home

Thursday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:27:06 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It's Thursday morning. That is all.

This is an Open Thread.

< Comparing Marijuana to Alcohol | The Sideshow >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Thursday Morning Open Thread | 204 comments (204 topical)
    The day after the World Series (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:31:49 AM EST
    adrenaline rush hangover?

    Not really. (none / 0) (#3)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:48:44 AM EST
    Heating up chana masala chicken for lunch.  Pondering what hoops I'm willing to go through to get a dog.  

    Keeping an eye on the Anthony Sowell story - not much to report - they did find his step mother alive and well in a nursing home.  Police are asking for DNA samples from relatives of missing women so they can test for matches.  I'm sure the usual suspects (O'Reilly, Nancy Grace, Beck) are going nuts over the story, but the comments are often quite civil over at the Plain Dealer website.  There were quite a few replies to someone who scoffed at the idea that Sowell's public defender proposed that Sowell should be allowed out on bail because he had a pacemaker.  They all pointed out that she was just doing her job.  Judge's decision: Held without bail.  Good idea.  He's far safer inside than outside.

    Some unreality over at the orange.  I don't think some people grasp the reality of the situation.  DeWine(R) has already launched an attack on Ohio's Governor Strickland and the election is almost a year away.  DeWine's choice of issues?  The Economy.

    Anyone surprised?

    [ Parent ]

    I'll have to go read some Orange (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:25:53 AM EST
    The group joy tank has been having a hard time over there with the issues getting in the way of the joy :)  I have heard blurbs of the latest serial killer but its very disturbing.  I find myself steering away from it right now.

    [ Parent ]
    Are you in Cleveland? (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:31:05 AM EST
    Or just horrified by the (truly horrifying) Sowell thing?  Obviously, the guy should never come out again.  Can't even imagine the chaos of the mind.  I wonder if he kept count of the bodies accumulating in his house.

    I was in Cleveland once briefly for a couple days on business about 20 years ago, and I really, really liked the city a lot from what little I saw.

    [ Parent ]

    I suspect Cleveland has changed alot (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by tigercourse on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:36:35 AM EST
    since you last saw it. A New York Times Magazine article from earlier this year basically painted it as a hell hole. It was a fascinating read. Thousands of houses sit empty, the population is steadily eroding, the best solution that the local politician can come up with is to raze large sections of it.  

    [ Parent ]
    From around there. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:48:26 AM EST
    But down in Columbus now.

    Cleveland is having very hard times now, for a whole range of reasons.  When my mother was battling the urban deer invasion on the East Side, we brain stormed ideas but tossed any that required direct intervention by any government agency.  "With all the problems they are dealing with, who will come out just to deal with deer?".  

    I keep track of news from that area.  From the elderly lady who was convicted and fined for killing a fawn in her garden, to the organized crime ring that turned to real estate fraud to make money and now, to the final resting place of at least eleven missing women.  May their families find peace and comfort.

    [ Parent ]

    Stock market goes down! (none / 0) (#73)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:00:10 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Only In Japan (none / 0) (#83)
    by CoralGables on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:14:54 PM EST
    they obviously weren't inspired by Hideki Matsui's MVP. The US stock market on the other hand must be celebrating a victory by the much hated Bombers.

    [ Parent ]
    My favorite article this morning (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:44:48 AM EST
    Democrats on Capitol Hill began a nervous debate Wednesday about the course President Obama has set for their party, with some questioning whether they should emphasize job creation over some of the more ambitious items on the president's agenda.

    Link

    These people are so out of touch. Why can't we pay them what they are worth, and put them on the health care reform plan they are trying to force feed to us?

    um, job creation? (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:50:29 AM EST
    12 months and counting, folks and no Bush/Cheney/McCain to run against this time.  WAKE! UP!

    [ Parent ]
    Why do you hate? (5.00 / 5) (#6)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:52:05 AM EST
    Obama's only been on the job for 9 months.  Last November and December were spent planning inaugural balls, Oprah shows, and how to accommodate 5 million people in DC.  Come on, now, be fair!  <snark>

    [ Parent ]
    Unless the most ambitious thing (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:59:09 AM EST
    the president has on his agenda is eliminating the need for currency of any kind to survive in this country, I'd say job creation, and re-opening the channels of finance to small and medium sized businesses so they can hire again really needs to be the top priority.

    That we need to slap the politicians upside the head to get them to understand the country and what their jobs are supposed to be is frightening. They are not there by appointment, fer goodness sake! They are supposed to work for US. I suppose we could just elect a president, let him appoint his 12 apostles and terminate congress, though.


    [ Parent ]

    Cheaper. (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:01:46 AM EST
    I was going to suggest a heavy tax on campaign fund raising.  There's gold in them thar PACs!

    [ Parent ]
    DC-Dems ponder walking, chewing gum at same time (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Ellie on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:31:51 AM EST
    While a handful of Dems can't hold it together long enough to pass vitally needed legislation ...

    A mysterious force inextricably binds thousands of other DC-Dems and prevents them from tackling more than one issue at a time.

    [ Parent ]

    Hold the Presses (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:24:12 PM EST
    There are ambitious plans on the president's agenda? I'd like to see them.

    [ Parent ]
    Some good news outta China... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:49:44 AM EST
    the government has banned the practice of beating the internet addiction outta kids.

    Rogues and Bad Apples--update. (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:48:11 AM EST
    The NYT reports a glitch in the linchpin of our counterinsurgency  strategy of "partnering and mentoring" of the Afghan National Security Forces so as to provide for Afghanistan's future.  Five British soldiers were killed at the hands of one or more Afghan police with whom they were working, and at the time, relaxing together on a rooftop enjoying the autumnal sun. This comes a month after an Afghan policeman killed two American soldiers during a joint patrol.  While some NATO allies, such as the French, were somewhat unsettled by it all saying that the NATO alliance was not working at all.  Moreover, they did not know what the goal and direction was.  General McChrystal, however, was undeterred by such events and seems to be committed to our continued quagmire-building.

    Was President Obama deterred by this? (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:52:49 AM EST
    He is the boss. McChrystal is just a Capo.

    [ Parent ]
    Different event, but UN is moving 600 (none / 0) (#36)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:56:16 AM EST
    staffers out of Afghanistan.  link

    [ Parent ]
    I read that too this morning (none / 0) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:02:02 AM EST
    they claim it is only temporary though until they can construct a compound that can be adequately protected.  So many compounds to be constructed....so little time :)

    [ Parent ]
    Not to worry, Kai Eide (none / 0) (#60)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:41:14 AM EST
    issued a "stern warning" to Karzai amid the ailing security.  All will be well, soon.

    [ Parent ]
    This is interesting. Retired military (none / 0) (#96)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:14:16 PM EST
    person who is now in Congress:  link

    [ Parent ]
    Gee, $300 Billion so far, (none / 0) (#112)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:56:04 PM EST
    spent in Afghanistan accordingly to the Congressman per link.  Unlike HCR, no cost estimates for the next ten years.  But, still, Afghanistan's budget will receive bipartisan support which we like.

    [ Parent ]
    But 'that's different' (none / 0) (#114)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:04:16 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Oh, I know. (none / 0) (#121)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:25:20 PM EST
    Of course we do not expect this war of necessity to be revenue neutral, but can't we see the cost estimates?  Or, the source of the funding? (e.g, print more money,  just use our Chinese and Japanese plastic).   A "free war"?

    [ Parent ]
    Did not hear of a WH comment, (none / 0) (#53)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:29:37 AM EST
    anonymous or not. McChrystal's statement was "we will not let this event deter our resolve to building a partnership ..." And, my guess is that this is the controlling statement.

    [ Parent ]
    The controlling statement controlling (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:38:44 AM EST
    what?  Media spin?  Maybe....perhaps....if he had said he was scared and wanted his mommy we would have all been disappointed in him too:)

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, and milk and cookies,too. (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:43:08 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    This is too funny (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by lilburro on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:08:03 AM EST
    this dog can dance salsa better than you.

    The dog is really hamming it up to boot (unawares of course).

    No sound at work (none / 0) (#107)
    by sj on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:43:07 PM EST
    but that video is awesome even without it.

    [ Parent ]
    thanks! Made my early morning (none / 0) (#122)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:37:44 PM EST
    Nothing cuter than a dancing golden!

    [ Parent ]
    Here's a theory: Maybe no one gives a d@mn (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Ellie on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:25:11 AM EST
    ... about the Obama-WH/FOX "war" and that's the explanation for why there was no spike in the GOP-mouthpiece's ratings.

    Fox lying about it isn't new. By now, neither is the painful sight of TeamO leaping into action to defend the image as quickly as they slink away and hide when it's time for Obama to show some affirmative leadership and create change.

    ("Make me" doesn't count.)

    According to Huff Post, Axelrod (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:42:52 AM EST
    "granted" an interview to Fox News to explain Tues. election results. Also, he sd. Obama team will work hard to inspire young voters for next election.

    [ Parent ]
    Whhhhoa! [/Keanu] n/t (none / 0) (#64)
    by Ellie on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:45:32 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Re the criminal conviction in Italy (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:13:53 AM EST
    of CIA personnel and others for kidnapping.  The defendants were not present and, presumably, have never been present before the Italian court.  Will other governments honor extradition requests?

    What extradition requests? (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:16:16 AM EST
    The Berlusconi government is aligned with the USA and has refused to make an extradition request.  This trial has been entirely carried out by the local prosecutors.

    [ Parent ]
    Ah. Greenwald, of course, is all over (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:18:31 AM EST
    this prosecution as an example of how other nations uphold international law but U.S. doesn't.  And he opines about Interpol and Jeff Toobin's comments on how restricted the defendants will be as to foreign travel.

    [ Parent ]
    Shrug (none / 0) (#13)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:23:43 AM EST
    I saw a very silly post here trying to analogize this case to "universal jurisdiction" prosecutions of Donald Rumsfeld and the like.

    Some prosecutions are political, but this case seems very straightforward.  The allegations are that CIA employees came onto Italian soil without authorization and did some bad things.  No question we'd have the right to prosecute if some foreign country carried out an illegal covert operation on U.S. soil.  So what's the big deal, I wonder?  As a matter of foreign policy and James Bond type stuff it's an interesting story, but as a legal matter it strikes me as a totally unremarkable prosecution.

    [ Parent ]

    Funny, as in strange, that the writer claims (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:29:44 AM EST
    he doesn't have time to read the whole AP article, and then he writes a long piece.  

    I am more interested in the procedural aspects, as the defendants were not before the court in Italy.

    [ Parent ]

    I read that they very carefully (none / 0) (#20)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:33:58 AM EST
    immunized all their own people who were involved in this before starting the prosecution.  So it's OK if it's your own people collaborate but not the other country?  I find it hard to take this seriously.

    [ Parent ]
    Shrug (none / 0) (#31)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:46:46 AM EST
    It's common for cooperating witnesses to get immunity.

    [ Parent ]
    Government restricts use of H1N1 vaccine (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:22:30 AM EST
    I have a friend who is 71 and has a chronic illness.

    The local health department has H1N1 vaccine but under federal guidelines cannot use it on people older than 64.

    Looks like the death panel got here a little quicker than we thought.

    If someone has a chronic illness (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:26:23 AM EST
    they are at greater risk for dying from the vaccine than someone without that condition, and it's my understanding that the flu vaccine is being offered at other places besides health clinics that have to follow federal guidelines.

    [ Parent ]
    Where? I'd like to get it. (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:30:50 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I think (none / 0) (#21)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:36:16 AM EST
    the best place to look is your State Department of Health.  I believe they are in charge of distribution - or should at least know who is!

    [ Parent ]
    FYI the reasoning behind the federal guidelines (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:42:39 AM EST

    The groups recommended to receive the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine include:

        * Pregnant women because they are at higher risk of complications and can potentially provide protection to infants who cannot be vaccinated;
        * Household contacts and caregivers for children younger than 6 months of age because younger infants are at higher risk of influenza-related complications and cannot be vaccinated. Vaccination of those in close contact with infants younger than 6 months old might help protect infants by "cocooning" them from the virus;
        * Healthcare and emergency medical services personnel because infections among healthcare workers have been reported and this can be a potential source of infection for vulnerable patients. Also, increased absenteeism in this population could reduce healthcare system capacity;
        * All people from 6 months through 24 years of age
              o Children from 6 months through 18 years of age because cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza have been seen in children who are in close contact with each other in school and day care settings, which increases the likelihood of disease spread, and
              o Young adults 19 through 24 years of age because many cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza have been seen in these healthy young adults and they often live, work, and study in close proximity, and they are a frequently mobile population; and,
        * Persons aged 25 through 64 years who have health conditions associated with higher risk of medical complications from influenza.

    2009 H1N1 vaccination has begun but initial supplies are small. More doses are expected for shipment each week. We ask members of the public who want to receive this vaccine to be patient as this program expands and more vaccine becomes available. While we expect there will be enough vaccine available for anyone who wishes to receive it, the ACIP also made recommendations regarding which people within the groups listed above should receive the first available doses. For more information see the CDC press release CDC Advisors Make Recommendations for Use of Vaccine Against 2009 H1N1.

    Once the demand for vaccine for the prioritized groups has been met at the local level, programs and providers should also begin vaccinating everyone from the ages of 25 through 64 years. Current studies indicate that the risk for infection among persons age 65 or older is less than the risk for younger age groups. However, once vaccine demand among younger age groups has been met, programs and providers should offer vaccination to people 65 or older.

    So, it's not a matter of death panels, it's a matter of priorities, since there isn't an unlimited supply of the vaccine, it makes sense that those groups affected worse should have a priority over other less affected groups.

    Link

    [ Parent ]

    Ah yes (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:19:23 AM EST
    Thank you for explaining how rationing works.

    But don't act surprised when the person being denied health care feels that a death panel is at work.

    You have before you the logical end of what removing $500 billion from the Medicare program will do.

    How did it go???

    "I said nothing when they came for....."

    [ Parent ]

    gee (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by CST on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:27:47 AM EST
    last I checked, we don't actually have a national health care plan yet, and no money has been removed from medicare.  So this is a problem in the existing system.  People are denied health care every day because of lack of insurance or insurance company "death panels" that decide not to cover you.

    By this logic there is no problem saying nothing when they came for the people who can't afford care.

    [ Parent ]

    No comparsion (none / 0) (#99)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:27:24 PM EST
    and no real information and not government policy.

    This is against a group (discrimination against the aged?) and is government policy.

    Big difference.

    [ Parent ]

    Wow you have some magic (none / 0) (#152)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:00:40 PM EST
    solution that would gie us limitless supplies of the Flu Vaccine?

    [ Parent ]
    Jim, you are actually making a solid case (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:32:21 AM EST
    for Universal Health CARE. Socialized medicine. A plan like Canada's or Australia's or France's or England's :)

    [ Parent ]
    In case you have been on another (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:55:56 AM EST
    planet... I have commented numerous times that I am for a single payer plan modeled on Medicare

    Obama's planS, in case you didn't have the Internet on that planet, is not a single payer plan and will result in exactly this.

    [ Parent ]

    When there isn't a sufficient supply (none / 0) (#98)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:27:22 PM EST
    of the vaccine in question, then it becomes a matter of prioritizing the vaccines to the groups that are hit the hardest, or would you rather your friend get his shot at the expense of a younger friend or family member who is more at risk if they get sick with the H1N1 swine flu?

    But don't act surprised when the person being denied health care feels that a death panel is at work.

    I'd be surprised if you had gone to the trouble to understand what the guidelines are and how they were based on recent experience with H1N1 infections.

    Now, if someone was able to call around for your friend and see if he could get a H1N1 shot elsewhere in his area, that might be productive rather than finding new things to get scared about, IMHO.

    There you go again, wanting to say that "Guvumint wants to kill all us old folks" when you spot what you thought was an opportunity and failed at it miserably, not that there's anything wrong with that.  

    You have before you the logical end of what removing $500 billion from the Medicare program will do.

    I have before me the result of what listening to Faux News on a regular basis can do to the human mind.

    How did it go???

    "I said nothing when they came for....."

    Don't flatter yourself that you'd ever be worth coming for, PPJ, or that comparing yourself to a victim of Nazism is nothing more than an extremely bad joke.

    [ Parent ]

    I know you are surprised. People who follow the (none / 0) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:37:07 PM EST
    rules blindly are often surprised when the discover they apply to them and their turn has come. Which it will for you as it does for all of us.

    And it does not matter why. Rationing is rationing. In this case Obama has been too busy talking on TV and flying around the world to see that enough H1N1 vaccine was produced. Perhaps if he had been studying that instead of the Olympics or having a beer to smooth over his gaffe.

    And if he takes $500 billion out of Medicare we will have shortages and rationing and call it what you will, for many it will be a Death Panel.

    [ Parent ]

    The president (none / 0) (#105)
    by CST on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:41:38 PM EST
    is not a scientist.  I don't think he should've been directly involved in studying the vaccine. That's what scientists are for. Science is not something that can be rushed or created with the snap of a finger.  If that were the case, we would've had an AIDS and cancer vaccine a long time ago.

    [ Parent ]
    It's about "blame Obama" for (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:03:17 PM EST
    "fill in the blank"  for PPJ.

    [ Parent ]
    The Left trained me well. (none / 0) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:59:47 PM EST
    ;-)

    [ Parent ]
    Like Pavlov trained his dogs? (none / 0) (#183)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:47:51 PM EST
    :-0

    [ Parent ]
    Now, that would be something (none / 0) (#187)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:52:39 PM EST
    to hold against the Left :-0


    [ Parent ]
    Do you think Obama's (none / 0) (#154)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:02:25 PM EST
    a Superhero- that he'd actually be making the vaccine himself, did you think that Bush actually went to war with Saddam?

    [ Parent ]
    I just checked. Health care provider (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:42:54 AM EST
    has no H1N1 vaccine.  County has it but says, if you have a primary care physician, call that person, and do not come to our clinics.  Anyhow, I am outside the guidelines of recipients.

    [ Parent ]
    The Today Show... (none / 0) (#33)
    by desertswine on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:48:24 AM EST
    had a bit about how certain Wall Street firms are getting swine flu vaccine..  in fact more than some hospitals are getting.  I really don't care to link to the Today Show.  But I'll give it a shot.

    [ Parent ]
    Infuriating. (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:57:50 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Many "big" employers in NYC received it (none / 0) (#61)
    by DFLer on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:41:44 AM EST
    More at

    Business Week

    and

    The Business Insider site

    Update: To be clear, Goldman confirms that all these decisions are made by the CDC, and that the vaccine only goes to specified high-risk individuals. In addition, as noted by the above BusinessWeek report, 29 companies including Time Warner and others have also been selected as vaccine distribution.


    [ Parent ]
    Heard something about that (none / 0) (#38)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:00:24 AM EST
    but I suspect it has to do with their insurance carriers making it available, as opposed to some secret government plan to vaccinate Wall Street.  That's just my guess.

    [ Parent ]
    AP says state decides re distribution (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:08:06 AM EST
    but fed. guidelines are still supposed to govern who gets vaccinated.

    AP

    [ Parent ]

    You can have mine (none / 0) (#65)
    by CoralGables on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:46:09 AM EST
    I have no interest.

    [ Parent ]
    A good friend just celebrated her (none / 0) (#76)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:02:04 PM EST
    65th birthday so she isn't a priority for swine flu vaccine.  She has swine flu---really ill for two weeks.  

    [ Parent ]
    Then, Jim is correct - death panels at work (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:27:20 AM EST
    Since when would the DHHS turn over something like this to insurance companies to manage distribution decisions? They are financial groups, not medical.


    [ Parent ]
    What has insurance companies (none / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:30:59 AM EST
    have to do with this?

    Your bias is showing.

    [ Parent ]

    Read Steve M's comment (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:11:48 PM EST
    Jim, and go bully someone else. I'm not in the mood to deal with your guff today.


    [ Parent ]
    I had been told (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:24:02 PM EST
    that our insurance company was arranging for our office to get the vaccine, so I was speculating that maybe something similar was going on.

    I just checked and was told, contrary to my belief, they were talking about a seasonal flu shot and not the H1N1 vaccine, so I was wrong about that.

    In any event, CBS is reporting that the Wall Street firms got their shots from the city health department, pursuant to a regular program that all businesses are able to participate in.

    The article implies, although it's not clear that it's the case, that only the employees of these companies who are in the high-risk categories were eligible to get the vaccine at this time.  I guess if that turned out not to be the case, that would bug me.

    [ Parent ]

    Numerous companies (none / 0) (#100)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:29:49 PM EST
    routinely hire a visiting nurse service to bring the vaccine to their employees. The closest I've ever come to having my insurance provider get involved was when they agreed to waive the co-pay for people who participated in getting their shot at work...oh, and I was also working for BlueCross at the time :)

    [ Parent ]
    Local media here reveal (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Cream City on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:25:03 AM EST
    really odd things about the distribution of the vaccines. The feds say at one point that they base it on population but then at another point say they base it on other factors.  It's all doublespeak.

    Bottom line is that my state, based on population, is supposed to get almost 600,000 injections/mists -- about the population of our largest city.  And so far, it is supposed to have gotten more than 100,000 of those.

    But the actual numbers received here?  13,000.

    And the flu is raging here.  The CDC data say so.  More deaths here every day.  And I have students hospitalized -- and worry because I haven't heard back from some in days.  I have students who had to drop out because they missed so much class, I have students emailing, like another just last night, that they have been verified with H1N1 and are isolation in dorms waiting for parents to come for them -- students who were coughing close to me a couple of days ago.  

    And I have a high-risk condition but as yet those of us with same have not been able to get the few priority injections/mists available here, all going -- correctly -- to health workers and caretakers of infants and pregnant women and such priorities.  But I'll tell ya, if one of my students dies, I may start going ballistic about the screwups on this. . . .

    [ Parent ]

    Walgreens and Costco (none / 0) (#39)
    by hollyfromca on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:00:36 AM EST
    Walgreens has walk-ins all day.  But you have to meet the guidelines.

    [ Parent ]
    Mist or shot? (none / 0) (#54)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:29:38 AM EST
    I'd like to know if I'm walking into a retail location where the active virus is being sprayed.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't Know (none / 0) (#81)
    by hollyfromca on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:11:44 PM EST
    The word they used is "shot", but not sure if they really meant vaccine.  They probably have recorded info if you call.

    [ Parent ]
    That means that the anti-viral might (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by inclusiveheart on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:40:09 AM EST
    be dangerous to your friend.  That's not a death panel - that's sound practice until they can come up with a version that safer for people like your friend.

    [ Parent ]
    That is total nonsense (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:20:46 AM EST
    Yes. Link please.

    [ Parent ]
    Let's see (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:45:26 AM EST
    The government commissions the production of an H1N1 vaccine.  There is only a limited amount of vaccine available because the manufacturers can only make it so fast.  But if the government determines, based upon scientific evidence, that certain groups are more at-risk and should get the highest priority, that's a "death panel"?  Okay.  I guess they should just hold a lottery, or better yet the government should leave us alone, like Sarah Palin wants, and not develop any vaccine at all.

    The scientific facts are here.  The data finds that the highest incidence of hospitalization for H1N1 involves children under 4 years, and the highest incidence of infection is among people aged 5-24.  In contrast to the seasonal flu - which tends to hit elderly people the hardest - hospitalizations and infections for H1N1 are much lower for the 65+ age group than for younger folks.  This is consistent with a study which found that 33% of people age 65+ have natural antibodies against H1N1, as compared to a mere 6-9% of people aged 18-64, and apparently even less than that among younger folks.  All of this is in the link I just provided.

    Accordingly, the CDC recommends - it's not a requirement - as follows: "Expanding vaccination recommendations to include adults aged ≥65 years is recommended only after assessment of vaccine availability and demand at the local level. Once demand for vaccine among younger age groups is being met, vaccination should be expanded to all persons aged ≥65 years."

    I'm glad the government commissioned this vaccine and I'm glad they're using science to ensure that the limited supply gets allocated to the people who face the greatest risk in the first instance.  You can call it a death panel if you like, but it's a pretty unimpressive argument.

    [ Parent ]

    I understand that you are under 64 (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:25:14 AM EST
    in good health and expect to live forever.

    Of course my friend has a serious chronic illness and has sees the end of time.

    Guess taking care of the sick and elderly isn't important in the age of Government controlled health care.

    [ Parent ]

    Wow (none / 0) (#67)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:48:10 AM EST
    talk about a complete nonresponse.  Try opening your ears next time.

    [ Parent ]
    My response was based on your (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:58:55 AM EST
    response and apparent lack of concern for the elderly who also have a chronic illness.

    [ Parent ]
    Uh huh (none / 0) (#78)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:05:03 PM EST
    I have a lack of concern for the elderly just like you have a lack of concern for the young children who, according to the scientific evidence, are actually far more at risk from H1N1 than the elderly.

    Tell me, why do you want small children to contract H1N1 and die?

    [ Parent ]

    Why does the government choose? (none / 0) (#85)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:19:18 PM EST
    "Just imagine, in the capitalist countries the government doesn't even distribute the bread."  

    [ Parent ]
    How should we allocate (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:22:14 PM EST
    a vaccine with a limited supply?  To the highest bidder?

    [ Parent ]
    He probably thinks so (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:46:43 PM EST
    But he should consider that 1) it's unlikely there would ever be enough vaccine (if any at all) if the private market were left to its devices; and 2) some of the people most likely to spread flu (i.e., children) would be last in line to get vaccine.

    You might as well ask why the government gets to decide that children should go to school, instead of bored retirees.

    [ Parent ]

    Dude come on. (none / 0) (#130)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:10:12 PM EST
    This H1N1 stuff is statistically a total waste of time, but " it's unlikely there would ever be enough vaccine (if any at all) if the private market were left to its devices" - what the hell does that even mean?  Who's defining "enough" here?  Can you give some examples of supply and demand totally collapsing in a free market?  

    "some of the people most likely to spread flu (i.e., children) would be last in line to get vaccine. " Right, cause children don't get vaccines not provided by governments.  

    "You might as well ask why the government gets to decide that children should go to school, instead of bored retirees."   At least bored retirees are less likely to be intimidated and children wouldn't be taught to conform in order to be successful from age 6.

    No the question is why do all property owners have to fund public education when the objective results show that americans are getting dumber and dumber.

    [ Parent ]

    QED (none / 0) (#132)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:12:03 PM EST
    Thanks.

    [ Parent ]
    That's not how proofs work! (none / 0) (#134)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:17:18 PM EST
    Public schools!  

    [ Parent ]
    heh (none / 0) (#135)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:20:22 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Seriously though... (none / 0) (#136)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:26:41 PM EST
    Why do you think the government is more capable of determining what type of vaccination program is necessary and makes sense?  

    Ignoring the morals of it, just considering effect, it seems to me more likely that allowing the same institution to determine the level of necessity of a vaccine and allocate other people's non-donated entirely unconditional money could lead to a scenario where lobbyist can make their pharma employers money by asking government to distort the severity of the issue.

    Not that a free market solution is simple but it's certainly less prone to corruption as the money - including charitable donations - is highly conditional thus creating a real burden of proof for the vaccine makers.  

    [ Parent ]

    If you want a debate on the merits (none / 0) (#137)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:34:38 PM EST
    of democratic control of basic public services, you will have to look elsewhere. I consider the question long-settled.

    [ Parent ]
    Couple of things. (none / 0) (#142)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:48:25 PM EST
    We're not talking about anything remotely democratic here.  

    What?????    

    [ Parent ]

    Of course we are (none / 0) (#150)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:59:52 PM EST
    We elect Congress and the President, and they impanel the CDC and the NIH. Government control of vaccine distribution means that people without money have a say, indirectly, in what goes where.

    [ Parent ]
    Um you do realize that private companies aren't (none / 0) (#157)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:05:47 PM EST
    banned from making Flu Vaccines- they choose to do so because its not profitable.

    [ Parent ]
    Is that at me? (none / 0) (#164)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:18:54 PM EST
    I don't get it.

    Whenever the government creates a product and distributes it for "free" that product become less profitable.  

    [ Parent ]

    They may be doing that (none / 0) (#94)
    by hollyfromca on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:52:41 PM EST
    I heard this morning on Dr. Nancy, MSNBC, that all of the big Wall Street firms have ample supply of H1N1.  I wonder how many of those workers would even meet the guidelines.

    [ Parent ]
    No by edict of whoever has the biggest gun. (none / 0) (#133)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:16:39 PM EST
    duh!  It's called science and medicine steve.  You see the government takes a ton of money - tells everyone we're all going to die - spends that money to make vaccines that most people don't want cause they recognize a racket when they see it - and then people chat about it on the internet.

    I love that since you don't want to get sick you think people should be forced to have a new vaccine injected into their bodies.  And I mean loooove.  

    [ Parent ]

    Grow the F up (none / 0) (#138)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:40:49 PM EST
    I asked how you would allocate a scarce vaccine and you give me this BS about people getting forced vaccinations at gunpoint.  Stop changing the subject.  If more people want the vaccine than there are doses available - I realize this never happens in your imaginary free-market utopia - but if it somehow happened, how should it be distributed that makes more sense than using scientific data to determine who is most at-risk?

    I find it kind of sad that the fact that government simply is better at handling certain things - like public health emergencies - forces you to resort to these paranoid fantasies about how the H1N1 virus is a government scare tactic to line the pockets of lobbyists.  Holding a faith-based believe that an unfettered free market would solve everything sure is a lot easier than actually having to think about difficult questions.

    [ Parent ]

    All I'm saying (none / 0) (#147)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:57:21 PM EST
    is that you have no right to force a vaccine into the body of someone else's child unless you can prove that not doing so is a threat to the child and yourself.  

    Ofcourse science is the best way to determine this allocation but you still cannot force someone to take a new vaccine.  

    No mention of utopia...it doesn't exist...the people who don't forfeit decision making to enlightened central authorities seem more prone to utopian ideals to you...ever heard of free healthcare for all?

    I don't understand how relying on the ability of individuals to make their own life decisions is more "faith based" than believing a central authority exists which has places your interests above their own and knows enough about every subject to make these decisions.  Belief in government is belief in god.  Belief in the free market just ain't.  

    [ Parent ]

    For heaven's sake (none / 0) (#153)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:01:56 PM EST
    no one is talking about forcing anyone to take the vaccine.  The problem is that there is not enough vaccine for the people who WANT IT, so the government is using scientific data to determine which at-risk groups should get the vaccine first.  No one is being forced.  Now could you answer the question?

    [ Parent ]
    Hot Dog (none / 0) (#161)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:16:15 PM EST
    I thought you had said "i don't want to do so get that kid vaccinated" - no idea where i read that originally cause I can't find anything close in your comments.  

    Jeeez.  How would a vaccine get allocated in a true free market?  Hmmm.  I'm not really sure.  Somewhat like food i suppose, though I don't know.  Whereas people being malnurished doesn't increase the likelihood of nurished people getting sick - it is different with a vaccinations for sure.  

    I'm sure that people such as yourself would recognize that the science indicates that children being vaccinated would lower overall cases.  In this free society you could take all the money that isn't spent on the military and buy that sweet sweet vaccine up for the kids.  

    Wait...maybe, oh no this is crazy...people will have preemptively setup charitable entities that receive donations and are run by scientists rather than beurocrats and therefore are much more likely to draw conclusions purely on the science.  

    Does that seems totally crazy to you?  Also - you're kind of my favorite person on this site.  No joke.  Some of your response are hilarious (and i mean intentionally - not like oh i disagree thats so funny he thinks that).  

    Can we skype it up somehow?

    [ Parent ]

    Well (none / 0) (#174)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:30:24 PM EST
    absolutely none of those wonderful charity-type things happened, so I'm glad the government stepped in and made sure this vaccine got manufactured!

    If we had a famine or something and there wasn't enough bread for everyone, I sure hope the government would help ensure kids and the elderly got fed, even if it means guys like me and Chris Christie have to eat smaller portions.  That the thing here.  It's a public health emergency.

    I think you may have been misled by my snark in another thread about death panels.  I think it would be silly to make the H1N1 vaccine mandatory when there aren't even enough doses for the people who voluntarily want one.  I appreciate the compliment about my writing though!

    (PS: I went to public high school, public college, public law school! :P)

    [ Parent ]

    Wait on that. (none / 0) (#185)
    by Samuel on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:49:27 PM EST
    "absolutely none of those wonderful charity-type things happened" - That doesn't mean they wouldn't in a free-market situation where the government was not already using coerced funds.  Obviously the existence of government health organizations crowds out private alternatives.  Like certainly private roads would exist to some extent in a free market - and the reason there are not more private roads right now is specifically because the government has crowded that industry out by using coerced funds (also a detriment to self-sustaining train lines as coerced spending on highways eliminated what would have most likely occurred in the free market).  

    Could you please please listen to the "school sucks podcast" and tell me what you think?  

    [ Parent ]

    Right (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:55:42 PM EST
    so when you have a public health emergency, how long should government wait to see if private charities will spring up to address it, before they can start waving their guns around?

    Maybe that's what happened with Katrina.  Bush was just thinking "don't want to crowd out all the private charities who will surely handle this situation..."

    [ Parent ]

    Tell me (none / 0) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:41:08 PM EST
    why do you want the elderly with a chronic illness to die from H1N1?

    [ Parent ]
    I don't want anyone to die (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:45:28 PM EST
    which is why I approve of vaccinating the people who are most at risk before the people who are least at risk.

    [ Parent ]
    Think about this (none / 0) (#198)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:24:08 PM EST
    Many children are being raised by their grandparents... who are past 64 thus can't get the vaccine... Kid comes home with the flu but the GPs haven't been vaccinated.......

    See where I'm going?

    I had an interesting chat with my local Health Department  Dr in Charge of H1N1.... She had no idea of how many doses they started with.... no idea of how many had been used.... and had no idea at what point the local non-qualified would become qualified... but she (at least) knew "that decision hasn't been made...." So let's say you start with 5000... use 3500 to meet the demand of the qual'd.... And trash the remaining 1500..

    Now that makes a lot of sense.

    [ Parent ]

    Not a problem (none / 0) (#200)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:31:09 PM EST
    caregivers of children in the at-risk group are on the high-priority list, so that situation wouldn't be an issue.  Not sure how the kid would get the flu though... are you suggesting the grandparent should get the shot but the kid, who is far more at risk, shouldn't?

    [ Parent ]
    First of all (none / 0) (#111)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:55:51 PM EST
    it's not "blindly following the rules" to use the observation that the elderly are less affected than other groups are by H1N1 in order to determine priority when the supply is limited.  

    why do you want the elderly with a chronic illness to die from H1N1?

    If that were the case, I wouldn't have mentioned other avenues that could be explored in order for someone who is elderly with a chronic illness to get a shot when he can't do so at the local clinic, as I did in my last comment.

    So you're really not making any sense here in your futile attempt to launch a vicious attack on me, and thank you for doing more for your reputation here than anything I've written to date.

    TTFN.

    [ Parent ]

    If makin sense is a requirement..... (none / 0) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:16:12 PM EST
    Why are you here?

    [ Parent ]
    Is this a trick question? (none / 0) (#202)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:34:22 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Right after you tell me (none / 0) (#159)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:07:35 PM EST
    why you hate children and want to kill America's future with the flu?

    [ Parent ]
    Link please? (none / 0) (#25)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:41:48 AM EST
    I can find no such announcement.

    Federal guidelines are only guidelines, not "restrictions," and they specifially include people of any age with complicating health issues, which primarily means lung problems.

    [ Parent ]

    I could link you to lots of stories (none / 0) (#51)
    by Cream City on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:27:48 AM EST
    and announcements where I am about the occasional clinics -- the ones not cancelled at the last minute when the distribution doesn't come in -- and the clinics are clear that they are prioritizing and will not provide vaccines to those of us who are on the federal guidelines list but not of the highest priority.

    So on the ground, the clinics are enforcing the "guidelines" as restrictions -- and understandably so, with the incredible shortages in some parts of the country, like mine (see comment above).

    [ Parent ]

    That's the clinics' decision (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:05:10 PM EST
    though.  He's blaming it on the great big mean ugly federal government's propensity for "death panels."

    I have no objection to prioritizing on the vaccine.

    The vaccine shortage here in VT -- both seasonal and H1N1 -- is horrendous.  What little H1N1 there is is being distributed first to the schools.  Whatever is available after that is being given to people on the honor system as far as age, health status, etc.  Seasonal flu vaccine is almost nonexistent.  There's currently not one -- not one -- public seasonal flu clinic scheduled in the state, the one public clinic for H1N1 was overwhelmed and had to turn away hundreds, and not another one scheduled until the end of the month, in case some more doses come in.

    [ Parent ]

    From what I'm hearing (none / 0) (#117)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:14:39 PM EST
    the seasonal flu sounds like a nonfactor this year.  Almost every reported case of the flu is turning out to be H1N1.  I'm not sure if this is true everywhere.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, CDC link (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by hollyfromca on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:01:16 PM EST
    My first link here.  Hope to not become a site skewer :)

    CDC

    It looks like 99.7% H1N1.

    I also heard, but no link, that the seasonal flu is expected to start later.  

    [ Parent ]

    Not a "non-factor" at all (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:29:21 PM EST
    The seasonal flu season hasn't kicked in yet.

    Also, they're not testing everyone, only a small sampling of most likely cases.  They're assuming most flu, mild and severe, right now is H1N1 because ... (wait for it)... the seasonal flu season hasn't kicked in yet, so H1N1 is the only thing it could be.

    It's to be grateful that we don't have H1N1 and an unusually early onset of seasonal flu at the same time.

    [ Parent ]

    Wondering if season flu vaccine will (none / 0) (#118)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:16:39 PM EST
    provide some protection against H1N1.  Supposed to be broad spectrum, isn't it?

    [ Parent ]
    No (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:32:00 PM EST
    Seasonal is a different category of viruses altogether.  That's why H1N1 is roaring through the population, nobody has immunity except some old people because a virus of that group hasn't been around for such a long time.

    [ Parent ]
    I think (none / 0) (#119)
    by CST on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:19:53 PM EST
    it's just too early for seasonal flu.  It may still come.

    [ Parent ]
    That is not what the health department said (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:28:22 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Meanwhile.... (none / 0) (#102)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:35:23 PM EST
    The NYC public grade schools can't give the shot away...only 22% of the kids got consent forms signed.

    Does your buddy mind going back to 6th grade for a spell Jim?  Thats one way to get it:)

    [ Parent ]

    If that's the school district that (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:42:07 PM EST
    "accidentally" gave the shot to several students who did not have their permission slip, sending one to the hospital with a severe reaction, it made national news.

    The media spin over the past decade has made a percentage of the population skeptical over what might really be behind these various "scare" tactics.

    There is not enough vaccine to go around! They need to be focused on making sure the high risk groups know who they are and have enough information to make a truly informed decision on whether or not to get the shot.


    [ Parent ]

    I think that proves that either (none / 0) (#109)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:48:01 PM EST
    a) The average parent in the NYC doesn't give a flip about their children's health.

    b) Or we have proven again that centrally managed anythings are subject to huge screw ups.

    [ Parent ]

    Pediatrician advised against..... (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by vicndabx on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:46:22 PM EST
    same reason my ex-wife gave as an argument against our son getting it.  I don't buy it and think he should get it.  Unfortunately, the folks who were supposed to administer the shots/mist didn't show up.

    Aside from that, there's a lot of "bad" info out there many are basing their decision on.


    [ Parent ]

    I wouldn't assume A) at all... (none / 0) (#110)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:55:22 PM EST
    I mean my sister's own pediatrician advised against getting her three girls the H1N1, said just get the regular one...professionals, much less reasonable caring parents, can disagree on whether the vaccine is right for their kid.

    The one girl they stuck last week, whose mom did not consent, was just waiting on a reco from her pediatrician on what to do since the girl was on meds for epilepsy...that was the girl who had the allergic reaction and had to be rushed to the hospital.

    It's not an easy call by any means...

    [ Parent ]

    Doesn't prove anything (none / 0) (#116)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:08:47 PM EST
    re: parents as some of those children may not be getting the vac because they already had the flu or were exposed. Remember we had quite a few school closings last spring and the kids have been in school and exposed for several weeks already this semester. Over the summer, we had camps circulating the virus. Parents may also prefer to be there and use their own Dr for the vac.

    I think NYC parents are more than capable of taking care of their children's health.

    [ Parent ]

    Exactly.... (none / 0) (#189)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:56:38 PM EST
    and, for how long it's taking to get the vaccine out to the public, by the time they do, there won't be many who haven't already had the H1N1 flu and no longer need it.

    [ Parent ]
    A man dressed as a ... (none / 0) (#23)
    by desertswine on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:37:47 AM EST
    breathalyzer gets busted for dui.  What are the odds?

    Waiting for kdog to comment. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:44:47 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Looks like a real winner... (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:46:23 AM EST
    and he doesn't even know that you should always/always/always refuse to blow...moron.

    [ Parent ]
    Bernie Kerik Pleads guilty (none / 0) (#49)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:27:21 AM EST
    per NYT.com

    Speaking of swine flu (none / 0) (#57)
    by CST on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:33:41 AM EST
    Does anyone know what the symptoms are?

    A friend of mine that I spend a lot of time with said something like 75% of her office is out sick, although I'm not sure with what.  Since then, we've both started coming down with something.  Feels like a bad chest cough, although not too bad yet, it just started, and we're pretty much the prime demographic except not in a school setting surrounded by others in that range.  I really can't afford to get sick right now...

    See the CDC site (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Cream City on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:40:25 PM EST
    for the differences between flu and a cold -- especially watch for a fast, high fever.

    The data show that most of the flu around now is swine flu.  Maybe not all, but then the other flus around, including a sort of H1N1 "unspecific" (so maybe morphing), are coming awfully early at this level.  The regular flu season started just last week.

    [ Parent ]

    Google (none / 0) (#180)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:37:57 PM EST
    "swine flu symptoms."  The Web is loaded, absolutely loaded, with medical sites explaining the symptoms and how they differ from colds and when to get out of bed and go to the hospital.

    [ Parent ]
    So weird (none / 0) (#58)
    by lilburro on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:36:47 AM EST
    I don't take Rep. Bachmann seriously but I really wonder why anyone would when she says stuff like this.  This is just straight up fascist:

    Republican organizers are planning for activists to go into the House office buildings and the U.S. Capitol and confront members directly after a press conference at noon.

    ...

    "I think that will absolutely scare these members of Congress so much that Pelosi will not get the votes and it will kill the bill. I think it could be dead for 10 years. Why won't we? Why won't we go for broke?"

    Yes, let's totally scare our democratically elected Congress into doing nothing.  That's a great idea!

    I just don't get it.

    Bachman's nuts... (none / 0) (#66)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:46:28 AM EST
    but I don't object to "scaring" Congress with people power, as long as its non-violent, even if I ain't down with the particular cause.  We need more of that, not less...participation in the democracy should be encouraged.

    That's not fascism, that's voicing grievances.  Fascism would be only letting lobbyists roam the halls, and locking regular Joes and Janes out of the building.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes (none / 0) (#70)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:56:24 AM EST
    Tea Partiers hit Capitol Hill

    And 9 members of Code Pink were arrested inside the Hart Senate building.

    [ Parent ]

    Here's the real link (none / 0) (#71)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:56:57 AM EST
    Link

    [ Parent ]
    Crazy. (none / 0) (#77)
    by lilburro on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:04:51 PM EST
    One sign read: "Obama takes his orders from the Rothchilds," a reference to theories of Jewish world dominance centered around the prominent Jewish family of Rothschilds.


    [ Parent ]
    It plays well in Tea Party Central (none / 0) (#74)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:01:09 PM EST
    And she'll probably get donations for being a blustering clown.

    [ Parent ]
    Fascist? (none / 0) (#84)
    by coast on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:18:05 PM EST
    A fascist would be opposed to any outright opposition to the government, which I believe is the position your are actually taking.

    [ Parent ]
    Nice try (none / 0) (#88)
    by lilburro on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:28:10 PM EST
    I'm not saying don't oppose the government.  I'm saying that personally scaring members of Congress so that they won't make policy sounds nutbag fascist.

    [ Parent ]
    Thought I would give it a shot (none / 0) (#90)
    by coast on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:35:54 PM EST
    but if the Congress person believes its good policy, a few whackos standing in your doorway aren't going to do much to sway your vote I would think.

    [ Parent ]
    Not really news but interesting timing: (none / 0) (#68)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:51:43 AM EST
    Swiss group will present retrospective of Polanski's films

    More fallout from Tuesday's elections (none / 0) (#75)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:01:29 PM EST
    Red-state Dems (many Blue Dogs) are rethinking their agenda

    Party leaders put their best face on Tuesday's results.

    Pelosi, pointing to Democratic House victories in special elections in New York and California, said: "We won last night."

    The office of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid circulated an analysis arguing that "gubernatorial races are primarily about local issues," and that it's therefore "hard to draw any direct comparisons between what happened in New Jersey and Virginia and what will happen in Congress."

    But some Democrats weren't buying the spin.

    "We got walloped," said Sen. Mark Warner, the junior Democrat from Virginia.

    Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said it was "nonsense" to suggest that the results in New Jersey and Virginia represented a referendum on President Barack Obama. To the contrary, he argued that the results meant that Democrats should redouble their efforts to "make sure we deliver on the promises of the last election."

    But if Tuesday's results leave red-state Democrats nervous about health care reform, a climate change bill and regulatory reform, it's going to be harder -- not easier -- for Van Hollen and his leadership colleagues to develop that record of legislative accomplishment.

    And that's certainly where things seemed to be headed Wednesday. As Pelosi's office ordered members to stay in town for a possible Saturday night House vote on health care, other Democrats were suggesting that it's time to take the foot off the gas.



    Here is NPR's Robert Siegel (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:08:24 PM EST
    interviewing the President of Club for Growth about NY 23 Congressional seat result:  NPR

    Talk about spin.  

    [ Parent ]

    Bill Owens (none / 0) (#82)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:13:59 PM EST
    Will Bill Owens have to run again, when the rest of the House is up?  Or does he get a 3 year term?  Andgarden - where are you?

    [ Parent ]
    Everyone is up in 2010 (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:22:46 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Um....? Chicago math? (none / 0) (#79)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:07:55 PM EST
    Salary raise counted as "saved job".

    WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's economic recovery program saved 935 jobs at the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council, an impressive success story for the stimulus plan. Trouble is, only 508 people work there.

    The Georgia nonprofit's inflated job count is among persisting errors in the government's latest effort to measure the effect of the $787 billion stimulus plan despite White House promises last week that the new data would undergo an "extensive review" to root out errors discovered in an earlier report.

    About two-thirds of the 14,506 jobs claimed to be saved under one federal office, the Administration for Children and Families at Health and Human Services, actually weren't saved at all, according to a review of the latest data by The Associated Press. Instead, that figure includes more than 9,300 existing employees in hundreds of local agencies who received pay raises and benefits and whose jobs weren't saved.

    That type of accounting was found in an earlier AP review of stimulus jobs, which the Obama administration said was misleading because most of the government's job-counting errors were being fixed in the new data.

    The administration now acknowledges overcounting in the new numbers for the HHS program. Elizabeth Oxhorn, a spokeswoman for the White House recovery office, said the Obama administration was reviewing the Head Start data "to determine how and if it will be counted."

    But officials defended the practice of counting raises as saved jobs.

    "If I give you a raise, it is going to save a portion of your job," HHS spokesman Luis Rosero said.

    Huh?

    That is (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by coast on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:32:18 PM EST
    a perfect example of it being better to not say anything at all when you don't have an explanation than saying something like that.  What an idiot.

    [ Parent ]
    The reporting was ridiculous (none / 0) (#92)
    by Cream City on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:44:00 PM EST
    in the state north of Chicago, too, as this local media front-page report (just the most recent of a continuing series) shows on the stimulus claims.

    Every day, what with the feds' flu vaccine claims as well as their stimulus claims, I read more and more that tells me that neither we nor the president are being well-served by so many lies -- or at least so much confusion and incompetence in their claims.

    [ Parent ]

    "You know you're a celebrity when ..." (none / 0) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:33:47 PM EST
    ... well, this being a public forum and all, I'll just have to let you watch for yourself. But on last night's Tonight Show with Conan O'Barbarian on NBC, William Shatner once again broke out the bongos and bass, and he hurt Levi Johnston's feelings in the process. Boo. Hoo.

    If Mr. Johnston wants his Andy-Warhol-allotted fifteen minutes, then he'd best soon realize that those who'd willingly offer themselves up as public piñatas mustn't whine about those persons who are tempted to take a swing or two.

    7 dead in Fort Hood shooting... (none / 0) (#123)
    by desertswine on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:38:16 PM EST
    no details yet.

    Aw, dammit. (none / 0) (#124)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:49:28 PM EST
    Not another one.

    Waiting for television talking heads to spout rampant speculation and "t" word.  Someone else will have to watch for me.

    [ Parent ]

    !st Cavalry is redeploying right now (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:02:35 PM EST
    meaning they are coming home.  So troops were processing coming home at the center.  I know that the Fort Hood Center is for families as well and not just troops, so I can't imagine that any of the returning soldiers had their weapons with them at that time.  Whenever I have picked up my husband or said goodbye to him from such a center, weapons were issued or turned in before returning to this point or leaving this point.  He has not ever deployed from Ft Hood though so they could do things differently.

    [ Parent ]
    All Ft Hood has now been directed (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:10:40 PM EST
    to turn off their heating and cooling systems as well as take cover....they apparently have reason to believe they are under an attack.

    [ Parent ]
    Seriously, MT? (none / 0) (#139)
    by caseyOR on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:45:19 PM EST
    Shutting off HVAC at Ft. Hood? I thought this was an attack by two armed individuals. Is there reason to believe it is bigger? More organized? Have the words "terrorist attack" been uttered yet?

    Or are you teasing without the snark tag?

    [ Parent ]

    No not teasing (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:53:26 PM EST
    Looks like 12 dead now.  Looks like they have the second one too now that was reported at one site.  It was organized though, that part is troubling.  Fort Hood will probably be on lockdown for at least 24 hours now.

    [ Parent ]
    From MSNBC (none / 0) (#145)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:57:04 PM EST
    At least 12 people were killed and 31 others were wounded in a mass shooting incident Thursday at Fort Hood, Texas, military officials said. The shooter was shot to death, they said.

    More shots were reported later in the afternoon, reported NBC affiliate KCEN-TV of Waco, which said no further details were immediately available.  

    A senior administration official told NBC News analyst Roger Cressey that the suspect who was in custody was an Army major with an Arabic-sounding name. The official said the shootings could have been a criminal matter rather than a terrorism-related attack and that there was no intelligence to suggest a plot against Fort Hood.



    [ Parent ]
    Oh FECK (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:26:03 PM EST
    Not this, if the shooters are members of our armed services and of Arabic ethnicity this is terrible.  Everybody has always speculated about an infiltration like that if indeed it is an infiltration and not just someone who is Muslim and decided enough of this.

    [ Parent ]
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:37:38 PM EST
    I sure hope people remember this for contrast.

    [ Parent ]
    Many of us will (none / 0) (#196)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:06:36 PM EST
    I wish that I could tell you that we won't go through a freaky freakish stupid spell where some soldiers will be suspect of others, but this will pass.  There is a code of conduct, everyone is expected to follow it and it isn't volunteer after you have volunteered.

    [ Parent ]
    Indeed (none / 0) (#201)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:32:06 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    With the mental health problems (none / 0) (#178)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:35:52 PM EST
    associated with prolonged deployment, I wouldn't be surprised if those involved served multiple tours.

    The rank is a bit of a shock.

    [ Parent ]

    Ah, the religion of peace (none / 0) (#199)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:29:59 PM EST
    strikes again....

    [ Parent ]
    Haven't seen anything to suggest (none / 0) (#203)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:35:31 PM EST
    what religion he followed, PPJ, but if he turns out to have been a Christian, would you still say the same thing about him?

    [ Parent ]
    Wouldn't you think, though, (none / 0) (#186)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:51:19 PM EST
    that if it was an infiltration, this would have not been confined to only one base? Seems to me that would be a lame attempt on their part.

    Fort Lewis, WA spokesperson said this was being treated as an isolated incident and that they would not be making any security changes here. They certainly know something if that's the case (I hope).

    [ Parent ]

    "with an Arabic sounding name"? (none / 0) (#151)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:00:01 PM EST
    Can I throw rotten tomatoes at someone over the internet?  Is there an iphone app for it?

    Fortunately the star-telegram omitted that piece of tripe.

    [ Parent ]

    That would be (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:04:02 PM EST
    "a senior administration official"

    Maybe the same one who said Congressman Weiner should have manned up and run against Bloomberg?

    [ Parent ]

    ABC Reporting (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:28:37 PM EST
    Suspect identified as Major Malik Nadal Hasan...

    [ Parent ]
    Clint Van Zandt (none / 0) (#181)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:37:59 PM EST
    Frm FBI profiler was just speculating about the Aribic sounding name on MNSBC with Tweety. Now I'm reminded why I don't watch cable!

    [ Parent ]
    Why is "Arabic-sounding name" (none / 0) (#184)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:49:21 PM EST
    a piece of tripe and too outrageous to be uttered?

    As it turns out, the man's name does appear to be Arabic.  OTOH, I'm not familiar enough with naming practices to say confidently it's an Arabic name.  Perhaps you are?

    In any case, I fail to see a problem.

    "Arabic-looking" is another thing altogether.  But "Arabic-sounding name" seems to me entirely legitimate.

    [ Parent ]

    If they don't know the effing name (none / 0) (#190)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:04:16 PM EST
    then don't bother telling us until they DO KNOW!

    It's that kind of BS that drives me up a wall.  If you have information, share it.  An Arabic-sounding name isn't useful information and it just serves to drive speculation.

    [ Parent ]

    Usage (none / 0) (#192)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:09:17 PM EST
    It's one thing, imo, to say someone has an Arabic sounding name in a more casual situation. But when the talking heads on MSNBC are saying it and  speculating, a bit different. It kinda equates with Arabic looking.

    [ Parent ]
    Longer probably. (none / 0) (#155)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:03:11 PM EST
    Intelligence and police will want to go over everything with a fine tooth comb and interview almost everyone.

    Can you do that in 24 hours?

    [ Parent ]

    KXXV in Waco has a tweet update (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:05:52 PM EST
    That says both shooters were soldiers.

    One police officer dead - 4 SWAT team members injured

    [ Parent ]

    No (none / 0) (#170)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:27:36 PM EST
    It is hard to keep such a large post locked down for much longer though if you think you have things contained.

    [ Parent ]
    Looks like the shooters were (none / 0) (#160)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:16:14 PM EST
    soldiers too, handguns were used and not M-16s as had been previously reported.  All persons killed were soldiers.  Very sad.  Everyone we know there seems to be fine.  It is a huge post.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually (none / 0) (#162)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:18:30 PM EST
    I think at least one of the dead was a civilian police officer.  

    Not that it matters - still horrible.

    And 4 SWAT members injured.

    [ Parent ]

    Was the police officer and the SWAT guys (none / 0) (#165)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:20:24 PM EST
    deploying?  They deploy a lot of them.  Doesn't make sense how they would have been there otherwise.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't know (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:23:42 PM EST
    The way I've been reading things, there was a college graduation supposed to take place there (for those soldiers who missed their own).  Police officer could have been a family member or on base for another reason.

    [ Parent ]
    News conf in front of base said (none / 0) (#167)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:22:39 PM EST
    local police response was quick, so perhaps there was some crossfire?

    [ Parent ]
    Local Police response on post? (none / 0) (#172)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:29:08 PM EST
    I think Fort Hood is bigger than the town at its gates :)

    [ Parent ]
    It was the Army guy from the post (none / 0) (#177)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:33:22 PM EST
    that was talking about the local police response. Me know nuttin'  :)

    [ Parent ]
    Took me a few (none / 0) (#144)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:55:11 PM EST
    to process that.  Just got in from raking leaves (no snakes) and it is 50F and windy.  Air conditioning is a foreign concept right now.

    [ Parent ]
    One report was that they got (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:18:35 PM EST
    one of the suspects off post at a Dollar General.  That's disturbing if he was part of the shooting.  He somehow got off post after the shooting and those gates should have been locked down tight.

    [ Parent ]
    The Army guy at the base on the news (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:21:07 PM EST
    said he hadn't heard about the DG when asked, but did speak about the shooter being killed and 2 suspects apprehended (I'm pretty sure he said shooter was dead!).

    [ Parent ]
    BBC News reporting (none / 0) (#191)
    by caseyOR on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:06:20 PM EST
    that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson has stated that the Major was about to deploy to Iraq.

    [ Parent ]
    CNN reporting he was a mental health (none / 0) (#193)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:13:54 PM EST
    professional.

    [ Parent ]
    Possible better link (none / 0) (#126)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:58:52 PM EST
    Ft Worth Star-Telegram

    The local papers tend to have the best coverage.  In the Sowell case, reading the Plain Dealer on line was best.  

    [ Parent ]

    Good news Springsteen fans... (none / 0) (#125)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:54:22 PM EST
    Bruce is going over his extensive collection of journals to bring us the most anticipated rock-n-roll autobiography of all time...let the bidding war begin, they're predicting he'll bust Keith's record 8 million dollar bonus.

    Planned Parenthood Director (none / 0) (#127)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:59:09 PM EST
    quits job and joins Coalition for Life - an anti-choice group

    Are the pro-life groups going to pretend (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:32:53 PM EST
    that Planned Parenthood is an abortion agency? They provide birth control to prevent the unwanted pregnancies.

    [ Parent ]
    It doesn't matter. (none / 0) (#182)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:39:42 PM EST
    Planned Parenthood helps women avoid their God Given Duty of blessed motherhood.  That's what matters.  How dare women take responsibility for their own reproductive choices!

    [ Parent ]
    And sun god bless 'em... (none / 0) (#195)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:50:31 PM EST
    Planned Parenthood is a great organization in my book...sure helped me stay protected when I was young and broke.

    [ Parent ]
    "Abortion industry," the lady said. (none / 0) (#204)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:43:28 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Good for her... (none / 0) (#141)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:46:58 PM EST
    If that's what her conscience said to do, no one should judge.

    I just hope she's ready to get pimped out by every pro-life group in America...they're gonna love her.

    [ Parent ]

    They love the repentant sinner. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Fabian on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:57:06 PM EST
    That story always sells.

    Hard to tell when that happens if it's sincerity that drives a person or crass opportunism.  

    [ Parent ]

    But won't she and those (none / 0) (#148)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:59:33 PM EST
    of the same/similar beliefs be doing a lot of judging and inflicting their "conscience" on others?  Especially if they p*mp her out? ;)

    [ Parent ]
    She says no.... (none / 0) (#194)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:43:46 PM EST
    "I'm not doing this to judge anyone," she said. "My goodness, I have participated in the abortion industry for eight years. I'm just here as a resource and telling my story ... and maybe somebody will be touched by it."

    I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that she's made a sincere choice not to be party to abortion, and wants to urge others to do the same...you can be anti-abortion personally and still be against its prohibition...I guess we'll see, if and when she pops up again, if she starts judgin' others choices.  Joinin' a pro-life group isn't a good sign though...I hear ya.

    [ Parent ]

    Thursday Morning Open Thread | 204 comments (204 topical)