12 thoughts on “News/Politics 5-4-20

  1. A bit much, no?


    “Gallup, NM ordered under quarantine; roads in and out of city sealed by police, Army National Guard”

    “New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham on Friday invoked the state’s Riot Control Act to lock down the city of Gallup, New Mexico — population 22,000 — ordering all roads leading in and out of the city to be sealed off by police and Army National Guard personnel.

    The governor’s office said in a press release:

    “Effective at 12 p.m., May 1, all roads into Gallup are closed. Businesses in the city of Gallup will close from 5 p.m. through 8 a.m. Vehicles may only have a maximum of two individuals. Residents of the city should remain at home except for emergency outings and those essential for health, safety and welfare.”

    Pictures posted to social media show the quarantine being enforced:”



  2. Joe’s a little slow. We already discovered the whole pay equality thing in pro-soccer was a contrived farce. But Joe’s not yet up to speed.



  3. Yeah he was vetted, by the same people who vetted Barry, so not at all.



  4. If you can’t take the heat from the fires you and your fellow media members create, maybe it’s time to look into coding or some other line of work.




  5. Huh.


    “Nobel prize-winning scientist: the Covid-19 epidemic was never exponential”


    “As he is careful to point out, Professor Michael Levitt is not an epidemiologist. He’s Professor of Structural Biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for “the development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems.” He’s a numbers guy — as he told us in our interview, his wife says he loves numbers more than her — but then, much of modern science is really about statistics (as his detractors never tire of pointing out, Professor Neil Ferguson is a theoretical physicist by training).

    With a purely statistical perspective, he has been playing close attention to the Covid-19 pandemic since January, when most of us were not even aware of it. He first spoke out in early February, when through analysing the numbers of cases and deaths in Hubei province he predicted with remarkable accuracy that the epidemic in that province would top out at around 3,250 deaths.

    His observation is a simple one: that in outbreak after outbreak of this disease, a similar mathematical pattern is observable regardless of government interventions. After around a two week exponential growth of cases (and, subsequently, deaths) some kind of break kicks in, and growth starts slowing down. The curve quickly becomes “sub-exponential”.

    This may seem like a technical distinction, but its implications are profound. The ‘unmitigated’ scenarios modelled by (among others) Imperial College, and which tilted governments across the world into drastic action, relied on a presumption of continued exponential growth — that with a consistent R number of significantly above 1 and a consistent death rate, very quickly the majority of the population would be infected and huge numbers of deaths would be recorded. But Professor Levitt’s point is that that hasn’t actually happened anywhere, even in countries that have been relatively lax in their responses.

    He takes specific issue with the Neil Ferguson paper. “In a footnote to a table it said, assuming exponential growth of 15% for six days. Now I had looked at China and had never seen exponential growth that wasn’t decaying rapidly.”

    The explanation for this flattening that we are used to is that social distancing and lockdowns have slowed the curve, but he is unconvinced. As he put it to me, in the subsequent examples to China of South Korea, Iran and Italy, “the beginning of the epidemics showed a slowing down and it was very hard for me to believe that those three countries could practise social distancing as well as China.” He believes that both some degree of prior immunity and large numbers of asymptomatic cases are important factors.”


  6. Leftists unite for censorship.

    The saddest part? The media is in on it too.


    “Legacy news, social media giants converge in new era of censorship
    Once rivals for audience share and cultural relevance, new and old media are now allied in top-down control of information.”

    “Social media giants like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter promised a new era of unfettered information, bypassing traditional media gatekeepers in the process.

    People could decide for themselves what mattered most, echoing the country’s democratic ideals.

    Instead, we’re now seeing tech platforms following legacy media’s lead, sometimes literally, in deciding what information we can and cannot see.

    New York Times reporter Davey Alba coaxed YouTube to remove a video by Aytu BioScience regarding a possible UV light treatment for COVID19 because it “backs up Trump’s idea … that UV rays kill coronavirus.”

    The video site deemed the information “violated its community guidelines.”

    (Lashing back on Twitter at “trolls” claiming “that my getting in touch w/ YouTube to have them take a look at @BioscienceAytu’s video amounted to censoring, and suppressing a legit treatment without reporting on it,” Alba said, “That’s…not true.”)

    New and old media, once at odds for audience share and cultural relevance, are frequently acting in unison. And it’s happening during a critical election year while a pandemic runs rampant across the globe, the facts of which remain in near constant flux.

    Author and Daily Wire podcaster Andrew Klavan savaged Big Tech for deciding what information we can and cannot have at our disposal.

    “The difference is not between good and bad information … we need all the information so we can decide,” Klavan said on his April 29 podcast. “YouTube has no business censoring anybody. This distrust of the people, this idea that these experts know what they’re doing and the people are fools, it’s just wrong. We need all the information and we need to hear debate.”

    Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee cried foul after YouTube yanked a video starring two California doctors questioning the government’s stay-at-home mantra.

    “These guys are medical doctors,” Huckabee said on Fox News. “They are scientists. For heaven’s sake, they didn’t say anything that was really disputable. They were giving facts [and] figures. I thought the most salient point they made in the course of the video — which I did see before it got pulled — was that historically when you have a pandemic, you quarantine the sick people — not the healthy people. And that was sort of like, you know, the light bulb went off.””


  7. Sorry Kizzie…. 🙂

    But the Karens have been exposed. 🙂


    “More than 900 Missouri residents who ‘snitched’ on lockdown rule-breakers fear retaliation after their details are leaked online

    St. Louis County had urged the community to share details of anyone not following guidelines in response to the coronavirus pandemic in March

    After more than 900 submitted tips, 29 businesses were reprimanded

    Many tipsters reported their own jobs for not following social distancing rules

    ‘I’m worried about someone showing up at my door, showing up at my workplace or me getting fired for doing what is right,’ a tipster said

    Jared Totsch shared the file of complaint emails in a Facebook group and said: ‘I released the info in an attempt to discourage such behavior in the future'”


    “Hundreds of people have been exposed for reporting people who have flouted social distancing rules and some are now scared they could receive a backlash.

    The names and addresses of approximately 900 people in Missouri were released as part of a media request under the Sunshine Law, which allows for the release of information submitted to a public agency (except for wrongdoing and abuse tips).

    St. Louis County had urged the community to share details of anyone not following guidelines in response to the coronavirus pandemic and noted in the terms and conditions that information may be shared publicly.

    However some people may not have read the small print submitted tips via an online form and email from the end of March.

    Many had asked for their communications to remain private.”


    If you’re worried about being exposed as a snitch, then don’t be a Karen.


  8. If I understand you correctly, yesterday, you said the police were right to be wary of certain groups marching based on past events. But that’s part of my point — police racially and politically profile and thus its more probable an incident will occur with a black led protest march or the march will not be allowed to reach its destination.

    When we look at previous events of violence, we find its not blacks and leftists. Its white conservative males. White supremacist groups have been identified as the largest source of domestic terrorism. Removing the political moniker, its white males who are most likely to be involved in a mass shooting. The difference is we tend to view white violence as “lone wolves” and not apply that to the larger group, ie white people. Whereas violence perpetuated by blacks is applied to the whole group.

    The idea that an armed populace prevents tyranny is ahistorical and nonsensical. The liberal Weimar republic had strict gun controls. When the Nazis ie fascists came to power they repealed most of them to appease their rural nationalist base rate. On the other side of the political spectrum, communist Yugoslavia had high gun ownership. Today the Nordic socialists have high gun ownership as do the more centrist New Zealand and Canada. There is no correlation between gun control, gun ownership and a type of government. After the US, the largest gun owners are in Yemen both a failed state and an autocratic Islamic state when in does function.


  9. Its not censorship if a private company won’t carry your tweet, rant, or video. I don’t expect the NYT to publish my anti-capitalist rant. Its a private company and is charge to what it publishes. Similarly youtube doesn’t have to host your video. If the company determines for whatever reason they don’t want to host the video they don’t have too. In most cases it has to do with liability or guilt by association. If you support people who break the law say social distancing they will take it down — they don’t want to be associated with lawbreaking. Military historians frequently see their WWII videos taken down if there is too many Nazi flags — if the automated algorithm sees something it doesn’t like, then its down. Its not censorship, its protecting private property.

    As much as like nieghbourhood busy bodies being exposed, the leaking of a tip line that promises confidentiality is troubling. Some of those who “snitched” were telling on their owning bosses for violating not only social distancing but health and safety rules. They now face very real consequences at work — this in unacceptable. People must feel comfortable reporting health and safety violations at work.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.