the state of the pandemic. We’ve been over this. However, in the case of flip-flopping on COVID-19 restrictions, this isn’t the point. The point is this: Lieu, Wen, and other pandemic zealots have used case numbers to inform public policy. Why, then, are they cheering the loosening of restrictions even though case numbers are essentially unchanged from this time last year, back when they were aggressively pro-pandemic regulations?
Well, as Wen said, the science, blessed be its most holy name, has changed.
The political science, that is.
The New York Times reports this week (emphasis added):
It was Gov. Philip D. Murphy of New Jersey who began the effort last fall, weeks after he was stunned by the energy of right-wing voters in his blue state, who nearly ousted him from office in what was widely expected to be an easy re-election campaign. Arranging a series of focus groups across the state to see what they had missed, Mr. Murphy’s advisers were struck by the findings: Across the board, voters shared frustrations over public health measures, a sense of pessimism about the future and a deep desire to return to some sense of normalcy.
Public polling suggests Democrats are headed toward a bloodbath in the 2022 midterm elections. One can only imagine what their internal polling looks like.
So, in case you’re wondering where this sudden pivot is coming from, now you know. For some “scientists,” politics is everything.
