Really? He said this? Really? He did? Of course he did. That’s what he’s paid to do. He cares. He really does. About your rights as a property owner not to immunize your property, uh, children, and the only problem is unimmunized illegals coming in and infecting unimmunized American property, um, children. But he will uphold your right as a property owner to treat your property, ah, children, as you see fit as a landholder, uh, parent with your religious freedom intact from attacks from liberty hating doctors and health officials. Damn them illegals.
Andre Aggasi was once the spokesperson for Canon cameras. The tag line was “Image is Everything”.
That applies to politics as much as it does to cameras and photography.
Two politicians who take that to heart more than most are Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York. Both have presidential aspirations, and both appear to be using the current medical crisis in Africa (and its spillover effect locally) to distinguish themselves from other prospective and actual candidates for president.
Both are governors of states whose main airports are international gateways and are two of the five airports through which 94% of all passengers from Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea travel. And both initially sought mandatory 21 day quarantines for medical personnel who are returning from working with Ebola patients.
Since Dr. Craig Spencer self-reported that he had a fever and the NYPD/FDNY took the necessary precautions that he might have Ebola (since confirmed), the governors have engaged in a shifting policy battle about who and when someone will be quarantined.
Both governors have shifted their stances in public pronouncements. First they both indicated a blanket mandatory quarantine, which later shifted to self-reporting, though Gov. Christie denies that he modified his position. That’s blatantly false. Josh Marshall points out the pretzel spin and logic of Gov. Christie:
In Florida yesterday, Christie was asked why he’d shifted his policy in releasing Nurse Kaci Hickox and allowing her to return to Maine. His answers were simply false on two counts. First he said that she’d been symptomatic for Ebola and was running a fever. Neither appears to be true.
According to her undisputed account, she was briefly shown to have a fever using a forehead strip thermometer which showed a slight fever, apparently because she was upset and stressed. Whatever the reason, a subsequent oral thermometer reading showed no fever. That almost certainly means she never had a fever. Nor has there been any suggestion that she had any symptoms of Ebola. So Christie’s claim that she was symptomatic for Ebola, but then saw her symptoms go away, is just false.
When asked if he’d reversed his decision, Christie denied any change in policy and said she would only have been forced to remain in isolation, “if she continued to be ill. She hadn’t had any symptoms for 24 hours and she tested negative for Ebola. The reason she was put in the hospital in the first place was because she was running a high fever and she was symptomatic … The minute she was no longer symptomatic she was released.” (emphasis added)
Again, based on everything we know about Hickox’s care, this is false. She was never symptomatic for Ebola and she never had a fever with the exception of one reading which was apparently contradicted a short time later by a more accurate test.
Nor was there any need for her to be symptomatic under the policy that the two Governors announced. The explicitly and expressed goal of the policy was not to hold people who were symptomatic but to hold everyone who’d treated Ebola patients in West Africa in isolation for 21 days in case they became symptomatic. Again, these are Cuomo’s and Christie’s own words.
So Christie is not only lying about the specifics of Hickox case he’s also claiming the policy says something different from what he said it was when he announced it.
Marshall further points out that it seems that both governors are pushing health policies that appear without any consultation with actual health experts. I wonder just who exactly is behind Christie’s policy here - especially since he took great pains to announce and identify an Ebola team that included top health officials in the state. Did they have a say in the policy, and what was their basis in medical and health policy? So far, they haven’t been heard from since Christie spoke.
And yes, I’ve seen the nj.com report that a Nobel prize winner in Medicine seems to support a quarantine for medical workers, though he (or perhaps it is the report itself) that seems to ignore that there are symptoms other than fever that can indicate that the person is symptomatic with Ebola. The doctor notes that there is a percentage of people who never show a fever but are symptomatic with Ebola. Omitted from the report is the bit about how there are other symptoms that include fatigue, weakness, etc.
That’s why the fever indicator isn’t a good indicator of whether someone has Ebola - there are undercounts (persons never show fever, but are symptomatic in other ways), or overcounts (person has fever from unrelated condition).
Christie instead pushed for and got a political solution to a medical issue, and says that he’s not changed his position, even though he had called for a medical quarantine in medical facilities, but changed that tune to allow the nurse to self-quarantine at home in Maine instead.
Christie and others have pointed to the medical correspondent from NBC News as proof that a voluntary quarantine isn’t enough. People should minimize contacts where possible, but if they’re not symptomatic, then they aren’t going to spread the disease. The guidance is to check for symptoms regularly and to check in with health authorities at the slightest change in condition.
To date, there have been far more false positives - those who were taken to facilities with suspected cases that were later ruled out (such as the five-year-old in NYC that was suspected of having Ebola but was found to have a respiratory ailment instead), than false negatives - such as where someone got Ebola from unannounced cases that came into the country and spread from other as yet unidentified sources.
Moreover, is Gov. Christie imposing quarantines on any of those health workers at Bellevue who live in NJ and are working in direct contact with Dr. Spencer? After all, they’re at risk of contracting the disease and spreading - without going to the epicenter of the epidemic in West Africa. Somehow, I doubt he’d have much success with that - and spin furiously to distinguish the two.
Since writing this yesterday, the confusion over exactly what New Jersey is doing has only grown. Despite the governor saying that they haven’t changed their policy since announcing it over the weekend, it’s not clear what even that policy is and who’s formulating it.
That contrasts with the NY policy, which clearly spells out what people should do.
Yet four days after he and the governor of New York announced the 21-day quarantine for high-risk travelers, neither Christie nor state health officials have offered details about how this will be accomplished.
If people are quarantined at home, can their families stay with them and still go out? If they are alone at home, is someone going to bring them food? What about high-risk travelers who are passing through the airport in Newark — should they be allowed to continue to their destination?
Those and many other questions remain unanswered — Christie officials said specifics about how the mandate will be enforced are “internal documents” and are not public.
What’s more, some of the agencies that are supposed to be enforcing the plan say they are uncertain about protocols because no policies have been presented. There is growing frustration, officials said. The Port Authority, for instance, had received no guidance from New Jersey health officials about the state’s Ebola response protocol as of Tuesday afternoon, a person familiar with airport operations said.
“Clarity would be incredibly helpful,” said the person, who requested anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak about the protocols.
In contrast, New York health officials circulated guidelines for screening at JFK International Airport on Tuesday, in a document that stresses “a respectful and supportive approach” to implementing the quarantine rules. It provides steps for agencies to follow to determine who should be quarantined, where they will stay and even how they will be transported.
And that they haven’t made it public also adds to the legal woes facing the state for trying to enforce a policy that appears to be thrown together with no actual input from health officials or legal staff, despite the Governor putting together a committee that has both health and legal officials involved.
The way New Jersey is going about this quarantine isn’t going to pass legal muster, because those rules should be available and distributed to all relevant agencies and departments so that there’s uniform understanding of what they are. Rather, the governor is going to approach this ad hoc. That’s no way to run things.
Elsewhere, a Connecticut family has filed suit after their child was told to stay home from school over Ebola fears. The family recently returned from a trip to Africa, but had not traveled to one of the three countries struggling with the current outbreak. They had visited Nigeria, which managed to stop a cluster of cases in Lagos several weeks ago. They have been outbreak free since then.
But it points to the ludicrous lengths to which some people will deny access on account of Ebola. People, including politicians, seem to have no idea of the geography involved, or that there are separate countries involved in this outbreak. Others think that all of Africa is somehow affected, even though it’s a tiny portion of a continent with more than one billion people living there.
“By forcibly detaining people we are also frightening the public and may deter genuinely sick people who fear quarantine from seeking the treatments they deserve, while also discouraging caregivers and first responders from helping sick patients who need their assistance,” said Ofer, adding, “This is a challenging time for New Jersey, but decisions must be made based on sound medicine, and not on fear. Governor Christie must provide more information to the public about how the state came to the conclusion that mandatory quarantine of our healthcare workers was medically necessary.”
Gov. Christie continues his best impression of Two-Face.
On the one hand, he’s all reasonable in dealing with the Ebola outbreak, and put together a team of people to address potential cases in the state, etc. That’s a good thing, and the more valid information is put out in a timely basis, the less likely the rumor mongers will be able to spread their noxious claims (they’ll still do it, but the facts will be out there).
On the other, Gov. Christie wants GOPers to win, so that they can control the mechanisms of voting.
Christie stressed the need to keep Republicans in charge of states — and overseeing state-level voting regulations — ahead of the next presidential election. Christie made his push at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce event in Washington, D.C., where he ran down a list of states he’s spent time in recently as chairman of the Republican Governors Association questioning whether a Republican presidential nominee would rather have the incumbent GOP governor in power or the Democratic challenger.
“Would you rather have Rick Scott in Florida overseeing the voting mechanism, or Charlie Crist? Would you rather have Scott Walker in Wisconsin overseeing the voting mechanism, or would you rather have Mary Burke? Who would you rather have in Ohio, John Kasich or Ed FitzGerald?” he asked.
I had to do a double take too on that, but that’s what he said, and the implications are clearly disturbing and reveal what the GOP really wants to do - they want to depress turnout and minimize the rights of those who can’t easily get to the polls, or that once they’re there, make sure that they can’t vote because more roadblocks are put up in their way.
He’s hardly alone, by the way.
No need for voter ID? 850 registered New York voters found who are supposedly 164 years old… http://t.co/U5mDffpwKv
A clerical error or typo is not proof of voter fraud. Clearing voter rolls of duplicates or deceased persons is not voter fraud either. It’s not proof that voter fraud has occurred either.
In studies of actual or possible voter fraud of the kind that Voter ID bills might stop, researchers found out of more than 1 billion votes cast, only 31 suspected incidents were identified where voter fraud may have occurred - that’s suspected cases and those that were prosecuted.
Despite how rarely in-person fraud could determine an election, even if it were common, Republican politicians and conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation have put an emphasis on new voter restrictions. After the Supreme Court blocked Wisconsin’s law late last week, Gov. Scott Walker (R) defended the law by saying, in essence, that its effect on outcomes didn’t matter. “It doesn’t matter if there’s one, 100 or 1,000,” he said during a gubernatorial debate. “Amongst us, who would be that one person who would like to have our vote canceled out by a vote that was cast illegally?”
Last week, we reported on a Government Accountability Office report indicating that some 100,000 fewer people voted in Kansas and Tennessee due to the introduction of voter ID laws in those states. The decline was weighted more heavily toward younger voters and black voters — or, to be clear, more-Democratic voters (the kind Democrats accuse the laws of targeting). In an editorial Monday, the New York Times attacked the “big lie” central to voting restrictions, that “there is virtually no in-person voter fraud; the purpose of these laws is to suppress voting.”
Levitt, author of the Wonkblog piece, also prepared a lengthy report on voter fraud in 2007 for the Brennan Center for Justice. It whittles down common stories about thousands of fraudulent votes into the reality that those reports usually stem from haphazard comparisons of voter rolls with population data. Levitt’s report also emphasizes the role historical allegations of fraud play in coloring the current debate; indeed, the Heritage Foundation’s Web site uses examples from 1844 and 1948 to demonstrate that fraud exists. Many proponents of voter ID laws also cite absentee ballot fraud, despite the fact that these more-plentiful examples wouldn’t be affected by voter ID laws.
The fact is that voter fraud is overblown as an issue by Republicans and conservatives because their true intent is to depress turnout. They’ve admitted as much in multiple incidences.
Studies have repeatedly shown that it depresses turnout.
In Tennessee alone, had the Voter ID law not been in place, 88,000 more people would have been able to vote. That’s disenfranchisement of 88,000 people who would otherwise have been eligible to vote.
That’s a far greater concern than the perceived protection that Voter ID might offer.
Moreover, Voter ID does nothing to protect against other kinds of voter fraud - the kind that can occur when an individual or group of individuals control the mechanisms of voting.
When considering that the margin of victory in many elections is in the thousands of votes, the ability to suppress tens of thousands of votes through Voter ID has the ability to swing elections in a way that Voter ID fraud prevention never could.
Chris Christie’s biggest hurdle in a 2016 presidential run is not just surviving the ongoing investigations into the politically fraught traffic jam caused by his administration, but convincing Republican donors that there will be no more surprises.
As the New Jersey governor mingled with some of the Republican Party’s most influential fundraisers at Mitt Romney’s three-day political retreat here in Utah, there was still palpable uneasiness about the swirl of investigations surrounding Christie and concern that he could be too damaged to be the Republican Party’s nominee in 2016.
But Christie tried forcefully to dismiss those concerns when he addressed a group of 300 donors during a speech Saturday, which was closed to the media. One of the first questions posed to him was whether the controversy over his administration’s closure of roads leading to the George Washington Bridge last September — in apparent retribution for the refusal of a local mayor to endorse Christie’s reelection — was behind him.
Christie replied that he didn’t get to “decide that,” according to accounts from people in the room, but he framed the bridge scandal as a media conspiracy against him after he won 61% of the vote in his gubernatorial race in a Democratic state. His opponents, he said, were trying to prevent him from getting any “more altitude.”
An online poll of grassroots conservatives revealed that Chris Christie and Jeb Bush finished at the bottom of a list of possible 2016 Republican hopefuls.
Charles W. Dunn, professor emeritus at Clemson University, predicts it’s unlikely that Christie will be able to climb from the bottom of the poll.
“Perception is the mother of reality, whether he’s guilty or not,” says Dunn. “The perception is that he is and that definitely hurts him with mainstream America, the center of the electorate.”
read more @ one news now
New Jersey and national reporters can now look back and see what the truth looks like. In black and white. Seems his “bad temper” was nothing more than a bell on the Tower of Spite. How the mighty have fallen. One more great hope from the party of dope goes belly up and stinks the joint out. It’s snowing in Jersey. I wonder who gets plowed? And who doesn’t?
I just heard a career drop like the blade of a salt truck.
The Christie ally who prepped an official before his testimony on the George Washington bridge scandal is now fair game for investigation.
In the unlikely event that you labored under the illusion that New Jersey’s soon-to-be former Governor Chris Christie was capable of enjoying the Super Bowl he worked so hard to procure, prepare for disappointment: New Jersey Transit was worse than Peyton Manning. According to some reports, more than 10,000 fans were stranded 90 minutes after game’s end, still awaiting a train. In a state notorious for being notorious, there’s your happy ending, dangling.
But that was the good news for Drumthwacket’s Il Duce. The Wall Street Journal’s Ted Mann broke the news early this morning that the Port Authority lawyer who helped prepare two Christie thugs to testify to the state legislature about the George Washington Bridge hit was a Christie crewmember himself — one Philip Kwon, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney to Chris Christie and then his assistant attorney general during Christie’s first term as governor. When Christie rewarded Kwon by nominating him to New Jersey’s state Supreme Court, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected him, and so Christie had Kwon installed at the Port Authority.
A controversial company promoted by Chris Christie runs an immigrant detention center in Texas slammed by advocates as one of the nation’s worst. The facility is used by the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to house immigrant detainees who are seeking asylum in the United States.
And, noting Christie’s “long and very close relationship with Community Education Centers,” the private company running the facility for ICE, one critic told Salon, “I think it’s time people start asking questions, because this company’s practices are not confined to New Jersey.”
“I’ve visited a bunch of detention facilities in Texas, and that’s by far the worst,” said the opponent, Bob Libal, who directs the prison reform group Grassroots Leadership and visited the Polk County Adult Detention Center with other activists in 2012 and 2013. His allegations echo a 2012 report from the Detention Watch Network, a coalition including the ACLU and the American Immigration Lawyers Association as well as Libal’s group: “Inadequate medical care, poor nutrition, lack of access to legal services, absence of meaningful programming, and a willful neglect of those who are imprisoned there plague the Polk detention center.”