Hillary Clinton, ideological pseudoscience and the death of truth

Hillary Clinton, ideological pseudoscience and the death of truth

Totalitarian mechanisms come into play to crush the truth when it refutes the ideological hobbyhorses of a predominant political movement.

WASHINGTON, September 13, 2016 — Last July, Hillary Clinton’s personal physician issued a letter to the press designed to quell concerns over the Democratic presidential candidate’s health and fitness to serve.

The letter noted Mrs. Clinton’s medical history included “hypothyroidism and seasonal allergies,” with Dr. Lisa Bardack adding that Clinton’s history was “notable for a deep vein thrombosis in 1998 and 2009, an elbow fracture in 2009” and that “Mrs. Clinton suffered a stomach virus after traveling, became dehydrated, fainted and sustained a concussion” in 2012.

Then, Dr. Bardack’s medical evaluation came to an astonishing conclusion, “She [Clinton] is in excellent physical condition and fit to serve as President of the United States.” The all-permeating stench of this episode has managed to undermine the veracity of diagnostic medicine and science in general.

Hillary Clinton suffers a fainting spell after leaving a 9/11 ceremony in New York City.
Hillary Clinton suffers a fainting spell while leaving a 9/11 ceremony in New York City.

The fainting spell Clinton suffered last Sunday either means the former Secretary of State needs a new doctor, or that the ideological nostrums of the left, espoused by the Democratic nominee and her party, have done more than merely corrupt constitutional government, the nation’s educational system and our media institutions.

We are led to believe that in this world there exists what is known as objective truth. Further, we are told there are none more dedicated to truth than the the all-wise elites of the organized left.

The left tells us it’s the consensus among climate researchers that man-made carbon emissions are causing Earth temperatures to rise, glaciers to recede, polar icecaps to melt thus causing polar bears, exhausted from swimming, to drown.

So certain are they that many of them now call for legislation making it illegal to challenge climate-change alarmism. Members of the Democratic Party platform committee, for instance, issued the following statement last June:

“The Committee unanimously adopted a joint proposal from [Sen. Bernie] Sanders and [Hillary] Clinton representatives to commit to making America run entirely on clean energy,” with another “calling on the Department of Justice to investigate alleged corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies who have reportedly misled shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change.”

And who paid for the scientific consensus on climate change? According to the Science and Public Policy Institute, it was Uncle Sam – to the tune of $32.5 billion (1989-2009).

A 2015 report by David Wojick and Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute says,

“Federal policies on climate-change and federal funding of climate research are both extensive. The linkage between these policies and research has become a major topic of discussion, including numerous allegations of bias… if this sort of bias is indeed widespread then there are serious implications for new policies, both at the Federal level and within the scientific community itself.”

Trofim Denisovich Lysenko.
Trofim Denisovich Lysenko.

Trofim Denisovich Lysenko was a pioneer in science. At least that’s what he thought. He rejected traditional biology in favor of his own, believing he could transform rye into wheat and wheat into barley.

His alchemical ideas caught the imagination of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who believed they would magically translate into higher crop yields. Accordingly, Stalin earmarked government funding for Lysenko and ordered government-controlled media to promote his “truly communist” science.

Although Lysenko’s ideas proved failures – which he blamed on sabotage – he reigned over the Institute of Genetics of the U.S.S.R.’s Academy of Sciences from 1940 to 1965.

His brand of genetic pseudoscience became known as “Lysenkoism.”

In 1964, Soviet nuclear physicist and political dissident Andrei Sakharov said Lysenko was responsible for the “shameful backwardness of Soviet biology” and “for the degeneration of learning and for the defamation, firing, even death, of many genuine scientists.”

You see, totalitarian mechanisms of the left come into play to crush the truth when it refutes the ideological hobbyhorses of such a predominant political movement.

In America, that movement wants Hillary Clinton in the White House. Its political currents are so strong and swift, doctors who have sworn to “do no harm” have stretched the truth in its service, telling the American people their patient – who is prone to uncontrolled coughing fits and fainting spells – is “in excellent physical condition and fit to serve as President of the United States.”

Not to worry. The Democratic Party platform committee will soon discover an ideologically pure pseudoscientist who boasts a 100 percent cure rate for what ails Hillary Clinton.

And you can bet that cure will be heralded by an irrefutable “scientific consensus.”

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Communities Digital News

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.