FLINT WATER: A TASTE OF REALITY

Are you, like me, still wondering how some people would be gullible enough to blame Republicans for the water contamination in Flint, Michigan – a city run virtually in its entirety by Democrats for decades, whose city council voted 7-1 to “save money” by changing its water source to what supposedly caused the problem?

Well, keep reading.  Here are excerpts from Chris White’s article at dailycaller.com, which will make you wonder even more:

One of the primary factors behind the Flint water crisis was a drastic spike in water main breaks in the city leading up to the scandal, according to a retiring Michigan environmental regulator.

Bryce Feighner, director of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and a water specialist, disputed claims that treating the city’s water would have fixed the problem. Water main breaks during the Polar Vortex winters of 2014 and 2015 was one of the primary factors investigators overlooked, Feighner said Thursday at a talk titled “Flint: What Really Happened?”

Breaks were one of several “confounding factors that you never hear anybody talk about,” said Feighner…

Feighner, who is retiring in July to become a minister, argued that the sheer number of main breaks, the constant shuttling of water through an overburdened water system, and a general lack of funds for upkeep led to the crisis.

Feighner was resolute in insisting the blame should set squarely on the city, not the state or even the EPA – he did argue the state’s decision to declare a state of emergency in Jan. 2016 only exacerbated the problem.

I urge you to use the link I’ve provided and read Mr. White’s entire piece.  I promise you will know a lot more about this awful situation than you did.. and will have a lot better of an idea about who to blame for it.

Then you can think about – and become angry over – the fact that, as usual, mainstream media quickly established its overriding premise (this somehow was the fault of a Republican Governor), then stuck with it as facts like what you just read came out, and then dropped the issue instead of singing a different tune based on those facts.

Journalists?  What journalists?

3 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *