Fact or Bullshit?

 Occasionally, I'll encounter someone on the right who's consumed the Koolaid, but doesn't insult me when engaged.  Today was such a day and the context was around what this person considered as overwhelming evidence Covid vaccines were killing scores of people.  Our meeting was over something one of the worst pieces of right wing garbage, Stew Peters, posted.  (below)

This is a perfect example of the innuendo tactic I'll be mentioning in an upcoming entry.  The goal of this one was to keep his readers on the hook, believing the claim of numerous deaths caused by the Covid vaccine.  I've already debunked most of that package of nonsense here, but the person I was interacting with hadn't read the post, much like the rest of the planet.  Like many on the right, she blindly accepted what she was told by right wing influencers.  

The purpose of this quick entry is to say "don't do that" and share the process I use when I'm presented with something that would be considered a game changer.  This isn't so much a formal process, but a set of litmus tests I apply to everything.

They include:

- Confirm credibility of the source - This can include the source sharing a claim and/or the data presented

- Verify the existence of what's being presented - Can you even find the article / data in an internet search?

- If it exists, does it say what is claimed? - This one can require some time, depending on what's been presented for you to believe.  For example, I spent a few days poring through the VAERS database to validate right wing claims of widespread severe reactions to the vax.  (those claims were bullshit)  Likewise, I present factual data to provide a compelling argument that carrots are deadly.

- Can the claim be independently validated? - Can you find corroborating evidence from other sources?  This is a big one!

- Why haven't I heard about this already? - If it's so earthshattering, why am I only hearing about it from some no name influencer?  Mainstream media coverup is NOT an unacceptable answer; I outline why in this post.  

Let's walk through this particular instance.  Despite the "article" not specifying vaccines, the innuendo was there, so I'm broadening my scope to include them.   

With respect to credibility, I've encountered too many lies broadcast by right wing media to trust them on anything.  To be clear, I'm referring to empirical facts and not subjective opinion pieces.  As a recent example, one of the outlets (Newsmax, OAN, or Gateway Pundit) posted a story stating the CDC was actively investigating a strong link between the vax and strokes.  However, if you read the CDC statement, it very clearly stated they only had anecdotal evidence of the link, but would monitor the situation.  In other words, they lied to stoke fear and outrage among those who may be more vulnerable to manipulation.  I've always taken the position that if I catch someone in a lie, they're a liar.  

Considering the asshat in question for this example has posted complete fabrications at least once per day, he also lacks any sort of credibility.  

The article wasn't anywhere on line.  Mr. Staines has been good enough to compile all of his articles on his professional website and this one isn't present.  Also note the lack of any sort of identification of the publication itself.  Note this is common with the right wing.

Validation on this one is nonexistent.  There's no evidence of a spike in deaths, period. Which makes answering why I haven't heard about it from sources other than right wing influencers easy.  Not even Fox News has made a peep.  

In this example, you should reach the same conclusion I have (repeatedly).  This tweet is bullshit, meant to push a bullshit narrative.  

Another resource for true facts has been linked below.

Factual data

Evil is Welcome Here

 According to Twitter, I've been a bad boy and more than once.  Early yesterday afternoon, I received an email advising my account was locked for violating some non-specified portion of their rules.  This is my fourth suspension in the past three months, so I was rather miffed.  You'll understand why, later.  When I discovered the penalty for this latest infraction, I felt a mix of outrage and depression.  

Before addressing my latest horrible act, I think it makes sense to quickly review what previously got me thrown in Twitter jail.

The first was a result of referring to Q Bitch Sporkfoot MTG as a "classless bimbo."  That one may have just edged the TOS, but no one can argue the statement wasn't factually correct.

The next two both involved the right wing looneys' favorite crybaby teen, Kyle Rittenhouse.  I was punished for referring to him as an "attention whore" and a then, a "teenage pansy".  I take serious issue with both of those, not only because of their accuracy, but because they flat out don't violate the TOS.  In fact, one of the gif options IN THE TWITTER APP specifically says "Attention Whore"

I'll say that again:  I was suspended for using a phrase Twitter allows you to pic as a gif!

For each of these three heinous non-offenses, I received a week long timeout.  

Because rules are nothing if they don't equally apply to everyone, I happened on the tweet below that clearly violated the rules against making disparaging comments regarding someone's sexual orientation.  Stew Peters is one of the most malignant right wing slime balls on the site and was behind the Suddenly Dying movie.  Anyway, I reported the tweet and received a message from Twitter saying the tweet didn't violate TOS.  

This evil fuck calling Lindsey Graham a HOMO sure as fuck violates your TOS, Space Karen!  But the rules don't apply to everyone, now do they?

That brings us back to my latest infraction.  The offending tweet was in response to a story on Newsmax about Ron DeSatan confirming himself to be a distasteful piece of waste, by stating he was serious about making criminals out of teachers who violated his bigoted, racist laws and they would see jail time.  My response was "Except for minorities and LGTQ, who will be summarily executed."  I was intentional in my wording for two reasons.  First was to emphasize what a hateful little prick he is and second, I wanted to see how many likes such a nasty sentiment would get from the right wing idiots.  The answer is twelve (and zero challenges on being a horrible human being), which absolutely disgusts me.

At this point, you may be wondering what penalty I received for suggesting minorities and LGTBQ should be executed.  If insulting heroes of the stupid got me three, one week suspensions, surely my account would be under serious review for advocating something so vile.  Nope, I received a twelve hour suspension, which has obviously been served.  

An intelligent human being would never look at these situations and consider them as proof Elmo is treating his right wing sycophants in a more favorable manner to those he disagrees with, but it does make one wonder.