For several months, a number of governors and the media have warned us of the dangers of assembling in churches and at many jobs because of the fear of infection. And, motivated by fear, we believed them.

But since the death of George Floyd, the news media, several governors and mayors have encouraged people to protest. Some of them have even joined in the protests. All of a sudden, "social distancing" and the fear of COVID-19 seem to have disappeared for those encouraging the protests.

Is it possible that the “stay-at-home” orders and closure of businesses and churches were at least an overreaction, and at worst were an attempt to damage the economy during an election year? And wouldn’t that be meddling in the election process? And isn’t it odd that the most restrictive COVID-19 governors happen to be encouraging the protesters – some, like Michigan’s governor, actually walking with protesters. When her citizens protested her rules, she brought in the state police.

Last year, in Kentucky, former Attorney General Andy Beshear supported protests against then-Gov. Matt Bevin. Now that Beshear is governor, he has called in the Kentucky National Guard. Seems odd to me! Being a Democratic governor must be difficult.

Edmond Schwab


(21) comments

Enough Already 2

When I read such comments as presented by Econobot, Parameter Estimator, and others such as Mr. Schwab, it always makes me feel I’m back at the old Southern Kentucky Fair and I have been drawn into the small circle surrounding the huckster operating the old “3 shell and a pea game”.

The pea is here, it is there, it’s everywhere!

This is also akin to Parameter Estimators saying that “Fryer’s work was better than peer reviewed.” (see thread below)

Wow, if this isn’t a clear setup to jump in and present some alternative facts, then I’ll be damned!


It has been noted that Dr. William J. Lewinski, a former Minnesota State professor, and Director of the “Force Science Institute, says his testimony and training are based on hard science, but his research has been roundly criticized by experts. An editor for The American Journal of Psychology called his work “pseudoscience.” The Justice Department denounced his findings as “lacking in both foundation and reliability.” Civil rights lawyers say he is selling dangerous ideas.

I personally feel that many of the “trump republican at any cost”, ( that consistently around 37% group of die hards) will always eat up these “dangerous ideas”, and accept them as fact, but that still does not make them real facts!

What say ye?


Soldiers are willing to die in battle to fight the evils in our world. In World War 2, 400,000 US Soldiers died fighting Fascists (They were the original Anti-Fa). Everyone participating in the protests will catch COVID19 and about 10% will DIE. The protesters choose to risk death to change the world. (10% Fatality. America had 1 Million with the virus and 100,000 died at that time.) Memorial Day we saw Republicans go out in huge groups to party. 2 weeks later, incubation time, there was another 19,000 COVID19 cases. There's millions of protesters, so expect everyone in the US to catch the virus now, and if the 10% is accurate, expect 35 Million Americans to die. This will destroy our entire healthcare system, cost the US 10% of the workforce, and devastate the economy. Then Russia, China and the Middle East can finish the job, wipe out the USA forever. These countries have been caught online fanning the flames of protest in the US, to spread the virus. Strange that Trump is helping them fan the flames of the protests, encouraging the Whites to go out in armed groups demanding haircuts, and then again fanning flames in the murder-by-cop situation. Trump should have encouraged online protesting, self-isolation, and expanded our military's mail-in-voting to all Citizens. Trump has done the opposite, and in the end, Russia will benefit from our destruction. (Replies to this commentary will be not be read. The opinion of Trump supporters is useless. Even if you wanted Trump to stop, he doesn't care about you, why should we?)


To Enough Already - don't bother. I don't want your warped opinion.

Enough Already

Yes you do. Your begging for it so I'm going to give it to you. I can't take credit for the paragraph below. It is an excerpt from an article and it says it very well.

Democrats have openly trashed the First Amendment’s guarantees of the free exercise of religion and peaceable assembly in deliberate overreaction to COVID-19, while simultaneously finding a “right” to violent mass protest and property destruction.

The fact is democrats would rather destroy Trump's economy to gain an edge in the election than help the country. While feckless PC nincompoops like yourself defend this anarchy cities run by democrats are being trashed, but when it is all over these same incompetent politicians will want to be bailed out by taxpayers because they played politics instead of protecting their cities. Bleeding heart lefties like you will think it reasonable and comment on editorial pages about how the federal government should be responsible for rebuilding. It is all politics and black people are pawns that democrats use for socialist policy changes in order to regain power. No one is buying the BS anymore.

Naivete is so becoming on you.


Hey, does anyone have a di*do to shove up this guy's a$s? He's spewing crap again. Asking for a friend.

Enough Already

You are such tool. (although not a very sharp one)


I see. So you, a psychic, was expecting Covid19, and the mass protest over cop brutality. Democrats SHOULD HAVE KNOWN all this was going to happen and plan accordingly. Covid19 procedures and measures are still very much valid. Moreso now than before. But it's a drop in the bucket in the minds of hundreds of years of torment and brutality in the black communities. Every day is a 'virus' experience for them. Every day is wondering if they're going to return home unharmed or depressingly disappointed. They will do whatever it takes, even chance Covid19, to remove the daily threat to life, safety, and need to come out of the pit of desperation that haunts them from birth to death. THERE IS NOTHING POLITICAL ABOUT THIS!


Whatever it takes except look at actual facts. Roland G. Fryer, Jr. is a black man who is an economist at Harvard. Of course he too was shocked to find that white men are the group most likely to die from police brutality, to the tune of 25% more likely to die. Black men are about 20% more likely to be in hand to hand combat that doesn’t end in death, but that’s still 3 percentage points of peace in favor of the black men. On top of that, the white men would probably take hand to hand combat over getting shot so often. What they found using large metro cities all over the United States and a huge data set was that race was the factor, because white police officers are more likely to shoot white men than black men. And so are black police officers. Therefore, the factor isn’t racial bias in the officer, unless that bias is against harming blacks and in favor of harming whites, regardless of their own color. So, whatever it takes except telling the truth, sharing truth, accepting the truth.

They have destroyed the economy and already created black people as a special privileged class. They were indoctrinating people in the schools for a South Africa future. Now the powers that be will be chanting for black lives matter despite the fact it calls for the destruction of capitalism and free college for only black people, which many of them already get. This movement is predicated on a factual lie with regards to total demand for justice, and it’s purpose is to create an even further privileged class on the scraps of the economy. It’s already better to black with a felony conviction hunting for a job than a white man who tried, or served his country, or went to college, or didn’t commit a crime. This will perpetuate it as the deify a victim of brutality.

He clearly was a victim of brutality. Police should arrest people, put them in cars, put cuffs on them, and so on. The instances of the police punching, shoving, and doing things that aren’t arrest and investigation are the problem. But this BLM is part of a socialist scheme to destroy the country and that is a fact.

They want the white children in the local school systems who still have fathers to have no aspirations for those fathers because everyone but them is privileged in some way. That’s why it’s a shame to see so many white girls doing it. It very clearly is about race. Actually talking about the effects and real world reality should matter. This is part of the effort to build a privileged class of blacks even more so than now. White man protest a quarter of the population falling into poverty, insta-fired. Black people protest after commiting crimes years ago – you’re hired!

So, yeah, those protesting white girls are insulting their fathers, but most of them probably have single mothers so it’s not something they would understand anyway.

Brutality is terrible, but making black people even more privileged isn’t right. And news flash, people like the Principal of Bristow getting college free because they were black, and then getting a job as a result is called reparations. The white men paid full freight and most of them didn’t get good jobs like that. Black women are the most educated demographic in the United States, and it’s often free because of special funding. But Black Lives Matter wants even more reparations, and so on and on.

That’s the truth. Instead of feeding these lies, people should be telling truth, and then holding the authorities to account. This is Black Supremacy with a bunch of white people helping create more homeless white guys for the streets of California in the future. Do note, that you don’t see homeless minorities, FYI, because there is special funding for them to have resources.



"we rely on synthetic cohorts to estimate lifetime risk " which means they just made up the relative risk assessments. There are also no hypothesis tests, no signficance tests, nothing. That paper is not science. Since you are typically on the evolution science wagon, surely you can be trusted to agree that of a given set of options, that one actually doing science with data and tests is the one worth believing over our own bias.


'Because we lack sufficient data to track a birth cohort over the life course, we rely on synthetic cohorts to estimate lifetime risk (31- S. Preston, P. Heuveline, M. Guillot, Demography: Measuring and Modeling Population Processes. Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA, 2000).

Period life tables allow us to estimate deaths over the life course within a compressed period by tracking age-specific mortality risk over hypothetical cohorts in each subgroup with the key assumption that underlying age-specific mortality risks remain constant at observed levels throughout the life course. All risk estimates presented in this paper can be interpreted as estimates of age-specific or cumulative lifetime risk at 2013 to 2018 police use-of-force mortality rates and 2017 total mortality rates. Our methods are described in more detail in SI Appendix, and an excerpt of our multiple-decrement period life table is displayed in SI Appendix, Table S4.

A replication package containing all scripts and data used in this analysis is available through an Open Science Framework project repository.

"There are also no hypothesis tests, no signficance tests, nothing. That paper is not science."

I must call to question your understanding of scientific studies contained within scientific journals. Refute the science and/or methodology as you desire, but attempts to cherry pick the data do not bode well for bolstering your 'hypothesis', nor do they lend credence to your acumen.

Parameter Estimator

So you stand by the paper with no scientific tests in it, and decry the one with a larger sample size across more years from better data -- the actual police records from the departments of all shootings. Understood. peace.


Appears as though we have two choices which have been presented for information.

The one I referenced; The PNAS, which is, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America is a peer-reviewed multidisciplinary scientific journal. It is the official journal of the National Academy of Sciences.

And the one Econobot recommended; The research paper from Mr. Fryer to be found in NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH titled 'An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use Force', which is undeniably an interesting read, but also one in which we can discover the admittance of the Bureau as to this piece containing, among other red flags;

National Bureau of Economic Research working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They HAVE NOT BEEN PEER-REVIEWED or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. (emphasis added)

And this admittance, 'We use four sources of data – NONE IDEAL – which together paint an empirical portrait of racial differences in police use of force conditional on an interaction. (emphasis added)

If ones data sources are NOT IDEAL then this so called 'empirical portrait' is absolutely suspect and can reasonably be labeled unscientific in origin regardless of intent.

Parameter Estimator

Mr. Fryer’s work was published in journals beyond that NBER working paper, and the National Bureau of Economic Research is just as good as the National Academy of Sciences. Secondly, Fryer’s results were even better than peer reviewed by others. They were repeated by journalists at Michigan State University and the University of Maryland at college park, and they used the most complete data set of it’s kind in the entire country. One of those researchers was named Joseph Cesario and you can read more about these by searching on the subject at the Force Science Institute. Fryer’s work was better than peer reviewed – it’s results were reproduced, which makes it the best kind of science – the technically correct kind. Fryer has since been suspended for Sexual Harassment, but he didn't lose tenure, and the quality of his work remains.


When it comes to scientific studies peer review is the gold standard. Period.

This 'better than peer reviewed' is just so much nonsense.

But this is interesting; Recent academic work, written in response to Fryer and others, has argued that the types of conclusions generated through administrative records on police stops are mathematically incapable of reaching the conclusions advocated by Fryer's work. So reproduced where exactly? That's right, repeated by journalists at Michigan State University and the University of Maryland at college park, and they used the most complete data set of it’s kind in the entire country. Which data set did they use? The same ones Fryer utilized perhaps?

The aforementioned National Bureau of Economic Research working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They HAVE NOT BEEN PEER-REVIEWED or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. Again, not peer reviewed, so certainly not 'even better than peer reviewed'.

Force Science Institute? Seriously? Hate to break it to you, but it appears as though your Parameter Estimater is askew and in dire need of recalibration.

Thank you for your time, but I believe we can put this one to rest.

Good day.


Black Americans 2.5X More Likely Than Whites to Be Killed By Police


Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex (hint: "Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups. Black women and men and American Indian and Alaska Native women and men are significantly more likely than white women and men to be killed by police. Latino men are also more likely to be killed by police than are white men."


You seriously want me to believe statista over actual science in peer reviewed published papers from the Ivy league? Did you miss Nate Silver's data driven fiasco for the woman who couldn't lose in 2016?


Or, as we say "Black Scientists Matter" . Drop your racist tendency to dismiss that Harvard PhD because he's black and go with some nameless visualization that doesn't even include hypothesis or significance tests.


YOU FAIL TO CITE YOUR RESOURCES .... evenso, your guy you're talking about, did he go into all the details or just make a blanket statement? "Victims were majority white (52%) but disproportionately black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites. Most victims were reported to be armed (83%); however, black victims were more likely to be unarmed (14.8%) than white (9.4%) or Hispanic (5.8%) victims. Fatality rates among military veterans/active duty service members were 1.4 times greater than among their civilian counterparts."

and I am done with this newspaper. Nothing but a bunch of psychopathic narcissists with little to no empathy for anyone. Re-pubic-cons. Not worth talking to, because all you want to do is force your beliefs and fail to look into facts.


Oh and .... show me actual video of whites being sat on until they die.

Enough Already

Here you go stoop!

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.