2 Comments

Really appreciate the information on judges on the ballot, both in today's edition and earlier this week. Other years, I've had to resort to making a decision based on who made the appointment. Now I know something more in terms of attorneys' assessments and rulings. And the flash cards focus the reader's attention. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Re: "Members of the Tucson Crime Free Coalition turned up the heat on Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos, hosting a press conference with his opponent, Heather Lappin, and Nanos’ critics, who say crime is on the rise. Police stats say otherwise, KGUN’s Kenny Dahr reports."

That's a rather milquetoasty way of saying those backing the challenger who are claiming the opposite of the facts are not being truthful in their public statements; most regular folks would just call that a lie, and expect such people to be called out by a fair media for lying.

Without any basis to doubt the accuracy of the 'police stats' (which I would assume local police reported crime statistics, and perhaps national statistics from the FBI/DOJ, which also demonstrate falling crime rates) why should an obviously politically motivated and self-interested, bold faced lie be called anything other than simply a lie? 'Police stats say otherwise' is the sort of cowardly both-siderism in which the media far-too often engages in order to not get criticism from the liars. This is one very strong reason why we are facing a crisis of truth in our politics: the media is reluctant to call outrageous and repeatedly-falsified lies what they simply are: lies by liars.

I expected better from Tucson Agenda. I am deeply disappointed. I will expect better in the future.

Expand full comment