Imagine working on a science agency and being like: “Yeah, I think we should collect less data + present it deceptively.” The banality of evil on full display, killing people quietly by concealing numbers and manipulating data. Seriously insidious stuff. Can’t sugarcoat it.
Okay, so why is this maybe worse then banally evil? Because it’s willfully misleading to assess risk. Without any explanation I’ve seen, CDC switched to completely arbitrary metric around percentage of deaths compared to everything else one could possibly die of is useless.
It’d be like living next to a toxic wasteland like Chernobyl or something (COVID still a top killer + compounds other top things that kill) and saying “Yeah, but as a trial percentage of what you can die of, it’s really only small. There’s 1,000 ways to die.”
And just to be super clear, and correct me if I’m misreading this newly minted greenwashed map, but to be in the red on the map the state equivalent of 26.7 million Americans would have to be dying of COVID? That’s clearly never been the case since 2020 + disease has been
leading cause of death and stunningly successful at disabling people and putting something in their body now documented in countless peer reviewed studies to be linked to long term very serious public health consequences that will kill people + destroy life quality.
By this new greenwash metric, and again correct me if I’ve misunderstood it, no US illness would get the map much beyond a pure green. And life expectancy continues to drop in the US due to COVID + other many other diseases/reasons.
In other words, the map is the same as “the water is safe in Dimock and Flint, the petrochemical refinery is pristine and nothing to worry about in living across the street from it, nothing to worry about for gun violence since it’s overall just a small % of US total deaths,” etc
It’s just a complete and shameless out of any appropriate social or scientific context manipulation of data, in other words, propaganda that will get people hurt and killed. And it’s pulled out of an age-old playbook of deceit. That’s why I used harsh words above, in sum.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Are there actual volunteers who show up in any meaningful number at these YIMBY rallies? I'm not a NIMBY at all (people in my neighborhood are and I refused to join the group over their parochialism and BS about "changing community character"), but at least NIMBYs are volunteers
Might be wrong, but at least locally (never heard of "YIMBY" in the midwest) everyone I've seen identify as a YIMBY here is somehow on the payroll of developers who are gentrifying communities and making them unaffordable. Or, it's politicians seeking developer money lol.
It's just an additional thing here, but I've also dealt with this guy during my days as a reporter. He worked on behalf of either the Chamber or Lincoln Club (not much different, so kind of distinction sans difference lol) to try to defeat the more progressive candidate.
So, Nathan Fletcher rose to the upper echelon of San Diego and California Democratic politics alongside Lorena Gonzalez without even basic things about his past being verified. Like, where he got a college degree or even if he has one. Same for his time in the GOP.
Apparently he also had a kid he hadn't disclosed from an out of marriage relationship who just "showed up" several years ago. It should go without saying, but basic facts about someone's background who oversees millions in budget money should be asked about incessantly.
May have sounded harsh when I said it yesterday, but Nathan Fletcher is the George Santos of San Diego. There are a lot of things about his background that just weren't fully vetted. See Trumpian explanation about transcripts. sandiegouniontribune.com/news/watchdog/…
For those unfamiliar with how Nathan Fletcher got elected to begin with in 2018, about 1.5 years after marrying Lorena Gonzalez, a key component was her facilitation of dark $$ into his campaign coffers via steering it into @sandiegodemsocregister.com/what-unlimited…
The fact it happened was covered well by local press. This piece by @inewsource explained that, essentially, the Power Couple found a legal loophole and exploited it. It’s nearly impossible to understand the dynamic duo today without knowing this part. inewsource.org/2018/07/24/dem…
Lo and behold, just months later they tried to replicate it again. I remember finding it odd that Olga Diaz was calling for no primary at her first debate vs Terra Lawson-Remer in 2019. Like a year before the primary. The goal was a plot facilitated by Nathan & Lorena.
So, the blue check becomes 100% obvious tomorrow between those who paid for it and those who didn't. But I've always promoted that the quest to get a blue check, even before paying for it, was a bit of a grift anyway. Elevating "thought leaders" & demoting many with great ideas.
The whole thing was so subjective and promoted behaving on this platform in a way so as to get the blue check that I found it destructive overall. At least now it will be 100% clear those who have a blue check are grifters/Elon Musk toadies, rather than leaving it up to question
And I realize I have a blue check. I did have to go through an application process and at the tie I got it, I was doing national leading coverage on fracking, LNG, oil & gas. But like, still some person subjectively had to be like "This guy is worthy of a blue check."
Damn, this editorial is scathing, made more so by the cartoon accompanying it. And I’d just argue this conduct makes him unfit for any job, not just those funded by taxpayers.
It’s frustrating because most local journalists enabled this locally. There have always been skeletons in the closet. But media fawned over the Power Couple and their rise to prominence instead of viewing them — like any elected official — through an critical lens.
That’s why I actually for a short time in 2019 created my own thing called San Diego Bulldog. Was going to be devoted to muckraking reporting on a nonpartisan basis without fear or favor. The whole point of it: separate myth from reality.