Last week, the airwaves were full of media praise for Nancy Pelosi to cover for a meltdown seemly aimed at reporter James Rosen but I feel was much more a vent toward a plan going very badly. The media certainly came with both barrels. Chris Mathews and selected Hardball panelists agreed that it may well have been her “finest hour.” That tower of truth Lawrence O’Donnell celebrated her “crushing” of Rosen. Andrea Mitchell attested to Pelosi’s “deep faith” and her sincerity in citing her status as a properly raised Catholic. And the ever-so conservative of convenience David Brooks, no doubt more impressed by the crisp crease of her pantsuit than her substance, called it a “beautiful moment.”

When I bothered to watch the clip of the press conference (actually just a tight, measured statement to the reporters) and her turning on Rosen as she was leaving, my first impression was of a cornered rat striking out and releasing the frustration with its predicament. It might have been quite a bit of her own doing, but Pelosi has been cornered into calling for the bills of impeachment after losing all of the battles needed to make the measure favor her party and her ends.

I use a lot of dangerous drugs. Well, not me personally, but on my patients. Of course, I use dangerous drugs only when the disease I’m treating is more dangerous than the drug. In diseases that are not life-threatening, naturally I avoid dangerous drugs and try to stick with safer therapies. Chemotherapy drugs can save your life, but they can also have significant side effects. Side effects that you would not tolerate if you were treating a sinus infection. But if you have cancer, and you’re trying to avoid dying, it may make sense to take a chance on side effects – even very serious side effects. In truly desperate circumstances, there are few actions one would not consider, no matter how drastic.

That’s what always bothered me about the great leftist / progressive / socialist leaders of the 20^th century: Hitler, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, and so on. They saw a problem and took drastic measures to fix it. When I consider the horrifyingly drastic measures they took, I wonder, “What possible problem did they see that warranted such drastic actions? Who on earth could have possibly thought that was a good idea?” Even for those who lack sympathy for others, killing millions of people is no small thing. They claimed that they were trying to save or improve their countries for their citizens. Which some considered to be an adequate reason. Think about that. And then, think about Greta Thunberg.