UPDATE: Los Angeles Times writer Michael Hiltzik did respond (sort of) to my email taking him apart last night.

I'd asked him if he still thinks mocking the Covid deaths of unvaccinated people was "ghoulish - but necessary," as he wrote in 2022. The answer appears to be yes. Dude doesn't know when to quit.

Last night, I published my back-and-forth with Michael Hiltzik, a lockdown and mRNA Covid jab fanatic who writes for the Los Angeles Times.

In it, Hiltzik asked me if my views on the mRNA shots had changed since 2021, and I responded that it had - that it had in fact “worsened considerably,” as the long-term failure of the jabs and their heart and autoimmune risks have become clear.

To say the least, you seemed to think I’d gotten the better of the debate. Last night’s piece has drawn the most likes and comments in months.

At the end, though, I asked Hiltzik if he stood by an ugly January 2022 column headlined, “Mocking anti-vaxxers’ deaths is ghoulish, yes — but necessary”

—

(Substack 1 zillion, Los Angeles Times 0. Join the fight for truth.)

—

There is of course only one answer to that question: Of course I’m sorry. I regret mocking the deaths of people I don’t know simply because their opinions about vaccines are different than mine. I’ve had some time to think about it, I made a mistake.

Just take the L, dude.

Apparently Hiltzik preferred to keep digging. Here was his response, in full and unedited:

Your readers are welcome to read my column about the deaths of anti-vaxxers instead of stopping at the headline, as apparently you did.

The whole thing, headline and all, is here. They might learn something, for once:

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-01-10/why-shouldnt-we-dance-on-the-graves-of-anti-vaxxers

—

In other words, Hiltzik blamed the headline and said it didn’t reflect what he wrote, instead of offering a substantive answer to my question about whether he stands by his article. This is an age-old reporter trick.

Only problem is, it’s not true (it almost never is). Allow me to quote the article - Hiltzik’s own words - directly:

“[T]hose who have deliberately flouted sober medical advice by refusing a vaccine …and end up in the hospital or the grave can be viewed as receiving their just deserts…

“Pleas for ‘civility’ are a fraud. Their goal is to blunt and enfeeble criticism and distract from its truthfulness. Typically, they’re the work of hypocrites.

“Mockery is not necessarily the wrong reaction to those who publicly mocked anti-COVID measures and encouraged others to follow suit before they perished…

—

Sounds like the headline writer captured Hiltzik’s point pretty well, huh?

And by the way, you can’t read Hiltzik’s piece yourself. It’s paywalled.

I know the LA Times is hurting - in January, it fired 115 reporters, 20 percent of its newsroom - but trying to get people to click on a paywalled article is the saddest kind of clickbait.

—

Please, Michael, PLEASE keep emailing me.

Your non-answers are comedy gold!

ORIGINAL PIECE FROM LAST NIGHT HERE: