Coronavirus in one state (158)

Governor Tim “tear down this” Walz continues to wage the war on Covid. He clings to the temporary emergency powers he has exercised under state law in order to control the “dials” of our lives. It’s a long way to temporary.

However, the war is over. There is no emergency. This series should come to an end.

With the assistance of Kevin Roche, I continue to submit questions to the Minnesota Department of Health. So long as the “emergency” persists, they are obligated to answer them. If there is anything to be made of MDH’s answers, Kevin comments at Healthy Skeptic.

I have published my questions and MDH’s answers over the past months for illustrative purposes. The answers mostly illustrate the evasions and misrepresentations on which the “emergency” is predicated. My inquiry into cases traced to tribal casinos gave life to the cliché about pulling teeth.

The point has been made many times over. I have discontinued the publication of the questions and answers in this series. War is over if you want it, and I do.

In the latest example of the misrepresentations on which the “emergency” has been predicated, consider the limitations on youth sports Walz promulgated late last year. We have been afforded an illuminating glimpse into the “science” — i.e., politics — supporting Walz’s temporary shutdown. In this case the politics dictated a scapegoat for Walz’s failures with long-term care facilities.

At Alpha News Anthony Gockowski has an excellent story on the emails showing the panicked search for a rationale to support Walz’s edict: “Prior to youth sports pause, state officials admitted to lack of evidence, emails suggest.”

Compare and contrast Gockowski’s straight news account with Jeremy Olson’s Star Tribune story “Youth sports groups question Minnesota COVID-19 restrictions.” Subhead: “Internal e-mails show state leaders concerned last fall about how to present an unpopular pause on high school and club athletics.”

Olson’s story passes judgment on the allegedly “odd time” to delve into the issue insofar as the war is over, or ending, to borrow my metaphor here. The “odd time” results from the Walz administration’s stonewalling to delay production of the emails. And if the time is “odd,” as Olson asserts, why the continuing “emergency”? The stonewalling is a phenomenon I have personally experienced and documented repeatedly in this series. It’s not the story that is of interest to Olson, but it’s a story and in fact it’s the story here.

Olson’s story is illustrative in its own way. It illustrates the Star Tribune’s continuing support for the twists and turns of the DFL authorities who continue to exercise control over our daily lives.

Responses