Those Superstitious Democrats

Even when they’re vaccinated against the coronavirus, Democrats insist on wearing masks and social distancing. Think of the absurd scene in the House chamber when President Joe Biden addressed Congress last week, or when Biden wore a mask on a Zoom call. The Democrats say theirs is the party of science but in reality it’s the party of fear, runaway emotions, and myth.

Not a shred of science has established that mandatory mask wearing and stay-at-home orders have been effective prophylactics against the Chinese virus. Yet the Democrats, which includes nearly the entirety of the press, have embraced both with a zeal much like that of the Salemites who hunted witches in the 17th century.

While the Democrats nagged and threw wet blankets on facts, pleasure, and optimism, John Tierney, an authentic journalist not a member of the Democratic Party’s disinformation team, dug into some research. And what did he find?

“There’s still no convincing evidence that strict lockdowns reduced the death toll from Covid-19,” he wrote in March. “But one effect is clear: more deaths from other causes, especially among the young and middle-aged, minorities, and the less affluent.”

A National Bureau of Economic Research report published last month showed what many of us knew intuitively: Lockdown policies failed. It determined that “evidence suggests that ‘households show the highest transmission rates’ and that ‘households are high-risk settings for the transmission of’” the virus.

While we acknowledge that covering our faces might slow the spread of the coronavirus under some conditions, the Democrats continue to insist that masks should be worn even among the immunized. Though many of us see mask rules as dehumanizing, veiling oneself is a sign of personal virtue for many on the left. But this chart, using federal and New York Times data, shows just how useless state mask mandates – as well as lockdowns – have been.

It’s no outlier. Rational Ground, an organization that was set up to “answer to the flood of chaotic COVID-19 misinformation,” “found that states where people are told to wear masks actually have a greater spread of COVID-19.”

The hysterical reaction to the virus from the party of the masked president has been so pervasive that it’s trickled down to everyday Democrats. Their decline has been documented by the Atlantic, which, earlier this week – nearly 14 months after the Democrats thought it best for all of us to hide in our basements – published a story exposing the thinking disorders plaguing the members of America’s left “who can’t quit lockdown.”

“Progressive communities have been home to some of the fiercest battles over COVID-19 policies, and some liberal policy makers have left scientific evidence behind,” writes Emma Green.

It’s a story, she says, “about progressives who stressed the scientific evidence, and then veered away from it.”

Green identifies a “subset” of Democrats whose “diligence against COVID-19 remains an expression of political identity – even when that means overestimating the disease’s risks or setting limits far more strict than what public-health guidelines permit.” Her report is rich with stories about overly worried progressives wiping down “groceries with Lysol wipes,” wearing masks “in places where you’re unlikely to spread the coronavirus, such as on a hiking trail,” and “scolding those who aren’t wearing masks.”

A new Rasmussen Reports poll confirms Green’s overall point. Three in four Democrats say the fully vaccinated should continue to mask up in public. In bright contrast, two-thirds of Republicans said they shouldn’t have to. More than three in four Democrats (77%) believe those who’ve had the virus but recovered should still cover their faces.

Of course we’ve long known that the Democrats’ allegiance to science and data has been promiscuous. Here are a few more examples of their fanaticism:

Fallacy-fueled economic policy. Democrats have been fully committed for decades to raising taxes, increasing regulation, redistributing the wealth, and heavy borrowing to pay for government programs. None of these are economically sound. In fact, they all cause devastating economic outcomes.

Genetically modified foods. Dr. Henry Miller, a regular contributor to these pages, tells us that, “according to the judgment of more than 280 global health, safety, academic, scientific, and governmental organizations, including our FDA,” genetically modified foods are safe for consumption. But as we’ve said before, the left is convinced they “are mysterious products that pose a profound health threat,” even though they have likely saved billions of lives.

Climate. Tall tales don’t come any taller than this one. Backed by nothing more than a load conjecture, the Democrats claim the science is settled, that there’s no denying Earth is being overheated by human greenhouse gas emissions. But nothing is ever settled in science. And there is more than enough uncertainty to create doubt. The long-term temperature record is unreliable. The models predicting global warming have been wrong. And it’s widely known that carbon dioxide, vilified by the Democrats since at least the late 1980s, is a weak greenhouse gas – or maybe isn’t a greenhouse gas at all. And need we mention that the climate has always changed due to innumerable natural causes and always will?

Chemophobia. This, says Politico, is “an irrational fear of ‘toxic chemical’ exposure in situations where there is no scientific evidence of danger.” It’s a “form of science denialism” that is quite common among Democrats. Digging into piles of proposed legislation, Politico found that “all but a handful” of “the sponsors of various chemophobic bills reveals” are authored by lawmakers from the left.

We see those NASA T-shirts and the narcissistic, plainly juvenile signs out there which proclaim “In this house … we believe science is real.” But no amount of self-congratulating, sanctimonious display can substitute for reality. The Democratic Party and the bulk of its supporters have a primitive outlook that threatens the progress of civilization. Would anyone be shocked if the next time Biden made a public appearance he dressed like 17th century plague doctor? Of course we all would. But it would wear off fast, given what we know about him and his followers.

— Written by the I&I Editorial Board