Georgia

Yesterday, I wrote briefly about the effort to re-open Georgia's economy:

Consider the case of Georgia. Governor Brian Kemp has decided that the state will begin to open up its economy. It's worth noting that someone must go first, that there are risks, but that the economy cannot and should not be closed indefinitely. Instead of commending Georgians for their attempt to pave the way for openings in other states, the Dems and their trained media hamsters (along with a few GOP catastrophists) have decided that the state's effort to restart its economy is somehow "irresponsible" and "dangerous." Why exactly? Because the governor correctly perceives continuing closure as something that will do enormous harm to his state's economy and as a consequence, to millions of residents?

In the nightly COVID-19 update yesterday, Donald Trump indicated that he didn't agree with Governor's Kemp's rapid re-opening strategy, but he noted that he respected the Governor's right to do what he felt was right for his state. Gosh, that's both constitutional and rational, but the Democrat's trained hamsters in the media will not be dissuaded from their quest to keep the country shut down. It's an absolute certainty that they will behave badly as they cover Georgia's attempt at re-opening. And I'm not alone in that opinion. Jake Novak writes:

We've already seen plenty of journalistic errors in the coverage of this story since it broke over the weekend. The best example is CNN.com's headline on the story that includes the phrase saying that the move, "... will likely please Trump," thus ensuring that this issue will be seen as a yet another pro/con Trump dividing line where facts go to die ...

We also have lots of supposedly objective journalists who have already gone on record, on social media and elsewhere, rooting heavily against, (and in some cases for), the Georgia experiment to succeed. Thus, anything those journalists write about how the Georgia reopening proceeds is hopelessly tainted by their all-too-public admissions about where they stand on the idea.

Novak suggests three rules that journalists (i use that term very loosely) should follow as they cover this story:

1. Stop publicly rooting for a particular outcome. In this case, the hamsters want to see Georgia fail and they'll paint even innocuous events as "evidence" of failure. A cough inside a nail salon will be characterized as akin to the release of COVID-19 by the Wuhan Virology Lab. Oh wait ... there are many hamsters who refuse to investigate that allegation and still characterize it a "conspiracy theory."

2. Learn some basic math and use it with appropriate context. Even if a predictable and relatively small number of new COVID-19 cases are encountered, we're guaranteed to see headlines like "GA Cases Spike After Re-Opening." Compared to what? Novak writes:

Context is also a place where mathematics and journalism often converge, and leaves journalism lying lifelessly on the ground. Any changes to Georgia's death or infection rates will need to be compared to states of similar sizes that have not ended any parts of their lockdowns. Otherwise, there's no way to really judge if any state is faring better than another.

Don't make it all about Trump. Because Trump Derangement Syndrome is rampant among the hamsters, anything Trump favors, even if it good for the country and the health of its citizens, is by their demented definition, bad!! Trump favors restarting the economy, therefore any restart is bad unless unachievable and often ridiculous constraints are imposed.

This is good advice, but it's highly unlikely that it will be followed. Much of the coverage of GA's attempt at re-opening will likely be fake news, intended to defeat other early attempts at re-opening by other states.

Here's an example from anti-Trumper (and therefore, a supporter of keeping the country closed) Jill Filipovic of CNN. She does the usual virtue signaling, masquerading as thoughtful commentary (2nd indent in italics is my fisking of her comments):

Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina and Florida -- all states with Republican governors -- have announced plans to roll back social distancing measures over the next few weeks. According to public health experts and institutions, including the WHO and CDC, social distancing is already the absolute baseline when it comes to facing down a deadly and highly contagious disease.

That would be the same WHO that told us there was no virus threat in January and the same WHO that covered for China during a preliminary investigation of the virus' origins. And yeah, that would be the same CDC that botched early test release. Finally, does the person who wrote this actually believe that there are no eminent epidemiologists who disagree with the notion that all states remain locked down without adaptations for individual circumstances.

We really need the mass manufacture of tests and the attendant supplies necessary to test, not to mention adequate tracking and treatment. Plus, of course, actual widespread testing.
The United States has tested about 4 million people over several months. A new Harvard report says we need to be testing more like 5 million every day.

Yeah, that's easily achievable. Filipovic discounts the logistical challenge involved in something like this along with its sheer difficulty, not to mention the simple notion that it may not be necessary. In addition, she seems unable to grasp the simple reality that additional testing has already "grown the denominator" (does she even know what a denominator is) and therefore: (1) the case fatality rate for COVID-19 will almost assuredly drop to the level of the common flu (about 0.1 to 0.2 percent), and (2) in turn testing being conducted every day will validate the strategy of governors who want to re-open.

But because our federal government is failing so miserably in that effort, the rest of us are left to do what we can to at least try not to get this thing in the first place. That means staying away from other people.

So in other words, if we had just tested, and tested, and tested in late February and March, the virus, would have been eliminated. That's patent nonsense. In fact, at that time, the virus was already well embedded in the population (antibody studies by Stanford University in Santa Clara, CA indicate that fact). Oh, BTW, we did test, and test and test and guess what, the virus could not be stopped.

And it means hoping our states, cities and municipalities will step up and fill the leadership vacuum left by the White House. Because this is less a problem of people than leadership: Overwhelming majorities of Americans under lockdown orders are complying with them. Overwhelming majorities of Americans support the restrictions. But we know that many people will, understandably, trust what our leaders tell us -- and too many of our conservative leaders are not earning that trust.

So ... it's not a problem for the people, huh? Maybe the author is unperturbed, collecting a paycheck and safely questioning the "leadership" without so much as a single coherent suggestion of how it could be effectively (key word) modified, but there are tewns of millions of people out there who might characterize no income as a "problem." The lack of empathy here is absolutely astounding.

These Republican governors don't even want to do the bare minimum of telling people to stay home, despite the nearly unanimous advice of public health authorities and experts. (I say "nearly unanimous" here simply as a hedge; I actually couldn't find a single reputable public health authority or expert who recommends ending social distancing)

All she had to do was refer to a number of my posts. I'm not going to waste my time provided hyperlinks to refute this outright falsehood.

"If you jump the gun and go into a situation where you have a big spike, you're going to set yourself back," Dr. Anthony Fauci told ABC's George Stephanopolous. So as painful as it is to go by the careful guidelines of gradually phasing into a reopening, it's going to backfire."

Ya gotta laugh, Filipovic couldn't resist quoting the word "spike" as I predicted in earlier in this post. And by the way, as a man who continually tells use we must rely on "the science," it's a bit surprising that Dr. Fauci would himself use words like "spike" and "backfire" when there is no clear scientific evidence to support his claim in this situation. To wit, we have NEVER before closed a society so there cannot be historical data to support his claim. It's his opinion, and that's all it is.

There you have it. The "journalist" who wrote the CNN piece violated every one of Novak's rules. No surprise there.

So yeah, the campaign to continue the shutdown and consequently disregard the very real risk destroying whatever is left of the economy, not to mention the hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands of lives lost because the shutdown remains in place (e.g., deaths due to postponed elective surgery, deaths due to late diagnosis of other illnesses, deaths due to suicide driven by economic or psychological despair ) is led by the propagandist hacks at CNN. After all, sowing discontent and anger with the potential that it will spill over in Trump's defeat is worth it for them and their Democrat masters. Let the little people who are living without a paycheck (and increasingly, in danger of losing their house, or their car or their employer) be damned.