hotair--2020-03-06--Coronavirus crazy: Santelli's bizarre suggestion to save the economy

I did not see this one coming .
Rick Santelli , an on-air editor for CNBC , offered up a suggestion on how COVID-19 could be handled in the U.S. in order to minimize the damage being done to the American economy – just give the coronavirus to everyone and be done with it .
Yes , really , that is Santelli ’ s idea of dealing with the market ’ s panic over the growing epidemic .
He was asked about the catalyst of recent chaos on Wall Street during an appearance on CNBC ’ s The Exchange .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ catalyst ?
Just watch your local news .
There ’ s your catalyst.
” CNBC anchor Kelly Evans agreed with Santelli ’ s conclusion that the coronavirus is disrupting the stock market , saying “ True.
” And then Santelli elaborated on his opinion .
Santelli continued : “ Of course , people are getting nervous .
And listen , I ’ m not a doctor .
I ’ m not a doctor .
All I know is , think about how the world would be if you tried to quarantine everybody because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m not saying this is the generic-type flu .
But maybe we ’ d be just better off if we gave it to everybody , and then in a month it would be over because the mortality rate of this probably isn ’ t going to be any different if we did it that way than the long-term picture , but the difference is we ’ re wreaking havoc on global and domestic economies.
” Adding to the craziness of this exchange is the fact that Ms. Evans isn ’ t phased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Santelli – she agrees with his theory that the spreading outbreak of the coronavirus is causing a panic on Wall Street and then she doesn ’ t challenge his suggestion that everyone should just be infected so that COVID-19 could run its course .
She just went on with a standard question about the markets .
It ’ s all very 2020 , isn ’ t it ?
We ’ ve become accustomed to some really bizarre conversations on our television screens but have we reached a point where the suggestion that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given a potentially deadly virus in order to save the stock market is not even questioned ?
You don ’ t have to be a CNBC anchor to come up with some fairly easy follow-up questions to that kind of madness .
How would any of that even work ?
What about the health care system in our country ?
It would be overwhelmed .
Those that we count on to care for the people infected – the medical professionals – would be ill , too .
None of it makes any sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contain the COVID-19 , not spread it .
A vaccine for the virus is still not available and may not be for up to a year or more .
To suggest that the virus is unleashed onto everyone in the population is insane .
The death toll alone would be staggering .
World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom said Tuesday that the COVID-19 coronavirus has killed 3.4 % of those with reported cases , compared to the seasonal flu , which kills far fewer than 1 % of those infected .
At that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were infected at once , as Santelli suggested , the death toll would top 11 million .
Even a fatality rate of 1.4 % , which a February New England Journal of Medicine study suggested , based on cases in China , would result in 4.6 million deaths if every American was infected .
( One leading epidemiology professor has suggested 40 % to 70 % of the world ’ s population will catch it this year , though most will have a mild reaction . )
To put that in perspective , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the seasonal flu this year .
And the 1918 flu pandemic , in which at least 50 million people died worldwide , killed about 675,000 Americans .
It is very likely that we are on the cusp of a widespread outbreak of COVID-19 in America .
Each day we are hearing the numbers grow , though thankfully the numbers remain very low .
In my own city , the first two cases were reported Thursday and a case in a surrounding county was reported .
People are nervous , even those of us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sensible about the likelihood of infection .
COVID-19 is like the flu but it ’ s worse , it spreads more quickly , and it is more deadly .
There is no vaccine as there is for the flu .
Santelli ’ s off-the-cuff suggestion was irresponsible and unnecessary .
If he wanted to offer advice , he should have followed what the medical experts are telling us and reminded everyone of some common-sense methods of prevention .
The same measures apply with COVID-19 as they do for the normal cold and flu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and water for 20 seconds , cover your coughs and sneezes ( but not with your hands ) , avoid large crowds , if possible , and get to a doctor if you aren ’ t feeling well .
I ’ ll close with this – does Rick Santelli ’ s name sound familiar ?
It likely does because he is often referred to as the inspiration for the Tea Party movement .
His impassioned rant on the floor of the CME aimed at the Obama administration ’ s Homeowners Affordability and Stability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and organize against big government bail-outs .
He was right then , but he ’ s dead wrong now .

I did not see this one coming. Rick Santelli, an on-air editor for CNBC, offered up a suggestion on how COVID-19 could be handled in the U.S. in order to minimize the damage being done to the American economy – just give the coronavirus to everyone and be done with it.
Yes, really, that is Santelli’s idea of dealing with the market’s panic over the growing epidemic. He was asked about the catalyst of recent chaos on Wall Street during an appearance on CNBC’s The Exchange. He responded by saying, “The catalyst? Just watch your local news. There’s your catalyst.” CNBC anchor Kelly Evans agreed with Santelli’s conclusion that the coronavirus is disrupting the stock market, saying “True.” And then Santelli elaborated on his opinion.
Santelli continued: “Of course, people are getting nervous. And listen, I’m not a doctor. I’m not a doctor. All I know is, think about how the world would be if you tried to quarantine everybody because of the generic-type flu. Now I’m not saying this is the generic-type flu. But maybe we’d be just better off if we gave it to everybody, and then in a month it would be over because the mortality rate of this probably isn’t going to be any different if we did it that way than the long-term picture, but the difference is we’re wreaking havoc on global and domestic economies.”
Adding to the craziness of this exchange is the fact that Ms. Evans isn’t phased at all about what she just heard from Santelli – she agrees with his theory that the spreading outbreak of the coronavirus is causing a panic on Wall Street and then she doesn’t challenge his suggestion that everyone should just be infected so that COVID-19 could run its course. She just went on with a standard question about the markets.
It’s all very 2020, isn’t it? We’ve become accustomed to some really bizarre conversations on our television screens but have we reached a point where the suggestion that the population of the United States is given a potentially deadly virus in order to save the stock market is not even questioned? You don’t have to be a CNBC anchor to come up with some fairly easy follow-up questions to that kind of madness. How would any of that even work? What about the health care system in our country? It would be overwhelmed. Those that we count on to care for the people infected – the medical professionals – would be ill, too. None of it makes any sense.
The medical community is working to contain the COVID-19, not spread it. A vaccine for the virus is still not available and may not be for up to a year or more. To suggest that the virus is unleashed onto everyone in the population is insane. The death toll alone would be staggering.
World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom said Tuesday that the COVID-19 coronavirus has killed 3.4% of those with reported cases, compared to the seasonal flu, which kills far fewer than 1% of those infected. At that rate, if all 329 million Americans were infected at once, as Santelli suggested, the death toll would top 11 million. Even a fatality rate of 1.4%, which a February New England Journal of Medicine study suggested, based on cases in China, would result in 4.6 million deaths if every American was infected. (One leading epidemiology professor has suggested 40% to 70% of the world’s population will catch it this year, though most will have a mild reaction.) To put that in perspective, an estimated 16,000 Americans have died from the seasonal flu this year. And the 1918 flu pandemic, in which at least 50 million people died worldwide, killed about 675,000 Americans.
It is very likely that we are on the cusp of a widespread outbreak of COVID-19 in America. Each day we are hearing the numbers grow, though thankfully the numbers remain very low. In my own city, the first two cases were reported Thursday and a case in a surrounding county was reported. People are nervous, even those of us who are trying to remain calm and sensible about the likelihood of infection. COVID-19 is like the flu but it’s worse, it spreads more quickly, and it is more deadly. There is no vaccine as there is for the flu.
Santelli’s off-the-cuff suggestion was irresponsible and unnecessary. If he wanted to offer advice, he should have followed what the medical experts are telling us and reminded everyone of some common-sense methods of prevention. The same measures apply with COVID-19 as they do for the normal cold and flu season: wash your hands with soap and water for 20 seconds, cover your coughs and sneezes (but not with your hands), avoid large crowds, if possible, and get to a doctor if you aren’t feeling well.
I’ll close with this – does Rick Santelli’s name sound familiar? It likely does because he is often referred to as the inspiration for the Tea Party movement. His impassioned rant on the floor of the CME aimed at the Obama administration’s Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan fired up conservatives to push back and organize against big government bail-outs. He was right then, but he’s dead wrong now.


hotair--2020-03-06--Watch these two imbeciles fail first-grade math on MSNBC

The imbeciles in question aren ’ t randos plucked from obscurity for a man-on-the-street interview .
They ’ re the former chief anchor of a major broadcast news network and a member of the editorial board of the country ’ s most esteemed newspaper .
This travesty began with a tweet , as so many modern travesties do , circulated to guffaws as the returns came in on Super Tuesday : The crack MSNBC news team caught wind of it too , although evidently they didn ’ t realize why it was circulating .
If you ’ re reading this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years old and a little dazzled by the Big Numbers , let me simplify .
Bloomberg spent $ 600 million or so on the campaign ; if instead he took that money and wanted to give a certain number of people $ 1 million each , all we ’ d have to do is divide 600 by 1 to see how many people he could gift .
What do you get when you divide any number by 1 ?
If you ’ re still struggling with the answer , either you haven ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first-grade math textbook or you ’ re a halfwit .
Guess what the answer is with these two .
Watch : I agree with Charles Cooke that it simply can not be that Brian Williams and Mara Gay are organically this stupid .
They know what 600/1 is .
But their brains shut off because they were offered this elementary math problem in the context of a narrative both yearn to believe , that the mega-rich like Bloomberg have so much wealth that they could afford to make literally everyone else rich if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give $ 1 million to each American , he would have to be worth $ 327 trillion ( in cash ) , which , for context , is around 17 times American GDP and about five-and-a-half thousand times what he ’ s actually worth .
The scale of the error here is galactic .
It ’ s also extremely telling .
This , right here , is why so many left-leaning Americans think that “ the billionaires ” can pay for everything .
It ’ s why Elizabeth Warren was enthusiastically boosted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she could pay for a series of gargantuan initiatives without raising taxes on anyone but the extremely rich .
It ’ s why Democrat after Democrat promises not to raise “ middle class taxes ” while promising programs that require the raising of middle class taxes .
How did this bad tweet make it onto TV to be endorsed ?
Why did Mara Gay agree with it ?
Why didn ’ t Brian Williams notice ?
Because the people involved in this clip thought it was true .
This is how they see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s total fortune of $ 60 billion and spread it across 330 million Americans , how much would we each receive ?
Answer : $ 181.82 , a decent-sized grocery bill for a small family for a single week .
God only knows what number Williams and Gay would spitball if you put that question to them .
The genius who got this ball rolling didn ’ t immediately give up on it , by the way , despite the viral mockery : Here ’ s the real question .
Why was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it inspire a conversation on MSNBC ?
The person who wrote it isn ’ t some well-known expert on finance or economics , obviously .
It ’ s not a hot-take opinion either of the sort that might be seized upon for some idle chatter during a lull in an hour-long cable news program .
It ’ s an embarrassingly false assertion of fact .
And no , I don ’ t believe that Williams and Gay promoted it knowing it was false .
Some of their dimwit viewers might have accepted their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority of us have in fact completed first-grade math and are windmill-dunking on them for their idiocy today .
They wouldn ’ t have willingly subjected themselves to humiliation on this order just to push disinformation that serves The Cause .
They did , mercifully , correct the error before the program was over .
Exit question : How did this happen ?

The imbeciles in question aren’t randos plucked from obscurity for a man-on-the-street interview.
They’re the former chief anchor of a major broadcast news network and a member of the editorial board of the country’s most esteemed newspaper.
This travesty began with a tweet, as so many modern travesties do, circulated to guffaws as the returns came in on Super Tuesday:
this is the funniest thing i've ever seen pic.twitter.com/FxqqMbcuk9 — Lewis Hamilton stan account (@Oliver_Stacks) March 4, 2020
The crack MSNBC news team caught wind of it too, although evidently they didn’t realize why it was circulating.
If you’re reading this right now and you’re six years old and a little dazzled by the Big Numbers, let me simplify. Bloomberg spent $600 million or so on the campaign; if instead he took that money and wanted to give a certain number of people $1 million each, all we’d have to do is divide 600 by 1 to see how many people he could gift.
What do you get when you divide any number by 1?
If you’re still struggling with the answer, either you haven’t reached that lesson yet in your first-grade math textbook or you’re a halfwit. Guess what the answer is with these two. Watch:
“Mike Bloomberg spent enough on his campaign to give every American $1 million.” @BWilliams on @11thHour @MSNBC pic.twitter.com/iBsWvqEIHf — Bad Econ Takes (@BadEconTakes) March 6, 2020
Suddenly the NYT’s endorsement of Elizabeth Warren makes sense.
I agree with Charles Cooke that it simply cannot be that Brian Williams and Mara Gay are organically this stupid. They know what 600/1 is. But their brains shut off because they were offered this elementary math problem in the context of a narrative both yearn to believe, that the mega-rich like Bloomberg have so much wealth that they could afford to make literally everyone else rich if they wanted to.
I rdon't want to pile on about the Bloomie Gives Everyone a Million thing, but I am fascinated by the fact that, totally disregarding the maths, it *sounded intuitive* to them. Makes me understand the wealth inequality debate more to know some people think that seems plausible. — Mike Bird (@Birdyword) March 6, 2020
Says Cooke:
For Bloomberg to give $1 million to each American, he would have to be worth $327 trillion (in cash), which, for context, is around 17 times American GDP and about five-and-a-half thousand times what he’s actually worth. The scale of the error here is galactic. It’s also extremely telling. This, right here, is why so many left-leaning Americans think that “the billionaires” can pay for everything. It’s why Elizabeth Warren was enthusiastically boosted by the media despite her ridiculous pretense that she could pay for a series of gargantuan initiatives without raising taxes on anyone but the extremely rich. It’s why Democrat after Democrat promises not to raise “middle class taxes” while promising programs that require the raising of middle class taxes. How did this bad tweet make it onto TV to be endorsed? Why did Mara Gay agree with it? Why didn’t Brian Williams notice? Because the people involved in this clip thought it was true. This is how they see the world.
If you liquidated Bloomberg’s total fortune of $60 billion and spread it across 330 million Americans, how much would we each receive? Answer: $181.82, a decent-sized grocery bill for a small family for a single week. God only knows what number Williams and Gay would spitball if you put that question to them.
The genius who got this ball rolling didn’t immediately give up on it, by the way, despite the viral mockery:
i lied this is the funniest thing i've ever seen https://t.co/NqCdUtw7qn pic.twitter.com/eZuaVlnFir — Lewis Hamilton stan account (@Oliver_Stacks) March 4, 2020
Here’s the real question. Why was this tweet on television? How did it inspire a conversation on MSNBC? The person who wrote it isn’t some well-known expert on finance or economics, obviously. It’s not a hot-take opinion either of the sort that might be seized upon for some idle chatter during a lull in an hour-long cable news program. It’s an embarrassingly false assertion of fact. And no, I don’t believe that Williams and Gay promoted it knowing it was false. Some of their dimwit viewers might have accepted their read at face value but the vast majority of us have in fact completed first-grade math and are windmill-dunking on them for their idiocy today. They wouldn’t have willingly subjected themselves to humiliation on this order just to push disinformation that serves The Cause.
They did, mercifully, correct the error before the program was over. Exit question: How did this happen?


hotair--2020-03-06--Trump signs $8.3B coronavirus-defense package; HHS assess lower mortality risk

“ I asked for two-and-a-half , and I got $ 8.3 billion , ” Donald Trump said as he signed the emergency appropriation into law , “ and I ’ ll take it.
” The bill clears the way for ramped up production of tests and research into treatments and a vaccine , with a good chunk going to the CDC for those purposes .
Trump himself was supposed to sign the bill at the CDC , but that got changed at the last minute : The $ 8.3 billion package includes $ 7.8 billion in discretionary appropriations , plus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending , which would allow Medicare providers to furnish telemedicine services to seniors .
The deal also has funding for research and development of vaccines , support for state and local government , and assistance for small businesses , a House Democratic aide told CBS News .
The aide also said the package includes $ 300 million to help ensure that all Americans can afford a potential vaccine .
The Trump administration has faced criticism over the availability of test kits in the United States .
Vice President Mike Pence has said any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the disease , but he acknowledged Thursday , as the government raced to distribute tests , that the capacity wasn ’ t there yet .
“ We don ’ t have enough tests today to meet what we anticipate will be the demand going forward , ” he said .
There have been 12 deaths from coronavirus in the United States — 11 in Washington state and one in California , which has declared a state of emergency as it tests passengers on a cruise ship quarantined off the San Francisco coast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases in 21 states , including Nevada and Colorado , which reported their first cases of COVID-19 on Thursday .
Thus far it ’ s still not at all clear just how far the virus has spread , or even what its fatality rate might be .
The initial reports of 3-4 % are significantly higher than influenza , but those might not be accurate either .
Those calculations apparently were focused on the most acute and problematic cases , and last night the assistant secretary for health at HHS said the true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flu after all .
With that in mind , the administration ’ s message today is get back to work , if possible : Larry Kudlow , President Donald Trump ’ s chief economic advisor , told CNBC on Friday that he doesn ’ t want to “ panic on policy measures ” designed to combat the new coronavirus and said that U.S. growth remains strong .
“ We would prefer a targeted approach , a rather micro approach , ” Kudlow said .
“ Let ’ s think about individuals who might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home if they get the virus .
Let ’ s think about small businesses that might get hurt by this.
” “ I just don ’ t want to panic .
I don ’ t want to panic on the economy , which looks sound .
I don ’ t want to panic on the virus , which frankly , most Americans are not at risk .
And I don ’ t want to panic on policy measures .
Let ’ s try to be calm and not overreact , ” he added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would rather take a more specific , tailored response to the virus and hold off on broad-stroke policies that could upend local economies such as quarantines .
“ Can we possibly do this fact by fact , day by day ?
Because we don ’ t know what the magnitude of the economy might be in terms of a slowdown , ” Kudlow added on Friday .
“ We don ’ t actually know what the magnitude of the virus is going to be .
Although , frankly , so far it looks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fairly bold statement , but the White House might be looking at data that has it worried about consequences of a panic .
Southwest Airlines reported today that its numbers are starting to have a post-9/11 feel to them even though they fly domestic routes within the US .
Having tourism redirected to within the US is perhaps a good way to keep dollars in the economy , but a turndown of domestic travel is going to have wide impacts throughout the economy .
Kudlow has good reason to be worried about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House had better be careful not to be seen as under-reacting , either .

“I asked for two-and-a-half, and I got $8.3 billion,” Donald Trump said as he signed the emergency appropriation into law, “and I’ll take it.” The bill clears the way for ramped up production of tests and research into treatments and a vaccine, with a good chunk going to the CDC for those purposes. Trump himself was supposed to sign the bill at the CDC, but that got changed at the last minute:
Pres. Trump says he cancelled an announced trip to the CDC because it was thought someone there had contracted the novel coronavirus. “I may be going,” he added, but it wasn't clear when he might try to go to the CDC. https://t.co/tUxmmf23E1 pic.twitter.com/FTEKyGcNZs — ABC News (@ABC) March 6, 2020
CBS breaks down the bill’s particulars:
The $8.3 billion package includes $7.8 billion in discretionary appropriations, plus $500 million in Medicare telehealth mandatory spending, which would allow Medicare providers to furnish telemedicine services to seniors. The deal also has funding for research and development of vaccines, support for state and local government, and assistance for small businesses, a House Democratic aide told CBS News. The aide also said the package includes $300 million to help ensure that all Americans can afford a potential vaccine. The Trump administration has faced criticism over the availability of test kits in the United States. Vice President Mike Pence has said any American would be able to get tested for the disease, but he acknowledged Thursday, as the government raced to distribute tests, that the capacity wasn’t there yet. “We don’t have enough tests today to meet what we anticipate will be the demand going forward,” he said. There have been 12 deaths from coronavirus in the United States — 11 in Washington state and one in California, which has declared a state of emergency as it tests passengers on a cruise ship quarantined off the San Francisco coast. There were at least 230 confirmed cases in 21 states, including Nevada and Colorado, which reported their first cases of COVID-19 on Thursday.
Thus far it’s still not at all clear just how far the virus has spread, or even what its fatality rate might be. The initial reports of 3-4% are significantly higher than influenza, but those might not be accurate either. Those calculations apparently were focused on the most acute and problematic cases, and last night the assistant secretary for health at HHS said the true calculation might be in line with the flu after all.
WATCH: "The best estimates now of the overall mortality rate for COVID-19 is somewhere between 0.1% and 1%," Adm. Brett Giroir, assistant secretary for health at HHS, says. "That's lower than you heard probably in many reports … it's not likely in the range of 2 to 3%" pic.twitter.com/ATnMRBLXVy — NBC News (@NBCNews) March 6, 2020
With that in mind, the administration’s message today is get back to work, if possible:
Larry Kudlow, President Donald Trump’s chief economic advisor, told CNBC on Friday that he doesn’t want to “panic on policy measures” designed to combat the new coronavirus and said that U.S. growth remains strong. “We would prefer a targeted approach, a rather micro approach,” Kudlow said. “Let’s think about individuals who might lose paychecks because they have to stay home if they get the virus. Let’s think about small businesses that might get hurt by this.” “I just don’t want to panic. I don’t want to panic on the economy, which looks sound. I don’t want to panic on the virus, which frankly, most Americans are not at risk. And I don’t want to panic on policy measures. Let’s try to be calm and not overreact,” he added. Kudlow explained that the White House would rather take a more specific, tailored response to the virus and hold off on broad-stroke policies that could upend local economies such as quarantines. “Can we possibly do this fact by fact, day by day? Because we don’t know what the magnitude of the economy might be in terms of a slowdown,” Kudlow added on Friday. “We don’t actually know what the magnitude of the virus is going to be. Although, frankly, so far it looks relatively contained.”
That’s still a fairly bold statement, but the White House might be looking at data that has it worried about consequences of a panic. Southwest Airlines reported today that its numbers are starting to have a post-9/11 feel to them even though they fly domestic routes within the US. Having tourism redirected to within the US is perhaps a good way to keep dollars in the economy, but a turndown of domestic travel is going to have wide impacts throughout the economy. Kudlow has good reason to be worried about overreacting, but he and the White House had better be careful not to be seen as under-reacting, either.


hotair--2020-03-06--"Don't use Martin Luther King against Joe Biden": The must-see Biden, Bernie surrogate debate over e

"Don't use Martin Luther King against Joe Biden": The must-see Biden, Bernie surrogate debate over evil of "white moderates" on CNN

It started out so well — or at least not so bad — but it didn ’ t take long for a debate between surrogates for the Democratic front-runners turned into a food fight over … Martin Luther King , Jr ?
Chris Cuomo tried to have Nina Turner and Hilary Rosen stick to answering criticisms of their own candidates in this CNN segment , but Lowey tried defending Bernie Sanders ’ socialism with Dr. King ’ s comments about “ white moderates ” in his letter from the Birmingham jail .
A few minutes later , Rosen , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden , erupted at that reference — and the ensuing fight left Cuomo looking like he was auditioning for one of those old Southwest Airline commercials .
Want to get away ?
The first reference comes in at the three-minute mark , but it gets started in earnest at five-thirty : And it gets really lit at the 6:33 mark : CUOMO : Last quick point to you , Nina .
TURNER : Chris , what Rev .
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was talking about , he said it is the point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be comfortable instead of focusing in on — the bigger threat is not necessarily the white KKK member , but more the white moderate that is more comfortable in keeping things the same and pretending like there is no tension than to deal — [ crosstalk ] ROSEN : Don ’ t — don ’ t use Martin Luther King against Joe Biden .
You don ’ t have — you don ’ t have that standing .
I ’ m sorry , you don ’ t .
TURNER : Don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have as a black woman in America !
How dare you !
First of all — [ crosstalk ] Turner doesn ’ t have “ standing ” to discuss the issue ?
What does that even mean ?
That led to this commentary shortly afterward on Twitter : For the record , Turner was more correct about the MLK argument about white moderates than was Rosen .
You can read the letter in its original form here ; King was expressing profound frustration and disappointment in the white moderates of his era not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rosen argued , but because they were vocally urging King and civil rights leaders to go slow and let time take care of everything .
They cared more for order than justice , King argued , not realizing ( or more likely not caring ) that order without justice is little more than authoritarianism .
None of this is terribly applicable to Bernie Sanders or his socialist agenda , though .
King wasn ’ t discussing political ideologies but basic human rights and equality under the law in his time .
Here , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it into this discussion was intended to blow it up , and Rosen stepped right into that trap .
At the end , Chris Cuomo was left with little to say except to remind the two that they were in the same party .
One has to wonder for how long .

It started out so well — or at least not so bad — but it didn’t take long for a debate between surrogates for the Democratic front-runners turned into a food fight over … Martin Luther King, Jr? Chris Cuomo tried to have Nina Turner and Hilary Rosen stick to answering criticisms of their own candidates in this CNN segment, but Lowey tried defending Bernie Sanders’ socialism with Dr. King’s comments about “white moderates” in his letter from the Birmingham jail.
A few minutes later, Rosen, who had just announced her endorsement of Joe Biden, erupted at that reference — and the ensuing fight left Cuomo looking like he was auditioning for one of those old Southwest Airline commercials.
Want to get away? The first reference comes in at the three-minute mark, but it gets started in earnest at five-thirty:
And it gets really lit at the 6:33 mark:
CUOMO: Last quick point to you, Nina. TURNER: Chris, what Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was talking about, he said it is the point that the white moderate wants things to be comfortable instead of focusing in on — the bigger threat is not necessarily the white KKK member, but more the white moderate that is more comfortable in keeping things the same and pretending like there is no tension than to deal — [crosstalk] ROSEN: Don’t — don’t use Martin Luther King against Joe Biden. You don’t have — you don’t have that standing. I’m sorry, you don’t. TURNER: Don’t tell me what kind of standing I have as a black woman in America! How dare you! First of all — [crosstalk]
Turner doesn’t have “standing” to discuss the issue? What does that even mean? That led to this commentary shortly afterward on Twitter:
Really cool to see a white liberal woman scold a black leftist woman on tv for correcting her, on the mischaracterization of MLK’s words on the White Moderate, in service of a white liberal man. pic.twitter.com/tqee9O1QfJ — Sana Saeed (@SanaSaeed) March 6, 2020
For the record, Turner was more correct about the MLK argument about white moderates than was Rosen. You can read the letter in its original form here; King was expressing profound frustration and disappointment in the white moderates of his era not for their “silence,” as Rosen argued, but because they were vocally urging King and civil rights leaders to go slow and let time take care of everything. They cared more for order than justice, King argued, not realizing (or more likely not caring) that order without justice is little more than authoritarianism.
None of this is terribly applicable to Bernie Sanders or his socialist agenda, though. King wasn’t discussing political ideologies but basic human rights and equality under the law in his time. Here, it’s a non-sequitur. Tossing it into this discussion was intended to blow it up, and Rosen stepped right into that trap.
At the end, Chris Cuomo was left with little to say except to remind the two that they were in the same party. One has to wonder for how long.


hotair--2020-03-06--Still rolling: US adds 273,000 jobs in February

After a year of mostly mediocre job-creation numbers , the US economy has regained its 2017 feel over the last four months .
Today ’ s job report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the US added 273,000 jobs in February , the third time in the last four months that job creation has exceeded 250K .
The unemployment mark went back to 3.5 % as labor-force numbers settled back down after a notable shift last month : Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 273,000 in February , and the unemployment rate was little changed at 3.5 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported today .
Notable job gains occurred in health care and social assistance , food services and drinking places , government , construction , professional and technical services , and financial activities .
… The labor force participation rate remained at 63.4 percent in February .
The employment-population ratio , at 61.1 percent , changed little over the month but was up by 0.4 percentage point over the year .
( See table A-1 . )
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons , at 4.3 million , changed little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have preferred full-time employment , were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs .
( See table A-8 . )
In February , 1.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force , little changed from the previous month .
These individuals were not in the labor force , wanted and were available for work , and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks prior to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them , numbered 405,000 in February , little different from the previous month .
Revisions to December and January added 85,000 jobs to their previous reports , making the new January total the same as this month ’ s .
The three-month average for job creation now stands at a rather robust 243,000 , which might seem a bit incredible at the moment as we worry about economic damage from the coronavirus spread .
In February , average hourly earnings for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 9 cents to $ 28.52 .
Over the past 12 months , average hourly earnings have increased by 3.0 percent .
Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 8 cents to $ 23.96 in February .
( See tables B-3 and B-8 . )
The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 0.1 hour to 34.4 hours in February .
In manufacturing , the workweek increased by 0.2 hour to 40.7 hours , and overtime edged up by 0.1 hour to 3.2 hours .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 0.1 hour to 33.7 hours .
CNBC ’ s Jeff Cox writes that the report “ smashes expectations , ” which is perhaps even an understatement .
Economists had predicted 175,000 jobs added : The Labor Department reported Friday that the U.S. economy added 273,000 new jobs during the month , while the unemployment rate was 3.5 % , matching its lowest level in more than 50 years .
An alternative measure of joblessness that counts those not looking for work and holding part-time jobs for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for payroll growth of 175,000 and a 3.5 % jobless level .
Average hourly earnings grew by 3 % over the past year , in line with estimates , while the average work week , considered a key measure of productivity , nudge up to 34.4 hours .
The Wall Street Journal was also surprised , and questions whether the coronavirus can put a dent in this jobs market : Some companies have expressed concern in recent days about the business impact of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United Airlines Holdings Inc. announced a hiring freeze through the end of June as the spread of the virus depressed bookings .
Hyatt Hotels Corp. also froze hiring at some properties as the growing coronavirus outbreak dampens demand for travel .
While virus-related uncertainty could lead to a wider slowdown in hiring in future months , many employers are still reluctant to cut workers given the virus could soon pass and the labor market remains tight .
Jobless claims , a proxy for company layoffs , declined to 216,000 last week , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president of child-care franchise Lightbridge Academy , said the virus is not impeding hiring plans .
The 1,600-employee company is looking to add nearly 400 teachers and directors this year as franchises expand near growing populations of dual-income earners .
“ It ’ s still extremely difficult to hire , ” she said .
“ With the unemployment rate as low as it is , there are fewer candidates who are available for the positions.
” The Associated Press isn ’ t so sure , but also acknowledges that it might not do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If employers were to start slashing jobs as a consequence of the virus , it could significantly escalate the economic damage .
For that reason , a range of job market barometers will provide some of the most vital signals about how the economy is withstanding the virus ’ impact .
Widespread layoffs can transform slowdowns in just one or two sectors — the travel industry , say , or manufacturing — into a full-blown downturn for the overall economy .
When workers lose jobs and pay , they typically cut spending .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ employed grow anxious about their own jobs and wary of spending freely , a cycle that can trigger further job cuts .
So long as monthly job gains remain above 100,000 or so , the unemployment rate should stay low and the economy may be able to avoid a downturn .
If the monthly pace were to sink below that level for a sustained period , joblessness would likely rise .
It might also have a more nuanced effect .
Companies with supply lines in China will have to replace those , requiring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get shifted to other overseas locations .
If some companies relocate supply lines back to the US , there is even more potential for job creation .
It ’ s easy to see why the White House is looking to expand legal immigration at the moment to keep this dynamism percolating , even if one disagrees with the need or the policy .
Politically speaking , it ’ s just what Donald Trump needs .
The question will be how long this peak can be maintained , and whether it doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as most people start thinking about the general election .
For now , though , Trump ’ s prospects on the economy couldn ’ t be brighter .

After a year of mostly mediocre job-creation numbers, the US economy has regained its 2017 feel over the last four months. Today’s job report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the US added 273,000 jobs in February, the third time in the last four months that job creation has exceeded 250K. The unemployment mark went back to 3.5% as labor-force numbers settled back down after a notable shift last month:
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 273,000 in February, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 3.5 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Notable job gains occurred in health care and social assistance, food services and drinking places, government, construction, professional and technical services, and financial activities. … The labor force participation rate remained at 63.4 percent in February. The employment-population ratio, at 61.1 percent, changed little over the month but was up by 0.4 percentage point over the year. (See table A-1.)
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons, at 4.3 million, changed little in February. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.) In February, 1.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, little changed from the previous month. These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks prior to the survey. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, numbered 405,000 in February, little different from the previous month.
Revisions to December and January added 85,000 jobs to their previous reports, making the new January total the same as this month’s. The three-month average for job creation now stands at a rather robust 243,000, which might seem a bit incredible at the moment as we worry about economic damage from the coronavirus spread.
Wages also looked strong:
In February, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 9 cents to $28.52. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.0 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 8 cents to $23.96 in February. (See tables B-3 and B-8.) The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 0.1 hour to 34.4 hours in February. In manufacturing, the workweek increased by 0.2 hour to 40.7 hours, and overtime edged up by 0.1 hour to 3.2 hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 0.1 hour to 33.7 hours.
CNBC’s Jeff Cox writes that the report “smashes expectations,” which is perhaps even an understatement. Economists had predicted 175,000 jobs added:
The Labor Department reported Friday that the U.S. economy added 273,000 new jobs during the month, while the unemployment rate was 3.5%, matching its lowest level in more than 50 years. An alternative measure of joblessness that counts those not looking for work and holding part-time jobs for economic reasons edged higher to 7%. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for payroll growth of 175,000 and a 3.5% jobless level. Average hourly earnings grew by 3% over the past year, in line with estimates, while the average work week, considered a key measure of productivity, nudge up to 34.4 hours.
The Wall Street Journal was also surprised, and questions whether the coronavirus can put a dent in this jobs market:
Some companies have expressed concern in recent days about the business impact of the virus and the global economic slowdown. United Airlines Holdings Inc. announced a hiring freeze through the end of June as the spread of the virus depressed bookings. Hyatt Hotels Corp. also froze hiring at some properties as the growing coronavirus outbreak dampens demand for travel. While virus-related uncertainty could lead to a wider slowdown in hiring in future months, many employers are still reluctant to cut workers given the virus could soon pass and the labor market remains tight. Jobless claims, a proxy for company layoffs, declined to 216,000 last week, a historically low level. Gigi Schweikert, president of child-care franchise Lightbridge Academy, said the virus is not impeding hiring plans. The 1,600-employee company is looking to add nearly 400 teachers and directors this year as franchises expand near growing populations of dual-income earners. “It’s still extremely difficult to hire,” she said. “With the unemployment rate as low as it is, there are fewer candidates who are available for the positions.”
The Associated Press isn’t so sure, but also acknowledges that it might not do as much damage as some fear:
If employers were to start slashing jobs as a consequence of the virus, it could significantly escalate the economic damage. For that reason, a range of job market barometers will provide some of the most vital signals about how the economy is withstanding the virus’ impact. Widespread layoffs can transform slowdowns in just one or two sectors — the travel industry, say, or manufacturing — into a full-blown downturn for the overall economy. When workers lose jobs and pay, they typically cut spending. Their friends and relatives who are still employed grow anxious about their own jobs and wary of spending freely, a cycle that can trigger further job cuts. So long as monthly job gains remain above 100,000 or so, the unemployment rate should stay low and the economy may be able to avoid a downturn. If the monthly pace were to sink below that level for a sustained period, joblessness would likely rise.
It might also have a more nuanced effect. Companies with supply lines in China will have to replace those, requiring more work here even if those lines get shifted to other overseas locations. If some companies relocate supply lines back to the US, there is even more potential for job creation. It’s easy to see why the White House is looking to expand legal immigration at the moment to keep this dynamism percolating, even if one disagrees with the need or the policy.
Politically speaking, it’s just what Donald Trump needs. The question will be how long this peak can be maintained, and whether it doesn’t get dragged down by summer doldrums just as most people start thinking about the general election. For now, though, Trump’s prospects on the economy couldn’t be brighter.


hotair--2020-03-06--Warren: It's just a fact that Bernie Bros use "organized nastiness" for intimidation

Looks like Elizabeth Warren won ’ t join Team Bernie any time soon .
In her first major one-on-one interview since withdrawing from the race , Warren told MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow that Bernie Sanders ’ campaign has an “ organized nastiness ” that intends to intimidate opponents out of the public square .
“ I ’ m talking about some really ugly stuff that went on , ” Warren tells Maddow , and “ it ’ s not just about me.
” Warren manages to make it about Donald Trump too , of course , but her main @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific reference to what she described as online harassment of union leaders in Nevada ahead of last month ’ s caucuses because they took issue with Sanders ’ s Medicare-for-all proposal .
“ They didn ’ t just disagree , ” she said .
“ They actually published the phone numbers and home addresses of the two women , immigrant women , and really put them in fear for their families .
… These are tough women who run labor organizing campaigns … and yet said for the first time because of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really under attack , and that wasn ’ t the first time it happened.
” … “ We need to reckon with this in our political discourse , ” said Warren , adding that what ’ s needed is “ an understanding that nobody puts somebody ’ s family at risk or puts you at risk.
” She said that Democrats can not “ follow that same kind of politics of division that Donald Trump follows.
” “ He draws strength from tearing people apart , from demonizing people , ” Warren added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who I want to be as a Democrat .
It ’ s not who I want to be as an American.
” That ’ s a bit rich for someone who insinuated just yesterday that her exit had to do with the misogyny inherent in the Democratic electorate and in the competing campaigns .
Warren also famously accused Sanders of claiming a woman couldn ’ t win the presidency , a charge that came out conveniently just before the Iowa caucuses , which Sanders vehemently denied .
When it comes to tearing people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have her own skills and talents .
However , the larger point about the Bernie Bros is almost certainly correct .
James O ’ Keefe had a series of undercover videos that showed Sanders ’ campaign workers talking about the use of political violence to achieve their ends , even to the point of guillotines and gulags .
Sanders himself is fond of claiming that his movement is all about “ Scandinavian ” socialism , but his followers tend much more toward the “ Sandinista ” version of it .
The most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be what was said — we have all known this for a while — but where it was said .
Chris Matthews just got pushed out of his Hardball slot for not being sufficiently appreciative of the Bernie Bro Generation , haranguing the “ Democratic Socialists ” for being , well , very much into the traditional model .
And yet Maddow plunges full speed ahead into the same territory , albeit in an interview mode , going after the head of the same movement in a similar fashion .
Good for Maddow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough to keep her from getting the Matthews treatment .
Probably .

Looks like Elizabeth Warren won’t join Team Bernie any time soon. In her first major one-on-one interview since withdrawing from the race, Warren told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that Bernie Sanders’ campaign has an “organized nastiness” that intends to intimidate opponents out of the public square. “I’m talking about some really ugly stuff that went on,” Warren tells Maddow, and “it’s not just about me.”
Warren manages to make it about Donald Trump too, of course, but her main target is clearly Sanders:
Elizabeth Warren calls out Sanders' supporters for online bullying and "organized nastiness" in her first interview since exiting the presidential race. #ctl #p2 #maddow pic.twitter.com/4xKMY0vYjI — PoliticusUSA (@politicususa) March 6, 2020
She made specific reference to what she described as online harassment of union leaders in Nevada ahead of last month’s caucuses because they took issue with Sanders’s Medicare-for-all proposal. “They didn’t just disagree,” she said. “They actually published the phone numbers and home addresses of the two women, immigrant women, and really put them in fear for their families. … These are tough women who run labor organizing campaigns … and yet said for the first time because of this onslaught of online threats that they felt really under attack, and that wasn’t the first time it happened.” … “We need to reckon with this in our political discourse,” said Warren, adding that what’s needed is “an understanding that nobody puts somebody’s family at risk or puts you at risk.” She said that Democrats cannot “follow that same kind of politics of division that Donald Trump follows.” “He draws strength from tearing people apart, from demonizing people,” Warren added. “… It’s not who I want to be as a Democrat. It’s not who I want to be as an American.”
That’s a bit rich for someone who insinuated just yesterday that her exit had to do with the misogyny inherent in the Democratic electorate and in the competing campaigns. Warren also famously accused Sanders of claiming a woman couldn’t win the presidency, a charge that came out conveniently just before the Iowa caucuses, which Sanders vehemently denied. When it comes to tearing people apart and demonizing them, Warren seems to have her own skills and talents.
However, the larger point about the Bernie Bros is almost certainly correct. James O’Keefe had a series of undercover videos that showed Sanders’ campaign workers talking about the use of political violence to achieve their ends, even to the point of guillotines and gulags. Sanders himself is fond of claiming that his movement is all about “Scandinavian” socialism, but his followers tend much more toward the “Sandinista” version of it.
The most significant part of this story might not be what was said — we have all known this for a while — but where it was said. Chris Matthews just got pushed out of his Hardball slot for not being sufficiently appreciative of the Bernie Bro Generation, haranguing the “Democratic Socialists” for being, well, very much into the traditional model. And yet Maddow plunges full speed ahead into the same territory, albeit in an interview mode, going after the head of the same movement in a similar fashion. Good for Maddow, whose progressive cred is probably strong enough to keep her from getting the Matthews treatment. Probably.


hotair--2020-03-06--Why is Klobuchar still involved in the Myon Burrell case?

For reasons that remain unclear , Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar is still wrapped up in the case of Myon Burrell .
He ’ s the man who was convicted in the 2002 slaying of 11-year-old Tyesha Edwards when Klobuchar was serving as the Hennepin County Attorney in Minnesota .
Burrell was 16 at the time of the killing , but developments in the case well after his two trials have called his guilt into question .
Yesterday , Klobuchar sent a letter to the current County Attorney asking for a full , independent investigation of the situation .
( Associated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a top Minnesota prosecutor Thursday to initiate an independent investigation into the case of Myon Burrell , a black teen sentenced to life after an 11-year-old black girl was killed by a stray bullet .
“ As you are aware , significant concerns about the evidence and police investigation have been raised by a press investigation , by members of the Hennepin County community , and by Myon ’ s family , ” she wrote in a letter to Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman .
In calling for an “ independent investigation and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to increasing community pressure to reopen a case that dogged her Democratic presidential primary run .
A yearlong Associated Press investigation published last month uncovered major flaws in the 2002 case , raising questions as to whether the 16-year-old blamed in the little girl ’ s death may have been wrongfully convicted .
Back when I first heard about ( and wrote about ) this case , I noted that the timing of the protests attacking Klobuchar ’ s campaign over the handling of the Burrell conviction seemed suspicious , to say the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conviction have been out there in the local press for more than a decade , but it was only when Klobuchar started showing some momentum in the primary that Black Lives Matter , the ACLU and other groups showed up to call for her to quit the campaign and deal with Burrell ’ s situation .
Further , the groups in question were obviously going after the wrong person and that ’ s still the case today .
It ’ s true that Klobuchar was in charge of the original trial , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t until 2008 when Burrell was finally convicted and sentenced to life in prison .
That was long after Klobuchar had moved on and taken a seat in the Senate .
Her replacement in the County Attorney ’ s office was the one who handled that .
Further , at the time of the original trial , none of the witness recantations nor the admission of guilt by a different prisoner had taken place .
She was working with the information available at the time and a jury found the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
None of this is to say that the case doesn ’ t deserve a fresh look .
Most people in prison claim that they didn ’ t do whatever they were accused of and jailhouse confessions aren ’ t always valid .
But it ’ s also true that innocent people are sometimes convicted and imprisoned .
The point here is that the current County Attorney , Mike Freeman , is the one who needs to be examining the case as Klobuchar has requested .
That really should be the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Freeman is claiming that an internal investigation is underway and that should be sufficient .
I somehow doubt that will quell the protests surrounding this case .
If Myon Burrell is truly innocent and this national exposure leads to his name being cleared and his release from prison , some good will have come from all of this .
But no matter how it plays out , this really isn ’ t Klobuchar ’ s problem , and continuing to drag her name into it is neither fair nor productive .

For reasons that remain unclear, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar is still wrapped up in the case of Myon Burrell. He’s the man who was convicted in the 2002 slaying of 11-year-old Tyesha Edwards when Klobuchar was serving as the Hennepin County Attorney in Minnesota. Burrell was 16 at the time of the killing, but developments in the case well after his two trials have called his guilt into question. Yesterday, Klobuchar sent a letter to the current County Attorney asking for a full, independent investigation of the situation. (Associated Press)
US Sen. Amy Klobuchar asked a top Minnesota prosecutor Thursday to initiate an independent investigation into the case of Myon Burrell, a black teen sentenced to life after an 11-year-old black girl was killed by a stray bullet. “As you are aware, significant concerns about the evidence and police investigation have been raised by a press investigation, by members of the Hennepin County community, and by Myon’s family,” she wrote in a letter to Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman. In calling for an “independent investigation and an independent review,” Klobuchar yielded to increasing community pressure to reopen a case that dogged her Democratic presidential primary run. A yearlong Associated Press investigation published last month uncovered major flaws in the 2002 case, raising questions as to whether the 16-year-old blamed in the little girl’s death may have been wrongfully convicted.
Back when I first heard about (and wrote about) this case, I noted that the timing of the protests attacking Klobuchar’s campaign over the handling of the Burrell conviction seemed suspicious, to say the least. The questions raised about the conviction have been out there in the local press for more than a decade, but it was only when Klobuchar started showing some momentum in the primary that Black Lives Matter, the ACLU and other groups showed up to call for her to quit the campaign and deal with Burrell’s situation.
Further, the groups in question were obviously going after the wrong person and that’s still the case today. It’s true that Klobuchar was in charge of the original trial, but that conviction was thrown out. It wasn’t until 2008 when Burrell was finally convicted and sentenced to life in prison. That was long after Klobuchar had moved on and taken a seat in the Senate. Her replacement in the County Attorney’s office was the one who handled that.
Further, at the time of the original trial, none of the witness recantations nor the admission of guilt by a different prisoner had taken place. She was working with the information available at the time and a jury found the case persuasive enough to deliver a guilty verdict.
None of this is to say that the case doesn’t deserve a fresh look. Most people in prison claim that they didn’t do whatever they were accused of and jailhouse confessions aren’t always valid. But it’s also true that innocent people are sometimes convicted and imprisoned. The point here is that the current County Attorney, Mike Freeman, is the one who needs to be examining the case as Klobuchar has requested. That really should be the end of her involvement.
For his part, Freeman is claiming that an internal investigation is underway and that should be sufficient. I somehow doubt that will quell the protests surrounding this case. If Myon Burrell is truly innocent and this national exposure leads to his name being cleared and his release from prison, some good will have come from all of this. But no matter how it plays out, this really isn’t Klobuchar’s problem, and continuing to drag her name into it is neither fair nor productive.


hotair--2020-03-06--Breaking: Meadows new WH chief of staff, Mulvaney to ... Northern Ireland?

He ’ s been on the short list a long time , almost as long as the man he ’ s replacing has had the job .
Now Mark Meadows moves to the inner sanctum of the Trump administration as the president ’ s fourth chief of staff .
Meadows had already announced his retirement from Congress in December , which means that this move won ’ t have any direct electoral impact on House Republicans ’ attempts to regain the majority : President Donald Trump announced Friday night on Twitter that Rep. Mark Meadows will become White House chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known and worked with Mark , and the relationship is a very good one , ” he said of the North Carolina Republican .
“ I want to thank Acting Chief Mick Mulvaney for having served the Administration so well .
He will become the United States Special Envoy for Northern Ireland.
” Meadows , who was first elected to North Carolina ’ s 11th District in 2012 , told CQ Roll Call in 2019 that he had actually been considering retiring last cycle .
When he decided to run for a fourth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong inclination it would be his last race .
Meadows should make for a smooth fit for Trump , being one of his firmest allies on Capitol Hill .
Fox News calls this a “ surprise announcement , ” but it ’ s not that much of a surprise .
Perhaps the only thing surprising about it is that Meadows agreed to do it ; it seemed as though he was content to leave Washington DC .
Unlike with Mulvaney , Meadows isn ’ t starting off with an “ acting ” tag @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep the arrangement for a significant amount of time , apparently .
( Voters will have something to say about how long in November , of course . )
The more surprising aspect of this announcement is what Mulvaney will do next .
Or , er , concurrently .
Maybe ?
As Fox also notes , Mulvaney was more than just chief of staff — he ’ s still OMB Director , too .
That was supposed to be his primary job until Trump dropped the “ acting ” tag on his term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Mulvaney would try to do both OMB and this special-envoy job , an ambassadorial-rank position that has gone unfilled until now since Trump took office .
Until today , it appeared that Trump didn ’ t have any interest at all in engaging on these issues .
What seems especially curious about this sudden move to fill the position is that it comes so soon after Mulvaney was quoted as saying that the US was “ desperate ” to expand immigration .
That was just two weeks ago .
Now Mulvaney ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his replacement is immigration hardliner Mark Meadows .
Coincidence ?
Maybe , maybe not , but it ’ s also possible that Mulvaney really wanted a new job , too .
He ’ s also been frustrated by a lack of seriousness over deficit spending — in fact , his accusations of Republican hypocrisy on the subject came up in the same event as his comments on immigration .
Belfast is a strange place to go if Mulvaney ’ s frustrated about either topic , though .

He’s been on the short list a long time, almost as long as the man he’s replacing has had the job. Now Mark Meadows moves to the inner sanctum of the Trump administration as the president’s fourth chief of staff. Meadows had already announced his retirement from Congress in December, which means that this move won’t have any direct electoral impact on House Republicans’ attempts to regain the majority:
President Donald Trump announced Friday night on Twitter that Rep. Mark Meadows will become White House chief of staff. “I have long known and worked with Mark, and the relationship is a very good one,” he said of the North Carolina Republican. “I want to thank Acting Chief Mick Mulvaney for having served the Administration so well. He will become the United States Special Envoy for Northern Ireland.” Meadows, who was first elected to North Carolina’s 11th District in 2012, told CQ Roll Call in 2019 that he had actually been considering retiring last cycle. When he decided to run for a fourth term in 2018, he had a strong inclination it would be his last race.
Meadows should make for a smooth fit for Trump, being one of his firmest allies on Capitol Hill. Fox News calls this a “surprise announcement,” but it’s not that much of a surprise. Perhaps the only thing surprising about it is that Meadows agreed to do it; it seemed as though he was content to leave Washington DC. Unlike with Mulvaney, Meadows isn’t starting off with an “acting” tag either, so both men plan to keep the arrangement for a significant amount of time, apparently. (Voters will have something to say about how long in November, of course.)
The more surprising aspect of this announcement is what Mulvaney will do next. Or, er, concurrently. Maybe?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1236096307858681857
As Fox also notes, Mulvaney was more than just chief of staff — he’s still OMB Director, too. That was supposed to be his primary job until Trump dropped the “acting” tag on his term as CoS. It seems almost unthinkable that Mulvaney would try to do both OMB and this special-envoy job, an ambassadorial-rank position that has gone unfilled until now since Trump took office. Until today, it appeared that Trump didn’t have any interest at all in engaging on these issues.
What seems especially curious about this sudden move to fill the position is that it comes so soon after Mulvaney was quoted as saying that the US was “desperate” to expand immigration. That was just two weeks ago. Now Mulvaney’s going to Northern Ireland, and his replacement is immigration hardliner Mark Meadows. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not, but it’s also possible that Mulvaney really wanted a new job, too. He’s also been frustrated by a lack of seriousness over deficit spending — in fact, his accusations of Republican hypocrisy on the subject came up in the same event as his comments on immigration. Belfast is a strange place to go if Mulvaney’s frustrated about either topic, though.


hotair--2020-03-06--Coronavirus comfort: Campbell's Soup and ... Tito's Vodka?

Shoppers are thinking ahead and stocking up on food and cleaning products just in case the COVID-19 epidemic strikes in their community .
Some shoppers are taking it farther and hoarding canned goods and snack products .
One of the products in demand is Campbell ’ s Soup .
Soup is the ultimate comfort food if you are feeling under the weather .
Generations have been fed chicken noodle soup to counter the common cold and the flu .
Now the Campbell ’ s Soup Company finds itself in need of placing rush orders for ingredients in order to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soup to pasta sauce to assorted snacks is in demand because of long shelf lives .
If you develop symptoms and are quarantined at home , experts advise that about a two week supply should meet your needs .
It is much like preparing for hurricane season along the Gulf coast , just in case a storm disrupts normal day-to-day life , you and your family will be prepared .
Some state health departments are recommending that residents stock up on non-perishable food , over the counter medicine to treat flu symptoms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As the stories of pockets of outbreaks in the United States dominate cable and network news reports , an increase in demand for Campbell products is beginning .
Over the weekend , a few retail customers began stepping up orders , Campbell Chief Executive Mark Clouse told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday .
The company had already begun building inventory for ingredients that are usually stockpiled during natural disasters , including canned soups , snacks and Prego pasta sauces .
“ We ’ re working very closely with folks to make sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Clouse said , adding that “ honestly before this weekend we had not seen much ” higher demand .
Big chain stores , like Kroger and Walmart , are becoming concerned about interruptions in supply chains as store shelves are being emptied .
Target reported Tuesday that its stores are seeing an increase in in-store traffic due to the coronavirus .
As with everything else having to do with COVID-19 , there is uncertainty about how long this trend in increased purchasing will continue .
Data firm Nielsen has reported that demand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretzels and fruit snacks – was up 5-7 % in January and February .
Clouse said sales growth over the last couple of weeks was comparable , but that he did not know if this would continue .
“ There ’ s no question that we ’ re seeing some uptick – it ’ s just hard for me yet to know the level of sustained need , ” Clouse said .
SpaghettiOs canned pasta and Swanson canned chicken are also seeing higher demand , he added .
As far as an increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerned , an unlikely product finds itself in the mix .
Austin-based Tito ’ s Vodka was working overtime on social media this week convincing customers that its vodka can not be used as a hand sanitizer .
The company responded to tweet after tweet – no , the vodka is not an acceptable substitute for hand sanitizer .
What brought about that conversation ?
Hand sanitizer is made of rubbing alcohol .
With shortages of hand sanitizers in stores , customers were asking about using vodka as a substitute .
People are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ project .
It ’ s easy to do and cheap , too .
Why pay a premium price on store-bought hand sanitizer when you can make it yourself ?
Tito ’ s won ’ t work as a substitute for rubbing alcohol , though , because it is just 40 percent alcohol by volume , not the 60 percent required to kill viruses .
Save it for its intended purpose .
Save the good stuff for a cocktail , don ’ t wash your hands in it .
If you want to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ HERE .

Shoppers are thinking ahead and stocking up on food and cleaning products just in case the COVID-19 epidemic strikes in their community. Some shoppers are taking it farther and hoarding canned goods and snack products. One of the products in demand is Campbell’s Soup.
Soup is the ultimate comfort food if you are feeling under the weather. Generations have been fed chicken noodle soup to counter the common cold and the flu. Now the Campbell’s Soup Company finds itself in need of placing rush orders for ingredients in order to keep up with the demand. Everything from soup to pasta sauce to assorted snacks is in demand because of long shelf lives. If you develop symptoms and are quarantined at home, experts advise that about a two week supply should meet your needs. It is much like preparing for hurricane season along the Gulf coast, just in case a storm disrupts normal day-to-day life, you and your family will be prepared.
Some state health departments are recommending that residents stock up on non-perishable food, over the counter medicine to treat flu symptoms, prescription medications, and sanitary products. As the stories of pockets of outbreaks in the United States dominate cable and network news reports, an increase in demand for Campbell products is beginning.
Over the weekend, a few retail customers began stepping up orders, Campbell Chief Executive Mark Clouse told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday. The company had already begun building inventory for ingredients that are usually stockpiled during natural disasters, including canned soups, snacks and Prego pasta sauces. “We’re working very closely with folks to make sure that we keep them in stock,” Clouse said, adding that “honestly before this weekend we had not seen much” higher demand.
Big chain stores, like Kroger and Walmart, are becoming concerned about interruptions in supply chains as store shelves are being emptied. Target reported Tuesday that its stores are seeing an increase in in-store traffic due to the coronavirus. As with everything else having to do with COVID-19, there is uncertainty about how long this trend in increased purchasing will continue.
Data firm Nielsen has reported that demand for some consumer products – such as pretzels and fruit snacks – was up 5-7% in January and February. Clouse said sales growth over the last couple of weeks was comparable, but that he did not know if this would continue. “There’s no question that we’re seeing some uptick – it’s just hard for me yet to know the level of sustained need,” Clouse said. SpaghettiOs canned pasta and Swanson canned chicken are also seeing higher demand, he added.
As far as an increased interest in products like hand sanitizer is concerned, an unlikely product finds itself in the mix. Austin-based Tito’s Vodka was working overtime on social media this week convincing customers that its vodka cannot be used as a hand sanitizer. The company responded to tweet after tweet – no, the vodka is not an acceptable substitute for hand sanitizer.
Per the CDC, hand sanitizer needs to contain at least 60% alcohol. Tito's Handmade Vodka is 40% alcohol, and therefore does not meet the current recommendation of the CDC. Please see attached for more information. pic.twitter.com/3gS4Cv92Xn — TitosVodka (@TitosVodka) March 4, 2020
What brought about that conversation? Hand sanitizer is made of rubbing alcohol. With shortages of hand sanitizers in stores, customers were asking about using vodka as a substitute. People are making hand sanitizer themselves as a DIY project. It’s easy to do and cheap, too. Why pay a premium price on store-bought hand sanitizer when you can make it yourself? Tito’s won’t work as a substitute for rubbing alcohol, though, because it is just 40 percent alcohol by volume, not the 60 percent required to kill viruses. Save it for its intended purpose.
“As soon as we saw the incorrect articles and social posts, we wanted to set the record straight,” a representative for Tito’s tells Eater. “While it would be good for business for our fans to use massive quantities of Tito’s for hand sanitizer, it would be a shame to waste the good stuff, especially if it doesn’t sanitize…”
Save the good stuff for a cocktail, don’t wash your hands in it. If you want to make a hand sanitizer at home, go HERE.


hotair--2020-03-06--Trump: I don't want to bring quarantined people off the cruise ship because I don't want "the number

Trump: I don't want to bring quarantined people off the cruise ship because I don't want "the numbers" to double overnight

There is genuine suspense as to how he ’ s going to react once testing ramps up , the true extent of the disease becomes known , and the “ we stopped it ” nonsense is revealed as nonsense .
He ’ s always been hung up on numbers .
It ’ s why he listed his fortune as the unlikely sum of $ 10 billion .
It ’ s why he always used to chatter about ratings for “ The Apprentice.
” It ’ s why he obsesses over the Dow and his job approval rating — among Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been great .
He likes big numbers .
He ’ s got another big number coming soon on coronavirus .
He won ’ t like this one .
Today at the CDC he touted the fact that there are only 240 cases nationwide , per Fox News ’ s reporting .
As I said in the last post , there were 17 in Italy two weeks ago and there are 4,600 now , and that ’ s despite the fact that entire towns were locked down to try to contain its spread .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems like a reasonable expectation .
And he won ’ t be able to suppress those numbers , in case that ’ s how he ’ s inclined .
The labs around the country that are testing for the disease will be compiling totals ; those totals will be given to local officials and to reporters .
What ’ s the White House message going to be after “ we stopped it ” ?
“ Most cases are mild ” ?
Maybe he ’ ll just out-and-out deny their veracity , like he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls ) post bad numbers for him .
Imagine Mike Pence and the CDC having to somehow manage the public ’ s need for accurate information with Trump ’ s need for happy talk .
As for the cruise ship that ’ s currently off the coast of California , and which had coronavirus tests delivered via helicopter yesterday : Out of 46 numbers — sorry , I mean people — tested so far , nearly half are positive .
Nineteen are crew members .
Trump says in the clip below that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handle it even though he prefers that the ship remain offshore lest the sick passengers add to “ the numbers ” here .
Pence said this afternoon that the ship will be brought in to a non-commercial port this weekend .
Which is smart , since cruise-ship quarantines seem to backfire .
Just a thought , but … maybe it ’ s time to stop going on cruises for awhile ?
I realize what that ’ s going to do to the hospitality industry ( it ’ s already happening ) but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if its staff can ’ t work due to infection .
Austin made a hard but very rational decision this afternoon in canceling SXSW , choosing ( a ) a major economic hit over ( b ) risking a major economic hit and a massive local public health crisis by holding the event and letting sick but asymptomatic attendees seed the city with coronavirus .
Pretty straightforward .
Others should learn from their example that large concentrations of people are a bad idea right now .
For some , it ’ s too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attend AIPAC .
Exit question : How bad are “ the numbers ” going to be for the Dow next week ?

There is genuine suspense as to how he’s going to react once testing ramps up, the true extent of the disease becomes known, and the “we stopped it” nonsense is revealed as nonsense. He’s always been hung up on numbers. It’s why he listed his fortune as the unlikely sum of $10 billion. It’s why he always used to chatter about ratings for “The Apprentice.” It’s why he obsesses over the Dow and his job approval rating — among Republicans, since the overall rating has never been great. He likes big numbers.
He’s got another big number coming soon on coronavirus. He won’t like this one.
Today at the CDC he touted the fact that there are only 240 cases nationwide, per Fox News’s reporting. As I said in the last post, there were 17 in Italy two weeks ago and there are 4,600 now, and that’s despite the fact that entire towns were locked down to try to contain its spread. Tens of thousands of cases here soon-ish seems like a reasonable expectation. And he won’t be able to suppress those numbers, in case that’s how he’s inclined. The labs around the country that are testing for the disease will be compiling totals; those totals will be given to local officials and to reporters.
What’s the White House message going to be after “we stopped it”? “Most cases are mild”? Maybe he’ll just out-and-out deny their veracity, like he does when polls (including Fox News polls) post bad numbers for him. Imagine Mike Pence and the CDC having to somehow manage the public’s need for accurate information with Trump’s need for happy talk.
As for the cruise ship that’s currently off the coast of California, and which had coronavirus tests delivered via helicopter yesterday: Out of 46 numbers — sorry, I mean people — tested so far, nearly half are positive. Nineteen are crew members. Trump says in the clip below that he gave Pence authority to decide how to handle it even though he prefers that the ship remain offshore lest the sick passengers add to “the numbers” here. Pence said this afternoon that the ship will be brought in to a non-commercial port this weekend.
Which is smart, since cruise-ship quarantines seem to backfire.
Just a thought, but … maybe it’s time to stop going on cruises for awhile? I realize what that’s going to do to the hospitality industry (it’s already happening) but the industry is going to be damaged anyway if its staff can’t work due to infection. Austin made a hard but very rational decision this afternoon in canceling SXSW, choosing (a) a major economic hit over (b) risking a major economic hit and a massive local public health crisis by holding the event and letting sick but asymptomatic attendees seed the city with coronavirus. Pretty straightforward.
Others should learn from their example that large concentrations of people are a bad idea right now. For some, it’s too late:
Important Update: Coronavirus As emailed to Policy Conference attendees, participants, speakers, administration and Hill offices.https://t.co/0mkWeuRErA pic.twitter.com/EHl694pkgJ — AIPAC (@AIPAC) March 6, 2020
Lots of members of Congress attend AIPAC. Exit question: How bad are “the numbers” going to be for the Dow next week?


hotair--2020-03-07--The Navy blows off Mark Walker about UFOs

Last summer , when there was a tremendous amount of buzz about UFOs being encountered by our Navy fighter pilots , Republican Congressman Mark Walker of North Carolina ’ s 6th district wrote a letter to the Navy asking for details .
There was a bit of a delay , but then-Undersecretary of the Navy Thomas Modly did eventually write back to Walker .
This was first reported last year by Politico , but the full contents of the ( non-classified ) letter weren ’ t released .
Now The War Zone has obtained a copy of the full letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the response was disappointing is a serious understatement .
Mody spoke almost entirely in vague generalities , eventually making it clear that he wasn ’ t even addressing the specific topic that Walker was inquiring about .
Walker described the letter as “ frustratingly insufficient.
” It also does not discuss any Navy connection to the Advanced Aerospace Threat and Identification Program ( AATIP ) , or its predecessor , the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications ( AAWSA ) program , which existed for various periods of time within the Defense Intelligence Agency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Secretary of Defense .
You can find out more about those programs in these previous War Zone pieces .
“ The wide proliferation and availability of inexpensive unmanned aerial systems ( UAS ) has increasingly made airspace de-confliction an issue for our aviators .
Naval aircrews have been provided reporting guidance to determine the frequency and location of UAS operating in training areas , ” Modly wrote to Walker .
“ The guidance supports objective , data-driven analysis of incursions .
The DON continues to dedicate resources to the tracking and investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our aircrews.
” As I said , you can read the entire letter at the link above , but Mody spoke in generalities , saying that the Department of the Navy ( DON ) “ takes these reports very seriously and continues to log sightings and fully investigate the accounts.
” But as you can see in the excerpt above , Mody then goes on to muddy the waters , talking about “ inexpensive unmanned aerial systems ( UAS ) .
” He ’ s talking about drones .
Walker wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s another , far more earthly concern that ’ s a valid topic of discussion .
The Congressman was specifically asking about the UAPs being reported by pilots from the Nimitz and Roosevelt carrier groups , among others .
He wrote : Does that sound to you like Walker was talking about drones that kids are picking up at Walmart for under fifty bucks ?
Of course not .
He was talking about UFOs and the pilots who have been seeing them .
Walker also made explicit reference to the AATIP program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not the DON had found “ material evidence or otherwise that substantiates these claims.
” Mody ignored those questions entirely .
This was a series of non-answers from the Navy that avoided the questions being asked .
Walker is on the House Committee on Homeland Security and is the Ranking Member for its Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism .
Do you suppose that someone like that might be entitled to some straight answers , even if they had to be delivered in a classified fashion ?
Instead , Mody seemed to twist the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying that the Navy would continue to work with the House Armed Services Committee ( of which Walker is not a member . )
I suppose this denial and obfuscation shouldn ’ t surprise us too much .
The Pentagon has gone almost entirely silent on this subject over the winter , saying as little as possible and being highly evasive when someone does drag an answer out of them .
But we ’ ll keep pounding our heads against that wall until we eventually get some answers .
Meanwhile , in case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ topic of the fascinating technology these UFOs are apparently demonstrating , it turns out that our military has been working on antigravity technology since the 50s and they ’ re still doing it today .
Of course , there ’ s no evidence that they ever figured it out , but they ’ ve been trying .
Lots of good data at the linked article .
Enjoy .

Last summer, when there was a tremendous amount of buzz about UFOs being encountered by our Navy fighter pilots, Republican Congressman Mark Walker of North Carolina’s 6th district wrote a letter to the Navy asking for details. There was a bit of a delay, but then-Undersecretary of the Navy Thomas Modly did eventually write back to Walker. This was first reported last year by Politico, but the full contents of the (non-classified) letter weren’t released. Now The War Zone has obtained a copy of the full letter and published it.
To say that the response was disappointing is a serious understatement. Mody spoke almost entirely in vague generalities, eventually making it clear that he wasn’t even addressing the specific topic that Walker was inquiring about. Walker described the letter as “frustratingly insufficient.”
It also does not discuss any Navy connection to the Advanced Aerospace Threat and Identification Program (AATIP), or its predecessor, the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) program, which existed for various periods of time within the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. You can find out more about those programs in these previous War Zone pieces. “The wide proliferation and availability of inexpensive unmanned aerial systems (UAS) has increasingly made airspace de-confliction an issue for our aviators. Naval aircrews have been provided reporting guidance to determine the frequency and location of UAS operating in training areas,” Modly wrote to Walker. “The guidance supports objective, data-driven analysis of incursions. The DON continues to dedicate resources to the tracking and investigation of reports that could affect the safety of our aircrews.”
As I said, you can read the entire letter at the link above, but Mody spoke in generalities, saying that the Department of the Navy (DON) “takes these reports very seriously and continues to log sightings and fully investigate the accounts.”
But as you can see in the excerpt above, Mody then goes on to muddy the waters, talking about “inexpensive unmanned aerial systems (UAS).” He’s talking about drones. Walker wasn’t asking about drones, though that’s another, far more earthly concern that’s a valid topic of discussion. The Congressman was specifically asking about the UAPs being reported by pilots from the Nimitz and Roosevelt carrier groups, among others. He wrote:
“Based on pilot accounts, encounters with these UAPs often involved complex flight patterns and advanced maneuvering, which demand extreme advances in quantum mechanics, nuclear science, electromagnets, and thermodynamics. If the accounts are true, the unidentified crafts could pose a serious security risk to our military personnel and defense apparatus. They could also represent a tremendous opportunity for advancements in science and technology that can contribute to the public good.”
Does that sound to you like Walker was talking about drones that kids are picking up at Walmart for under fifty bucks? Of course not. He was talking about UFOs and the pilots who have been seeing them. Walker also made explicit reference to the AATIP program in his letter and asked whether or not the DON had found “material evidence or otherwise that substantiates these claims.” Mody ignored those questions entirely.
This was a series of non-answers from the Navy that avoided the questions being asked. Walker is on the House Committee on Homeland Security and is the Ranking Member for its Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism. Do you suppose that someone like that might be entitled to some straight answers, even if they had to be delivered in a classified fashion? Instead, Mody seemed to twist the knife a bit in his letter, saying that the Navy would continue to work with the House Armed Services Committee (of which Walker is not a member.)
I suppose this denial and obfuscation shouldn’t surprise us too much. The Pentagon has gone almost entirely silent on this subject over the winter, saying as little as possible and being highly evasive when someone does drag an answer out of them. But we’ll keep pounding our heads against that wall until we eventually get some answers.
Meanwhile, in case you wanted some extra reading on the topic of the fascinating technology these UFOs are apparently demonstrating, it turns out that our military has been working on antigravity technology since the 50s and they’re still doing it today. Of course, there’s no evidence that they ever figured it out, but they’ve been trying. Lots of good data at the linked article. Enjoy.


hotair--2020-03-07--ER doctor: Coronavirus won't be severe for most, but...

It ’ s Jeremy Faust , who wrote two widely read semi-encouraging pieces about COVID-19 for Slate recently .
( Maybe the only semi-encouraging pieces about the disease to appear online over the last two weeks , in fact . )
I linked both when they were published but here they are again : “ Why the Silent Spread of Coronavirus Might Actually Be a Good Sign ” and “ COVID-19 Isn ’ t As Deadly As We Think.
” His point in each is straightforward , that there ’ s every reason to believe coronavirus won ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data we already have .
It almost never kills children , rarely kills young adults , and may not be much more deadly than the common flu to middle-aged adults .
In fact , in the one somewhat “ controlled ” experiment we have — the Diamond Princess cruise — death rates were lower than the data from China led us to expect .
Which is great .
But there are three wrinkles .
First , the numbers for older adults are very frightening .
Here ’ s a new study that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the flu for the under-40 crowd .
Then it inches up for the 40-49 crowd .
Then inches up further for 50-59 .
And then , at around age 60 , we have lift-off .
Septuagenarians have a one in 10 chance of death .
The overall death rate ends up at 1.6 percent , considerably higher than the flu because the high mortality rate among older people drags up the average .
Faust emphasizes that too in the clip below , as you ’ ll see : Senior citizens and people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ re facing catastrophe .
But looking at death rates from COVID-19 is too simple .
That ’ s the second wrinkle .
The threat from an epidemic isn ’ t merely whether the disease will get you , it ’ s whether it will cripple basic services — medical services , first and foremost — and thereby make it much easier for something else to get you .
If your stomach can take it , read this thread projecting what the load on the U.S. health-care system might be as soon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not just the death rate that matters ; the hospitalization rate matters too .
And of course the two are linked .
If you come down with coronavirus , or flu , or any other disease , infectious or otherwise , and can ’ t get a bed because hospitals are overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients , your risk of dying from whatever you have will obviously increase considerably .
The death rate might be 1.6 percent when there ’ s enough capacity to treat everyone to the full extent that their illness requires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there isn ’ t ?
The third wrinkle , as you already know , is that the CDC has utterly blown its chance to put out this fire before it spread : [ O ] nce the CDC finally began its national testing regime , it faltered in almost every way imaginable .
The initial tests didn ’ t work , and officials are probing whether there was possible contamination .
The protocol for who could be tested was restricted to people already known to have been exposed to the virus or who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the epidemic raced to multiple countries like Japan , South Korea , Italy and Iran… Airport passenger screening has gotten less scrutiny than testing , but it appears to be lagging , too .
Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf told House lawmakers that Customs and Border Protection and medical staff had screened more than 50,000 passengers on flights from China and Iran who were funneled through 11 airports .
But the screening , which involved measures such as testing people for elevated body temperatures , may have detected only one in three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ School of Public Health communicable disease expert Marc Lipsitch told a news briefing this week .
Trump ’ s limited ban on travel to China slowed down the spread temporarily , but new research shows that travel bans likely buy a few weeks at most .
When Politico asked one public-health expert what went wrong with the feds ’ response , his answer was , “ What went right ?
” Here ’ s Faust , who ’ s tweeting about the crushing delay in coronavirus testing today , on CNN this morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Bush and Obama with a far grimmer assessment of the situation .
In a few weeks , when the extent of the contagion is better known , it seems a cinch that pro sports leagues will have to start turning away fans in order to limit community spread .
( The NBA is already discussing it . )
Since the virus can ’ t be contained anymore , the only option is collective self-isolation to the greatest extent feasible unless and until doctors find a drug cocktail that works .

It’s Jeremy Faust, who wrote two widely read semi-encouraging pieces about COVID-19 for Slate recently. (Maybe the only semi-encouraging pieces about the disease to appear online over the last two weeks, in fact.) I linked both when they were published but here they are again: “Why the Silent Spread of Coronavirus Might Actually Be a Good Sign” and “COVID-19 Isn’t As Deadly As We Think.” His point in each is straightforward, that there’s every reason to believe coronavirus won’t be deadly to most people based on the data we already have. It almost never kills children, rarely kills young adults, and may not be much more deadly than the common flu to middle-aged adults. In fact, in the one somewhat “controlled” experiment we have — the Diamond Princess cruise — death rates were lower than the data from China led us to expect.
Which is great. But there are three wrinkles. First, the numbers for older adults are very frightening. Here’s a new study that’s going around today:
Useful new analysis by @C_Althaus et al, which adds to evidence on COVID-19 case fatality rate. They estimate higher values than us, but even if there is still uncertainty about exact overall value, the age pattern of severity is striking https://t.co/n5BqcYwmCE https://t.co/pNQaGITaWg pic.twitter.com/PFp0YofW82 — Adam Kucharski (@AdamJKucharski) March 7, 2020
No worse than the flu for the under-40 crowd. Then it inches up for the 40-49 crowd. Then inches up further for 50-59. And then, at around age 60, we have lift-off. Septuagenarians have a one in 10 chance of death. The overall death rate ends up at 1.6 percent, considerably higher than the flu because the high mortality rate among older people drags up the average. Faust emphasizes that too in the clip below, as you’ll see: Senior citizens and people with underlying illnesses are the priority. They’re facing catastrophe.
But looking at death rates from COVID-19 is too simple. That’s the second wrinkle. The threat from an epidemic isn’t merely whether the disease will get you, it’s whether it will cripple basic services — medical services, first and foremost — and thereby make it much easier for something else to get you. If your stomach can take it, read this thread projecting what the load on the U.S. health-care system might be as soon as early May. It’s not just the death rate that matters; the hospitalization rate matters too. And of course the two are linked. If you come down with coronavirus, or flu, or any other disease, infectious or otherwise, and can’t get a bed because hospitals are overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients, your risk of dying from whatever you have will obviously increase considerably.
The death rate might be 1.6 percent when there’s enough capacity to treat everyone to the full extent that their illness requires. What’s the rate when there isn’t?
The third wrinkle, as you already know, is that the CDC has utterly blown its chance to put out this fire before it spread:
[O]nce the CDC finally began its national testing regime, it faltered in almost every way imaginable. The initial tests didn’t work, and officials are probing whether there was possible contamination. The protocol for who could be tested was restricted to people already known to have been exposed to the virus or who had been in China, even as the epidemic raced to multiple countries like Japan, South Korea, Italy and Iran… Airport passenger screening has gotten less scrutiny than testing, but it appears to be lagging, too. Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf told House lawmakers that Customs and Border Protection and medical staff had screened more than 50,000 passengers on flights from China and Iran who were funneled through 11 airports. But the screening, which involved measures such as testing people for elevated body temperatures, may have detected only one in three infected travelers arriving from overseas, Harvard School of Public Health communicable disease expert Marc Lipsitch told a news briefing this week.
Trump’s limited ban on travel to China slowed down the spread temporarily, but new research shows that travel bans likely buy a few weeks at most. When Politico asked one public-health expert what went wrong with the feds’ response, his answer was, “What went right?”
Here’s Faust, who’s tweeting about the crushing delay in coronavirus testing today, on CNN this morning followed by a pandemic expert who worked for Bush and Obama with a far grimmer assessment of the situation. In a few weeks, when the extent of the contagion is better known, it seems a cinch that pro sports leagues will have to start turning away fans in order to limit community spread. (The NBA is already discussing it.) Since the virus can’t be contained anymore, the only option is collective self-isolation to the greatest extent feasible unless and until doctors find a drug cocktail that works.
“Hoarding is not going to help. The panic is not going to help. What’s going to help is focusing our attention on those elderly and sick people whose lungs cannot handle this,” Dr. Jeremy Faust says to @smerconish about coronavirus. https://t.co/gAD4haqfgh pic.twitter.com/wRoa2JxMOM — CNN (@CNN) March 7, 2020