Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Speaking of virtue signaling
Quote | Reply
surprised #pink no one posted this


https://fox17.com/...isturbing-revelation

Get out the torches and pitchforks
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Can you tell me more about the contact tracing process in Tennessee? I'm guessing it's a lot easier to contact trace workers at construction sites and people in nursing homes than random bar-goers.

It's a hoax!
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think it’s pretty telling that the email exchange said “for the leadership’s eyes only, not for the public, correct?” and now the Mayor is basically saying “sue us under FOIA” to verify the authenticity.
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
Can you tell me more about the contact tracing process in Tennessee? I'm guessing it's a lot easier to contact trace workers at construction sites and people in nursing homes than random bar-goers.

It's a hoax!

I think you have been smoking too much of the devil's lettuce if you think restricted environments are easier to trace than restaurants and bars.

That said, why the cover-up? I thought we were asking our officials to be honest with us because we were big kids and could handle the truth?
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [TimeIsUp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TimeIsUp wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Can you tell me more about the contact tracing process in Tennessee? I'm guessing it's a lot easier to contact trace workers at construction sites and people in nursing homes than random bar-goers.

It's a hoax!


That said, why the cover-up? I thought we were asking our officials to be honest with us because we were big kids and could handle the truth?

Exactly
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
I think it’s pretty telling that the email exchange said “for the leadership’s eyes only, not for the public, correct?” and now the Mayor is basically saying “sue us under FOIA” to verify the authenticity.

Anyone who works for the government knows their emails are public. She was most likely asking: is this for a public news release? Not, are we being secretive. Everyone knows smart politicians do their shady shit on the phone instead of email.

As for the Sinclair Communications (right wing) owned local Fox news story, it is pretty much all fakes news. I live here. I did not vote for Mayor Cooper, but this story is bullshit.

Earlier this week, Mayor Cooper responded harshly to the local right wing extremists proposing a referendum that will LITERALLY end Nashville’s city government and send us into bankruptcy. It will actively defund not only police, but everything else the city pays for like schools, parks, etc. So yesterday, because they don’t like the tax increase (which is needed since Cooper inherited a major shortfall due to prior administrations playing fast and loose with the budget), they “expose” a story that was reported on the first week of August by online news Tennessee Lookout to make the Mayor look bad. The problem? It’s total fake news. Not only does it leave out legitimate key details, it makes no sense. What does Mayor Cooper have to gain by keeping businesses closed when the more businesses make, the more money the city gets?

There is a Council member and his minions who are trying to hoo-doo Nashville like they did with transit (and that had Koch Brothers money behind it). They’re going to distract with one story and try to turn people against the mayor, then lie about the legislation they want and hope people listen to them. They’ve done it twice now: with Transit and electing Mayor Cooper (there were much better options). Get you all mad and distracted and create a big crap storm in the middle of a national crap storm, knowing people aren’t paying close attention to local politics.

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [TimeIsUp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TimeIsUp wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Can you tell me more about the contact tracing process in Tennessee? I'm guessing it's a lot easier to contact trace workers at construction sites and people in nursing homes than random bar-goers.

It's a hoax!


I think you have been smoking too much of the devil's lettuce if you think restricted environments are easier to trace than restaurants and bars.

That said, why the cover-up? I thought we were asking our officials to be honest with us because we were big kids and could handle the truth?

Cover up = bad. But it's not good if the data are poor because the contact tracing process is ineffective, and then the poor data are used to argue for bars to re-open as normal, and then you see more community spreading.
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
TimeIsUp wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Can you tell me more about the contact tracing process in Tennessee? I'm guessing it's a lot easier to contact trace workers at construction sites and people in nursing homes than random bar-goers.

It's a hoax!


I think you have been smoking too much of the devil's lettuce if you think restricted environments are easier to trace than restaurants and bars.

That said, why the cover-up? I thought we were asking our officials to be honest with us because we were big kids and could handle the truth?


Cover up = bad. But it's not good if the data are poor because the contact tracing process is ineffective, and then the poor data are used to argue for bars to re-open as normal, and then you see more community spreading.

true, but that does not appear to be situation here. The discussion revolved around concealing and misrepresenting the data instead of "needs further review due to incomplete statistical analysis."
Quote Reply
Re: Speaking of virtue signaling [TimeIsUp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TimeIsUp wrote:
The discussion revolved around concealing and misrepresenting the data instead of "needs further review due to incomplete statistical analysis."

Correct. They had ample opportunity to say the data wasn't released because it was flawed or there was uncertainty around the methodology but they did not. They still have not.
Quote Reply