While Democrats and the media have largely been maximalists when it comes to COVID-19 prevention measures, it’s becoming clearer and clearer that most people are ready to come around to the conservative approach.
We told you so, Dems.
Conservatives have been countering liberal accusations that they’re not “following the science” by arguing that decisions on enacting COVID-19 restrictions, such as mask mandates and lockdowns, aren’t a matter of exact science, but rather balancing risk. It looks like that argument has finally sunk in.
1. NANCY PELOSI TAKES THE MASK OFF: The House Speaker said Tuesday during an appearance on MSNBC that she would be eschewing a face covering, reasoning that people should “make their own judgment.”
Pelosi doesn't plan on wearing a mask at the SOTU tonight.
Today, kids in D.C. schools are still forced to wear masks. pic.twitter.com/GgR2qsoPx5
— MRCTV (@mrctv) March 1, 2022
“I think people have to use their judgment about it. But I do think that if people make their own judgment, I’m making my own judgment, that I won’t be wearing a mask tonight,” Pelosi told MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell.
2. AKSHUALLY, MASKING KIDS DOES HAVE COSTS: For the past two years, many liberals have argued that “kids are resilient” and that even if the benefits of masking school children aren’t great, there’s little downside. But this week The New York Times, a lodestar for the liberal consensus, changed course.
You'll note that since there are no draconian restrictions, these crybabies have pirouetted to "think of the children," but children are resilient and the kids at my neighborhood elementary school, where everyone seems to be sensibly blasé about masks, seem… happy and fine? https://t.co/cHmBj3o4pT
— Jacob Bacharach (@jakebackpack) January 24, 2022
“It’s a lot to ask young children to wear masks for several hours a day, especially when so many adults seem to struggle with it,” The Times’ editorial board decreed Monday.
3. THIS IS WHAT WE’VE BEEN SAYING: On Tuesday, Axios reported that “following the science” in fact involves a “complex array of factors that policymakers must weigh in formulating a response.”
- “Science has been weaponized time and again to justify or defend positions held by both policymakers and public health experts. Even when data is irrefutable, people can disagree on the application of that data and how much value to give other factors,” wrote Caitlin Owens.
- According to Owens, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recent decision to loosen masking guidance is the “latest example of a pandemic policy rooted in science, but that is ultimately a judgment call.”