hotair--2020-02-24--Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Nevada caucuses, coronavirus updates, Catholic school enrollm

Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Nevada caucuses, coronavirus updates, Catholic school enrollment, transgenderism and its pastoral challenges, and more!

Once again , I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today !
The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air , as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows .
• No one knows Nevada like Jon Ralston , and we ’ ll get his read on what the caucuses this weekend tell us about the presidential race .
We ’ ll also get updates on the irregularities , real and alleged , and whether or not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• What ’ s the latest on the coronavirus outbreak ?
Dr. Robert Tiballi of Germbusters explains what ’ s happening and what ’ s next • Should Catholics be concerned over a sharp drop in parochial school enrollment ?
Manhattan Institute ’ s Ray Domanico will discuss its impact on education and the church .
• What are the consequences of transgender transitions , both personal and on the church ?
Walt Heyer returns to tell his story of having transitioned and then transitioned back , while Bishop Thomas Paprocki of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this ambiguity and gender dysphoria .
• And more to come … stay tuned !
We may add more before the show starts today , plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour .
We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149 .
You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world , so download it now .
I ’ ll look forward to talking with you !

Once again, I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today! The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air, as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows.
Today’s Relevant Radio® show includes:
No one knows Nevada like Jon Ralston, and we’ll get his read on what the caucuses this weekend tell us about the presidential race. We’ll also get updates on the irregularities, real and alleged, and whether or not they will matter in the long run.
What’s the latest on the coronavirus outbreak? Dr. Robert Tiballi of Germbusters explains what’s happening and what’s next
Should Catholics be concerned over a sharp drop in parochial school enrollment? Manhattan Institute’s Ray Domanico will discuss its impact on education and the church.
What are the consequences of transgender transitions, both personal and on the church? Walt Heyer returns to tell his story of having transitioned and then transitioned back, while Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield Illinios discusses the pastoral challenges of this ambiguity and gender dysphoria.
And more to come … stay tuned!
We may add more before the show starts today, plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour. We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149. You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world, so download it now. I’ll look forward to talking with you!


hotair--2020-02-24--Uh oh: China cancels parliament session over coronavirus as spread continues in Iran, Italy, South K

Uh oh: China cancels parliament session over coronavirus as spread continues in Iran, Italy, South Korea

So much for having the coronavirus outbreak under control .
While Xi Jinping ’ s government insists that they have turned the corner on the rapid spread of the disease , their actions tell another story .
For the first time since the Cultural Revolution , the Communist Party-controlled parliament will postpone its regular March session — a major blow for state propaganda efforts in more ways than one : China has postponed its most important political gathering as the country struggles to contain a deadly coronavirus outbreak that has spread to more than two dozen other nations .
China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision on Monday to delay the annual parliament session set to take place in Beijing in March .
A new date will be decided at a later time , according to state media outlet CGTN , which is owned by CCTV , the national media organization of China .
It ’ s the first time in decades that the assembly has been postponed , since the Cultural Revolution .
Like his predecessors , Xi uses this parliament to promote his communist propaganda as well as his cult of personality .
This session would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — it would have sent a message of continuity , normality , and progress against the coronavirus outbreak that official party statements have claimed .
Its sudden cancelation will raise even more questions about just how bad it really is , and how little truth Xi and Beijing are telling .
That impression will only get worse in Wuhan , where a previously announced rollback of quarantine measures got abruptly reversed : On Monday , a city government statement on Weibo said that non-residents would now be able to travel out of Wuhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not quarantined .
It was the first move to ease a lockdown over the 60 million Hubei population that ’ s been in place for a month , and seen as a sign that China believed that the outbreak is until control .
But hours later , the statement was deleted off Weibo as well as state media sites without explanation .
Shortly after , a new statement was issued on the city government ’ s Weibo account saying that the earlier announcement was “ unauthorized ” and that there would be no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abrupt about-turn within a matter of hours added to the confusion emanating from the devastated city of 11 million which has been sealed off since Jan. 23 .
Hubei province — where Wuhan is located — has also adjusted its official count of infected people multiple times in recent weeks , fueling mistrust of the official narrative emerging from the epicenter of an outbreak that has infected almost 80,000 people and killed over 2,600 .
This could be the single most destabilizing event China has experienced since Mao came to power .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protesters any more , but about the government ’ s inability to deal with its pandemic .
Dictatorships like the Communist Party ’ s in China only work if the public is convinced that it ’ s so omnipotent that it can not be challenged .
If over a billion people become convinced that Xi and his clique are fallible — especially in such important matters — that could trigger a meltdown that would have its own global implications .
As bad as the pandemic remains there , it ’ s picking up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” France 24 reports this morning .
Iran now has the highest level of deaths outside of China , and Italy and South Korea are racing to contain outbreaks now .
Iran is of particular concern because of similar propaganda issues , and no one ’ s quite sure just how bad it ’ s getting there : On Monday , a lawmaker from Qom – a Shia holy city 75 miles ( 120 km ) south of the capital , Tehran , accused Iran ’ s health minister of lying about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the semi-official Ilna news agency , which is close to reformists , the lawmaker , Ahmad Amirabadi Farahani , said there had been 50 deaths from the coronavirus in Qom alone .
“ The rest of the media have not published this figure , but we prefer not to censor what concerns the coronavirus because people ’ s lives are in danger , ” the Ilna editor Fatemeh Madiani told Agence France-Presse .
But the country ’ s deputy health minister rejected the report .
In a news conference broadcast live on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people had died from the coronavirus and 66 had been infected .
“ I categorically deny this information , ” he said , adding : “ This is not the time for political confrontations .
The coronavirus is a national problem.
” A better measure of Iran ’ s credibility on this point might be the reaction from its neighbors .
Most have now closed their borders with Iran , which isn ’ t a vote of confidence in its handling of the situation .
Speaking of no confidence , investors have finally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus .
For those with money in the game , it looks like it will get worse before it gets better : 10:51 am : Emerging markets head for worst day in six months The iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF ( EEM ) dropped 3.6 % , putting the EM stocks fund on pace for its worst day since Aug. 5 , when it closed 3.7 % lower .
EEM also dipped into correction territory , briefly trading 10 % below its 52-week high .
—Francolla , Imbert 10:49 am : Big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levels Monday ’ s sell-off in stocks led the Dow , S & P 500 and Nasdaq to trade below their 50-day moving averages .
It was the first time that the Dow broke below its 50-day average since Feb. 3 .
The S & P 500 and Nasdaq , meanwhile , haven ’ t closed below their 50-day moving averages since October .
—Imbert , Francolla Eventually the profit-takers will jump in to slow the rush , but Morganlander ’ s advice to seek shelter in blue chips will mean less energy @ @ @ @ @

So much for having the coronavirus outbreak under control. While Xi Jinping’s government insists that they have turned the corner on the rapid spread of the disease, their actions tell another story. For the first time since the Cultural Revolution, the Communist Party-controlled parliament will postpone its regular March session — a major blow for state propaganda efforts in more ways than one:
China has postponed its most important political gathering as the country struggles to contain a deadly coronavirus outbreak that has spread to more than two dozen other nations. China’s top legislature approved a draft decision on Monday to delay the annual parliament session set to take place in Beijing in March. A new date will be decided at a later time, according to state media outlet CGTN, which is owned by CCTV, the national media organization of China. It’s the first time in decades that the assembly has been postponed, since the Cultural Revolution.
Like his predecessors, Xi uses this parliament to promote his communist propaganda as well as his cult of personality. This session would have done more than that, however — it would have sent a message of continuity, normality, and progress against the coronavirus outbreak that official party statements have claimed. Its sudden cancelation will raise even more questions about just how bad it really is, and how little truth Xi and Beijing are telling.
That impression will only get worse in Wuhan, where a previously announced rollback of quarantine measures got abruptly reversed:
On Monday, a city government statement on Weibo said that non-residents would now be able to travel out of Wuhan as long as they are healthy and not quarantined. It was the first move to ease a lockdown over the 60 million Hubei population that’s been in place for a month, and seen as a sign that China believed that the outbreak is until control. But hours later, the statement was deleted off Weibo as well as state media sites without explanation. Shortly after, a new statement was issued on the city government’s Weibo account saying that the earlier announcement was “unauthorized” and that there would be no change to the quarantine. … The abrupt about-turn within a matter of hours added to the confusion emanating from the devastated city of 11 million which has been sealed off since Jan. 23. Hubei province — where Wuhan is located — has also adjusted its official count of infected people multiple times in recent weeks, fueling mistrust of the official narrative emerging from the epicenter of an outbreak that has infected almost 80,000 people and killed over 2,600.
This could be the single most destabilizing event China has experienced since Mao came to power. No one’s talking about Hong Kong protesters any more, but about the government’s inability to deal with its pandemic. Dictatorships like the Communist Party’s in China only work if the public is convinced that it’s so omnipotent that it cannot be challenged. If over a billion people become convinced that Xi and his clique are fallible — especially in such important matters — that could trigger a meltdown that would have its own global implications.
As bad as the pandemic remains there, it’s picking up steam “outside its epicenter in China,” France 24 reports this morning. Iran now has the highest level of deaths outside of China, and Italy and South Korea are racing to contain outbreaks now. Iran is of particular concern because of similar propaganda issues, and no one’s quite sure just how bad it’s getting there:
On Monday, a lawmaker from Qom – a Shia holy city 75 miles (120 km) south of the capital, Tehran, accused Iran’s health minister of lying about the scale of the outbreak. According to the semi-official Ilna news agency, which is close to reformists, the lawmaker, Ahmad Amirabadi Farahani, said there had been 50 deaths from the coronavirus in Qom alone. “The rest of the media have not published this figure, but we prefer not to censor what concerns the coronavirus because people’s lives are in danger,” the Ilna editor Fatemeh Madiani told Agence France-Presse. But the country’s deputy health minister rejected the report. In a news conference broadcast live on state television, Iraj Harirchi said 12 people had died from the coronavirus and 66 had been infected. “I categorically deny this information,” he said, adding: “This is not the time for political confrontations. The coronavirus is a national problem.”
A better measure of Iran’s credibility on this point might be the reaction from its neighbors. Most have now closed their borders with Iran, which isn’t a vote of confidence in its handling of the situation.
Speaking of no confidence, investors have finally begun to react to the spread of the coronavirus. For those with money in the game, it looks like it will get worse before it gets better:
10:51 am: Emerging markets head for worst day in six months
The iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) dropped 3.6%, putting the EM stocks fund on pace for its worst day since Aug. 5, when it closed 3.7% lower. EEM also dipped into correction territory, briefly trading 10% below its 52-week high. —Francolla, Imbert 10:49 am: Big decline pushes stock averages below key technical levels
Monday’s sell-off in stocks led the Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq to trade below their 50-day moving averages. It was the first time that the Dow broke below its 50-day average since Feb. 3. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq, meanwhile, haven’t closed below their 50-day moving averages since October. —Imbert, Francolla
Eventually the profit-takers will jump in to slow the rush, but Morganlander’s advice to seek shelter in blue chips will mean less energy behind innovation and expansion.


hotair--2020-02-24--Ad barrage beginning? Bloomberg hits Bernie in two new spots

The conventional wisdom congealed rapidly last week , even before Nevada , that the only prayer of stopping Sanders now is Mike Bloomberg dropping a nuclear ad bomb on him .
Three hundred million bucks ’ worth of new attack ads , or something on that order , airing in all of the Super Tuesday states — immediately .
I ’ m not part of that conventional wisdom .
I think the race is effectively over already .
Even if Bloomy went bombs away , early votes have already been banked in those states .
Sanders is probably going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second in South Carolina regardless , creating more good buzz for him .
Odds remain high that Bloomberg , Biden , and Buttigieg will divvy up moderate voters among themselves on Super Tuesday , enabling Sanders victories across multiple states even if an ad barrage succeeds in holding Bernie ’ s numbers a bit lower than they might otherwise have been .
I think this cake is baked .
Bloomberg ’ s strategy of entering the race late and then swamping a divided field with ginormous ad spending almost worked .
If the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early states voted , with Biden winning a state , Buttigieg winning one , Bernie winning another , circumstances would have been ripe for a big-name big-spender to swoop in and sort out the muddle .
But as it is , with Bernie taking a clean sweep so far ( the first time that ’ s ever happened in the modern primary era ) , there ’ s too much momentum .
Bloomberg ’ s playing for second place .
I wonder if he knows it too .
In rolling out this new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll be on social media only .
If he ’ s playing to win , why not carpet-bomb Super Tuesday states with it ?
Maybe it ’ s a prelude to an attack he plans to make at tomorrow night ’ s debate , knowing that the last one got blockbuster ratings .
Someone has to hit Bernie hard .
At least Bloomberg ’ s trying .
Sort of .
But the gun ad smells to me like another case of people not learning lessons from 2016 .
Trump was attacked relentlessly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apostasies against dogmatic conservatism and the fundamental sleaziness of his character .
Didn ’ t matter .
Righties liked the big picture he was painting , a populist insurgency against the elite consensus on war , immigration , and trade .
Voters , it turns out , will forgive a lot of ideological sins if they feel galvanized by your broader vision for the country .
And so we come to Bloomberg trying to ding Bernie for having once been a pro-gun leftist .
What ’ s a fencesitting liberal apt to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s recent conversion to the cause of gun control simply came too late , and disqualify him ?
Or , admiring Bernie ’ s big-picture quest for a more “ economically just ” America , look for reasons to let him slide ?
Lotta truth to that .
If you share that “ deep animating belief , ” as many Democrats ( even the majority who don ’ t describe themselves as socialists ) do , you ’ re not going to get hung up on his idiosyncracies .
Admittedly , having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targeting those idiosyncracies would be a momentous test for my theory , but I think Sanders would withstand it .
And I think a lot of Democratic establishmentarians increasingly think so too : “ In 30-plus years of politics , I ’ ve never seen this level of doom .
I ’ ve never had a day with so many people texting , emailing , calling me with so much doom and gloom , ” said Matt Bennett of the center-left group Third Way after Sanders ’ win in Nevada… Among the pitches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could not overcome past policies that alienated minorities , most prominently the stop-and-frisk policing tactic he embraced as New York City mayor .
They argued that if Bloomberg stays in the race , Sanders will clean up on Super Tuesday , then it ’ s game over… “ Everybody other than Bernie thinks everybody other than Bernie should drop out — except themselves , ” said Chris Lippencott , a Democratic strategist in Texas , which votes on Super Tuesday .
“ Maybe the [ South ] Carolina results provide a little clarity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance .
Unless that happens , they ’ re just crabs in a bucket pulling each other down.
” Crabs in a bucket .
The supreme irony of the race thus far , in fact , is that the socialist is en route to an unstoppable victory largely thanks to two billionaires who couldn ’ t resist running vanity campaigns this year , splintering the Not Bernie vote .
Nate Cohn flagged this result from the latest poll of South Carolina : That ’ s a lot of movement from Biden to Steyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to finish a dismal fifth with around five percent of the vote and may be on the cusp of taking just enough votes from Joe in SC to enable a momentous Sanders sweep of the early states .
Amazing .
Bloomberg may be in a position now where he ’ s trying to decide whether to go all-in against Bernie or to accept that it ’ s hopeless and start trying to turn him from an enemy into a frenemy .
If he ’ s all-in , he ’ ll launch a massive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s giving up , he won ’ t bother wasting the money and will instead start calculating whether spending on Sanders ’ s behalf against Trump in the general election is worth doing as a way to ingratiate himself to the presumptive nominee .
Bloomberg said last month that he ’ ll keep his campaign organization going even after he drops out so that it can work for the Democratic candidate in the general election ; his spokesman also said just this morning that he ’ ll support Bernie this fall if in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m guessing he won ’ t spend as much , or maybe even anything , trying to get an anti-Wall-Street socialist elected , but it never hurts to have the president and his party owe you a favor .
Either way , a Sanders win on Saturday may convince Bloomberg that aggressively contesting the race is futile , in which case so is a massive negative ad binge .
Here ’ s his other new ad today .
This might — might — work in a general election .
I don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to overcome the “ deep animating belief ” in a primary .
Although maybe just the fact that Bloomberg ’ s willing to throw punches at Sanders when the rest of the field seems afraid too will earn him some notice and goodwill among Democratic moderates .
In that sense today ’ s ads might give him an advantage over the centrists , if not over Bernie himself .

The conventional wisdom congealed rapidly last week, even before Nevada, that the only prayer of stopping Sanders now is Mike Bloomberg dropping a nuclear ad bomb on him. Three hundred million bucks’ worth of new attack ads, or something on that order, airing in all of the Super Tuesday states — immediately.
I’m not part of that conventional wisdom. I think the race is effectively over already. Even if Bloomy went bombs away, early votes have already been banked in those states. Sanders is probably going to finish no worse than a surprisingly strong second in South Carolina regardless, creating more good buzz for him. Odds remain high that Bloomberg, Biden, and Buttigieg will divvy up moderate voters among themselves on Super Tuesday, enabling Sanders victories across multiple states even if an ad barrage succeeds in holding Bernie’s numbers a bit lower than they might otherwise have been.
I think this cake is baked. Bloomberg’s strategy of entering the race late and then swamping a divided field with ginormous ad spending almost worked. If the field truly had been divided after the early states voted, with Biden winning a state, Buttigieg winning one, Bernie winning another, circumstances would have been ripe for a big-name big-spender to swoop in and sort out the muddle. But as it is, with Bernie taking a clean sweep so far (the first time that’s ever happened in the modern primary era), there’s too much momentum. Bloomberg’s playing for second place.
I wonder if he knows it too. In rolling out this new spot, his campaign announced that it’ll be on social media only. If he’s playing to win, why not carpet-bomb Super Tuesday states with it?
The NRA paved the road to Washington for Bernie Sanders. He spent the next three decades making sure they got a return on their investment. We deserve a president who is not beholden to the gun lobby.#NotMeNRA pic.twitter.com/HLYZe4J5PM — Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 24, 2020
Maybe it’s a prelude to an attack he plans to make at tomorrow night’s debate, knowing that the last one got blockbuster ratings. Someone has to hit Bernie hard. At least Bloomberg’s trying. Sort of.
But the gun ad smells to me like another case of people not learning lessons from 2016. Trump was attacked relentlessly in the primaries in 2015-16 for his apostasies against dogmatic conservatism and the fundamental sleaziness of his character. Didn’t matter. Righties liked the big picture he was painting, a populist insurgency against the elite consensus on war, immigration, and trade. Voters, it turns out, will forgive a lot of ideological sins if they feel galvanized by your broader vision for the country. And so we come to Bloomberg trying to ding Bernie for having once been a pro-gun leftist. What’s a fencesitting liberal apt to do with that information? Decide that Sanders’s recent conversion to the cause of gun control simply came too late, and disqualify him? Or, admiring Bernie’s big-picture quest for a more “economically just” America, look for reasons to let him slide?
Bernie Sanders isn’t running on socialist economics. He’s running on a socialist ethic. What sets Sanders apart from many liberal Democrats isn’t his voting record. It is a deep, animating belief that our political and economic system is unjust. https://t.co/wf9fN76emr — Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) February 24, 2020
Lotta truth to that. If you share that “deep animating belief,” as many Democrats (even the majority who don’t describe themselves as socialists) do, you’re not going to get hung up on his idiosyncracies. Admittedly, having Bloomberg devote $500 million in ads targeting those idiosyncracies would be a momentous test for my theory, but I think Sanders would withstand it. And I think a lot of Democratic establishmentarians increasingly think so too:
“In 30-plus years of politics, I’ve never seen this level of doom. I’ve never had a day with so many people texting, emailing, calling me with so much doom and gloom,” said Matt Bennett of the center-left group Third Way after Sanders’ win in Nevada… Among the pitches from pro-Biden forces to donors: Bloomberg could not overcome past policies that alienated minorities, most prominently the stop-and-frisk policing tactic he embraced as New York City mayor. They argued that if Bloomberg stays in the race, Sanders will clean up on Super Tuesday, then it’s game over… “Everybody other than Bernie thinks everybody other than Bernie should drop out — except themselves,” said Chris Lippencott, a Democratic strategist in Texas, which votes on Super Tuesday. “Maybe the [South] Carolina results provide a little clarity as to who really has a fighting chance. Unless that happens, they’re just crabs in a bucket pulling each other down.”
Crabs in a bucket. The supreme irony of the race thus far, in fact, is that the socialist is en route to an unstoppable victory largely thanks to two billionaires who couldn’t resist running vanity campaigns this year, splintering the Not Bernie vote. Nate Cohn flagged this result from the latest poll of South Carolina:
South Carolina: Biden continues to lead among African-Americans — who make up a majority of the state's Democratic electorate — but his support has declined 19 points since the fall. Steyer has made big gains. https://t.co/e3ixMdVmH3 pic.twitter.com/CQuZgH75OS — CBS News Poll (@CBSNewsPoll) February 23, 2020
That’s a lot of movement from Biden to Steyer, who spent big in Nevada only to finish a dismal fifth with around five percent of the vote and may be on the cusp of taking just enough votes from Joe in SC to enable a momentous Sanders sweep of the early states. Amazing.
Bloomberg may be in a position now where he’s trying to decide whether to go all-in against Bernie or to accept that it’s hopeless and start trying to turn him from an enemy into a frenemy. If he’s all-in, he’ll launch a massive anti-Sanders ad blitz. If he’s giving up, he won’t bother wasting the money and will instead start calculating whether spending on Sanders’s behalf against Trump in the general election is worth doing as a way to ingratiate himself to the presumptive nominee. Bloomberg said last month that he’ll keep his campaign organization going even after he drops out so that it can work for the Democratic candidate in the general election; his spokesman also said just this morning that he’ll support Bernie this fall if in fact he’s the nominee. I’m guessing he won’t spend as much, or maybe even anything, trying to get an anti-Wall-Street socialist elected, but it never hurts to have the president and his party owe you a favor. Either way, a Sanders win on Saturday may convince Bloomberg that aggressively contesting the race is futile, in which case so is a massive negative ad binge.
Here’s his other new ad today. This might — might — work in a general election. I don’t think it’s going to overcome the “deep animating belief” in a primary. Although maybe just the fact that Bloomberg’s willing to throw punches at Sanders when the rest of the field seems afraid too will earn him some notice and goodwill among Democratic moderates. In that sense today’s ads might give him an advantage over the centrists, if not over Bernie himself.


hotair--2020-02-24--Bernie Bros take their cues from Sanders top staffers and 'Bernie knows exactly what's happening'

This morning Guy Benson pointed out some feedback he got from Bernie Bros after he appeared on Fox News : This sort of thing has become routine for Sanders critics no matter how many times Sanders himself claims his supporters wouldn ’ t or shouldn ’ t behave this way .
Today the Independent published a story about the Bernie Bros and where they are taking their cues .
According to several people interviewed , it ’ s coming from the tone of Sanders ’ campaign : Gun control activist Fred Guttenberg , whose daughter died in the Parkland shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporters and Bernie Bros .
He says the latter are worse and are taking their cues from Sanders ’ top staffers : “ There are people in this campaign who operate in a very uncivil way… they ’ re relentless , ” he said .
In particular , he said three of the most frequent ringleaders from whom Sanders ’ online mobs take their cues are national campaign co-chair and former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner , national press secretary Briahna Gray , and speechwriter David Sirota… “ I used to say the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s supporters , but I was wrong — they ’ re worse , ” he said .
“ They ’ re more confrontational and they ’ re more aggressive.
” Shireen Mitchell leads a group which tracks online harassment campaigns .
She was upset with Sanders ’ attempt to blame the bad behavior of his own supporters on a Russian bots .
“ He denied everything in 2016 , and then all of a sudden he wants to save 2020 when it ’ s actually his staff who are participating in these activities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with more than a hint of sarcasm in her voice .
“ Everybody ’ s not doing it .
They [ the Sanders campaign ] are doing it and they think it ’ s acceptable , and so they project it onto everybody else ’ s campaign.
” Mitchell pointed to a recent tweet by Briahna Gray in which she claimed the “ Bernie Bro smear is racist erasure.
” In essence , if you talk about the bad behavior of Sanders ’ supporters , you ’ re racist : Briahna Gray is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last week and claimed Mike Bloomberg has suffered heart attacks .
She later corrected the record on Twitter but never apologized for the false attack .
The story quotes a Democratic activist who says Bernie knows exactly what is happening online in his name : Another “ veteran Sanders operative ” told the Independent , “ That ’ s been the tone that is set by the campaign leadership .
And broadly speaking , I don ’ t think the Senator has a problem with that.
” Sanders has already denounced bad behavior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this campaign .
How many more times will he get a pass before the rest of the media realizes the campaign is directing this and encouraging it ?

This morning Guy Benson pointed out some feedback he got from Bernie Bros after he appeared on Fox News:
After that Fox segment, Bernie Bros already polluting my timeline with stuff like this — plus seething hatred of Israel. Can’t wait to tell even more truth for 3 hours on the radio today. pic.twitter.com/epmmb1hjKe — Guy Benson (@guypbenson) February 24, 2020
This sort of thing has become routine for Sanders critics no matter how many times Sanders himself claims his supporters wouldn’t or shouldn’t behave this way. Today the Independent published a story about the Bernie Bros and where they are taking their cues. According to several people interviewed, it’s coming from the tone of Sanders’ campaign:
“That’s the tone that has been set by campaign leadership,” said one Democratic strategist, a Bernieworld veteran. He pointed to the campaign’s frequent use of email fundraising solicitations which warn supporters that the “establishment” is trying to keep a rigged system in place by stopping Sanders’ candidacy.
Gun control activist Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter died in the Parkland shooting, has been targeted by both Trump supporters and Bernie Bros. He says the latter are worse and are taking their cues from Sanders’ top staffers:
“There are people in this campaign who operate in a very uncivil way… they’re relentless,” he said. In particular, he said three of the most frequent ringleaders from whom Sanders’ online mobs take their cues are national campaign co-chair and former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner, national press secretary Briahna Gray, and speechwriter David Sirota… “I used to say the Bernie supporters were just like Trump’s supporters, but I was wrong — they’re worse,” he said. “They’re more confrontational and they’re more aggressive.”
Shireen Mitchell leads a group which tracks online harassment campaigns. She was upset with Sanders’ attempt to blame the bad behavior of his own supporters on a Russian bots.
“He denied everything in 2016, and then all of a sudden he wants to save 2020 when it’s actually his staff who are participating in these activities? Right,” she said, with more than a hint of sarcasm in her voice. “Everybody’s not doing it. They [the Sanders campaign] are doing it and they think it’s acceptable, and so they project it onto everybody else’s campaign.”
Mitchell pointed to a recent tweet by Briahna Gray in which she claimed the “Bernie Bro smear is racist erasure.” In essence, if you talk about the bad behavior of Sanders’ supporters, you’re racist:
The “Bernie Bro” smear is racist erasure. Use it, and you’re complicit. It’s that simple. https://t.co/0op9KCZTXK — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) February 17, 2020
Briahna Gray is the Sanders spokesperson who went on CNN last week and claimed Mike Bloomberg has suffered heart attacks. She later corrected the record on Twitter but never apologized for the false attack.
The story quotes a Democratic activist who says Bernie knows exactly what is happening online in his name:
“Bernie knows exactly what’s happening,” the activist said. “And his campaign is in the loop about this coordinated viciousness.”
Another “veteran Sanders operative” told the Independent, “That’s been the tone that is set by the campaign leadership. And broadly speaking, I don’t think the Senator has a problem with that.”
Sanders has already denounced bad behavior by his excitable fans several times during this campaign. How many more times will he get a pass before the rest of the media realizes the campaign is directing this and encouraging it?


hotair--2020-02-24--Weinstein jury manages two guilty verdicts out of five

When John wrote about a potential deadlock in the jury trial of noted pervert Harvey Weinstein , he appeared to reach the conclusion that Weinstein might be convicted on three charges but not on the two most serious ones .
For my part , I still saw a path where he might just get off scot-free .
The truth turned out to be somewhere in-between .
Despite potential procedural errors in the verdict sheet given to the jury and plenty of confusion , the jurors managed to find him guilty of two lesser charges .
( NBC News ) A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studio boss Harvey Weinstein guilty of third-degree rape in the case of Jessica Mann and guilty of first-degree sexual assault in the case of Mimi Haley , acquitting him of the two most serious counts of predatory sex assault .
Those two counts of predatory sex assault , which would have required 12-member jury to find Weinstein guilty of attacking both “ Sopranos ” actress Annabella Sciorra and Mann or both Sciorra and Haley , appeared to be a point of contention late last week .
As the fourth day of deliberations wrapped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge a note asking if they could be deadlocked on those two counts .
The judge said no , and refused the defense ’ s request for a partial verdict .
When we say “ lesser charges ” it doesn ’ t mean that they aren ’ t serious .
The cretin was still convicted of rape in the 3rd degree and first-degree sexual assault .
But he dodged convictions on predatory sex assault which could have carried a life sentence .
He also didn ’ t get convicted of rape in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consider Weinstein ’ s age and health issues , it may wind up being a life sentence anyway .
In theory , the judge could give him as much as 25 years on the sexual assault charge and four more years on the rape charge if the two sentences are ordered to be served consecutively .
But that would be so far outside the normal sentences for third-degree rape and sexual assault for someone with no prior convictions that it seems highly unlikely he ’ ll get anywhere near that much .
Also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal the conviction , so this story is probably far from over .
This might have concluded sooner if it weren ’ t for the weirdness involving the details on the verdict sheet given to the jury .
( The Associated Press described the verdict sheet as “ a complex set of instructions that read like an income tax return.
” ) The jurors were instructed to first consider charges 1 and 3 , the most serious ones involving Sopranos actress Annabella Sciorra and Miriam Haley .
But the instructions they were given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrived at a G ( guilty ) or NG ( not guilty ) on each charge .
If guilty , they didn ’ t need to bother with the other three charges .
If not guilty , they were to move on and consider charges 2 , 4 and 5 .
But there were no instructions given as to what to do if they were hung on 1 and 3 .
Lacking instructions as to how to proceed , at least some legal analysts had concluded that the jury could have concluded their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result to the judge .
That outcome was apparently avoided , however , with further clarification and instructions from the judge .
I ’ m sure there are people out there who will upset that he didn ’ t wind up getting a life sentence on the biggest charges , but that was always going to be a difficult case to make .
He ’ s likely going to wind up doing at least some time behind bars and he ’ s been pronounced guilty of sex crimes by a jury of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best that could be hoped for .

When John wrote about a potential deadlock in the jury trial of noted pervert Harvey Weinstein, he appeared to reach the conclusion that Weinstein might be convicted on three charges but not on the two most serious ones. For my part, I still saw a path where he might just get off scot-free. The truth turned out to be somewhere in-between. Despite potential procedural errors in the verdict sheet given to the jury and plenty of confusion, the jurors managed to find him guilty of two lesser charges. (NBC News)
A New York jury has found former Hollywood studio boss Harvey Weinstein guilty of third-degree rape in the case of Jessica Mann and guilty of first-degree sexual assault in the case of Mimi Haley, acquitting him of the two most serious counts of predatory sex assault. Those two counts of predatory sex assault, which would have required 12-member jury to find Weinstein guilty of attacking both “Sopranos” actress Annabella Sciorra and Mann or both Sciorra and Haley, appeared to be a point of contention late last week. As the fourth day of deliberations wrapped up Friday, the jury sent the judge a note asking if they could be deadlocked on those two counts. The judge said no, and refused the defense’s request for a partial verdict.
When we say “lesser charges” it doesn’t mean that they aren’t serious. The cretin was still convicted of rape in the 3rd degree and first-degree sexual assault. But he dodged convictions on predatory sex assault which could have carried a life sentence. He also didn’t get convicted of rape in the first degree.
Still, when you consider Weinstein’s age and health issues, it may wind up being a life sentence anyway. In theory, the judge could give him as much as 25 years on the sexual assault charge and four more years on the rape charge if the two sentences are ordered to be served consecutively. But that would be so far outside the normal sentences for third-degree rape and sexual assault for someone with no prior convictions that it seems highly unlikely he’ll get anywhere near that much.
Also, he’ll be able to appeal the conviction, so this story is probably far from over.
This might have concluded sooner if it weren’t for the weirdness involving the details on the verdict sheet given to the jury. (The Associated Press described the verdict sheet as “a complex set of instructions that read like an income tax return.”) The jurors were instructed to first consider charges 1 and 3, the most serious ones involving Sopranos actress Annabella Sciorra and Miriam Haley. But the instructions they were given only said what to do if they arrived at a G (guilty) or NG (not guilty) on each charge. If guilty, they didn’t need to bother with the other three charges. If not guilty, they were to move on and consider charges 2, 4 and 5.
But there were no instructions given as to what to do if they were hung on 1 and 3. Lacking instructions as to how to proceed, at least some legal analysts had concluded that the jury could have concluded their work was done and sent back no result to the judge. That outcome was apparently avoided, however, with further clarification and instructions from the judge.
I’m sure there are people out there who will upset that he didn’t wind up getting a life sentence on the biggest charges, but that was always going to be a difficult case to make. He’s likely going to wind up doing at least some time behind bars and he’s been pronounced guilty of sex crimes by a jury of his peers. That’s probably the best that could be hoped for.


hotair--2020-02-24--Famous Fidel apologist to AIPAC: Sod off, oppressors

Imagine looking at Fidel Castro ’ s Cuba and finding the sunny side of his dictatorship , and then turning around and castigating a modern liberal democracy and its supporters for oppression .
Actually , no need to imagine that , because Bernie Sanders pulled off that trick in a single day .
Just before Sanders made his but the literacy !
argument on 60 Minutes to defend his support of Castro , he went on Twitter to declare that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee ( AIPAC ) was beyond the pale for its “ bigotry.
” That might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hoyer , who ’ s co-headlining the event : AIPAC didn ’ t take this lying down .
They slammed Sanders for his “ odious ” remarks , calling them “ truly shameful ” : How will Sanders ’ fellow Democrats take this ?
They can ’ t exactly afford to lie down either , thanks to their investment in Israel ’ s alliance and for credibility with its supporters .
The House Majority Leader is hardly alone in speaking at AIPAC , after all .
House colleagues Angie Craig , Elaine Luria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vincente González , and even progressive Democratic caucus chair Hakeem Jeffries will speak at the conference next week .
Senator Bob Menendez will also address AIPAC , as will former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz , who ’ s not exactly one of Sanders ’ favorite people anyway .
This move emphasizes Sanders ’ radical nature in foreign policy as well as economics .
AIPAC is a mainstream pro-Israel organization , one that strives mightily to keep its partisan balance and prevent Israel from becoming a victim of red/blue politics .
This conference appears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than Republicans , in fact , although it ’ s close .
By calling the organization and its platform bigoted , Sanders is painting a very broad smear that attacks not only elected officials in his own party but also participating organizations such as the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights .
That ’ s the look that the Democratic Party will have to adopt if it hands Sanders the nomination .
¡Fidel Si , Israel No !
might sell with the Bernie Bros and the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fringe of American politics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fly with mainstream Americans who have a much clearer view of both Fidel and Israel .

Imagine looking at Fidel Castro’s Cuba and finding the sunny side of his dictatorship, and then turning around and castigating a modern liberal democracy and its supporters for oppression. Actually, no need to imagine that, because Bernie Sanders pulled off that trick in a single day. Just before Sanders made his but the literacy! argument on 60 Minutes to defend his support of Castro, he went on Twitter to declare that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was beyond the pale for its “bigotry.”
That might be news to fellow Democrat Rep. Steny Hoyer, who’s co-headlining the event:
As president, I will support the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians and do everything possible to bring peace and security to the region. 2/2 — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 23, 2020
AIPAC didn’t take this lying down. They slammed Sanders for his “odious” remarks, calling them “truly shameful”:
Senator Sanders has never attended our conference and that is evident from his outrageous comment. Full statement: https://t.co/XDcNKhYXSq pic.twitter.com/aJGJiv2wv8 — AIPAC (@AIPAC) February 24, 2020
How will Sanders’ fellow Democrats take this? They can’t exactly afford to lie down either, thanks to their investment in Israel’s alliance and for credibility with its supporters. The House Majority Leader is hardly alone in speaking at AIPAC, after all. House colleagues Angie Craig, Elaine Luria, Ted Deutch, Lois Frankel, Vincente González, and even progressive Democratic caucus chair Hakeem Jeffries will speak at the conference next week. Senator Bob Menendez will also address AIPAC, as will former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who’s not exactly one of Sanders’ favorite people anyway.
This move emphasizes Sanders’ radical nature in foreign policy as well as economics. AIPAC is a mainstream pro-Israel organization, one that strives mightily to keep its partisan balance and prevent Israel from becoming a victim of red/blue politics. This conference appears to actually feature more Democrats in office than Republicans, in fact, although it’s close. By calling the organization and its platform bigoted, Sanders is painting a very broad smear that attacks not only elected officials in his own party but also participating organizations such as the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights.
That’s the look that the Democratic Party will have to adopt if it hands Sanders the nomination. ¡Fidel Si, Israel No! might sell with the Bernie Bros and the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fringe of American politics, but it’s not going to fly with mainstream Americans who have a much clearer view of both Fidel and Israel.


hotair--2020-02-24--Carville: Nominating Bernie is "political suicide"

I just can ’ t understand why people believe this after 2016 .
I understand Carville ’ s skepticism about Bernie ’ s theory of the case , that he ’ ll expand the electorate by galvanizing unprecedented numbers of young adults who haven ’ t voted before to turn out .
But if Sanders is overrating his chances of pulling that off , we ’ re all probably underrating his chances of winning the old-fashioned way , flipping enough voters from red to blue in battlegrounds to get to 270 .
Liam Donovan looked at the data from Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helpfully reminded everyone that he ’ s already broadly acceptable to Democratic voters .
It ’ s fun to blog scenarios in which all the moderates save one drop out , leaving a unified center to confront Sanders on Super Tuesday , but the evidence that centrists would coalesce to try to beat him is thin .
Some of them would peel off to join him — and already did , per Nevada ’ s results : If a strong “ Anyone but Bernie ” impulse exists among the Democratic center , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who gained the most between the first and second ballot in Nevada on Saturday .
There should have been a stampede towards Biden , since he was the moderate who finished second on the first ballot .
Likewise , says Donovan , Bernie not only has the highest favorable rating of any candidate among national Democratic voters , he has the highest rating of any Democratic candidate among all voters .
Higher even than Mr. Electability , Joe Biden : He took 22 percent of “ moderate ” Dems on Saturday , 53 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of black voters , a group with whom he struggled in 2016 .
He ’ s hot on Biden ’ s heels in the latest polling from South Carolina , a state where the majority of the Democratic electorate is black .
He ’ s just not the sort of niche candidate that he was four years ago .
That ’ s not to say he doesn ’ t have special vulnerabilities : He ’ s going to give suburbanites sticker shock , risking the Democrats ’ advantage in House elections , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not going to win Florida .
But he also has special strengths , notes Luke Thompson : He may be the Democrats ’ most appealing option among rural voters , which puts the Rust Belt in play .
He ’ d need a clean sweep there — Pennsylvania , Michigan , and Wisconsin , especially if Thompson is right about him underperforming in other swing states .
And he ’ ll probably have to rethink his support for a national ban on fracking if he wants to win PA .
But if he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hillary ’ s 2016 states , he ’ d win with 278 electoral votes .
Is that a likely outcome ?
Nah .
I ’ d bet on Trump .
Nominating Sanders could even backfire catastrophically on Democrats by scaring suburbanites into flipping the House back to red , notes Thompson , engineering a Trump second term with no one in Congress willing to check him .
( House Democrats are going to run away from him . )
But it ’ s not “ political suicide.
” It ’ s just a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that probably won ’ t pay off for Democrats with major legislative gains even if he wins .
One more data point for you .
Where are these results from ?
Answer : Those are the last four polls ( all since New Year ’ s ) taken in the great state of Wisconsin .
In Michigan , Bernie leads Trump by an average of five points .
In Pennsylvania , Bernie leads by an average of three .
And nationally , Bernie leads by an average of 4.4 points , the biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a tick behind at 4.3 .
Right , right , Trump and the GOP haven ’ t gone to work on him yet — wait until they start hammering him on the fracking ban — but bear in mind that everything ’ s going well for Trump at the moment too .
Booming economy , no coronavirus epidemic ( yet ) , no major foreign troubles , some of the best job approval numbers he ’ s ever seen .
It ’ s possible that his fortunes will turn even brighter in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s also possible that we ’ re seeing him right now at peak strength — and he ’ s still in a toss-up with Sanders in states he needs to win .
This isn ’ t “ political suicide ” by Democrats .
It ’ s more like Russian roulette .
Which I guess is fitting in Bernie ’ s case .

I just can’t understand why people believe this after 2016. I understand Carville’s skepticism about Bernie’s theory of the case, that he’ll expand the electorate by galvanizing unprecedented numbers of young adults who haven’t voted before to turn out.
But if Sanders is overrating his chances of pulling that off, we’re all probably underrating his chances of winning the old-fashioned way, flipping enough voters from red to blue in battlegrounds to get to 270.
Liam Donovan looked at the data from Bernie’s blowout win on Saturday and helpfully reminded everyone that he’s already broadly acceptable to Democratic voters. It’s fun to blog scenarios in which all the moderates save one drop out, leaving a unified center to confront Sanders on Super Tuesday, but the evidence that centrists would coalesce to try to beat him is thin. Some of them would peel off to join him — and already did, per Nevada’s results:
The other way to look at this–check out the movement between first and final alignment: Bernie: +6.3
Biden: +1
Pete: +2.5
Warren: -1.1
Amy: -2.1
Steyer: -4.3 Rough night to talk about ceilings https://t.co/athcmNLkcg — Liam Donovan (@LPDonovan) February 23, 2020
If a strong “Anyone but Bernie” impulse exists among the Democratic center, he shouldn’t have been the candidate who gained the most between the first and second ballot in Nevada on Saturday. There should have been a stampede towards Biden, since he was the moderate who finished second on the first ballot. Likewise, says Donovan, Bernie not only has the highest favorable rating of any candidate among national Democratic voters, he has the highest rating of any Democratic candidate among all voters. Higher even than Mr. Electability, Joe Biden:
The number that should worry stop-Bernie Ds coming out of NV, and it has nothing to do with the caucus results. pic.twitter.com/ivPW48lPfz — Liam Donovan (@LPDonovan) February 22, 2020
He took 22 percent of “moderate” Dems on Saturday, 53 percent of Latinos, and 27 percent of black voters, a group with whom he struggled in 2016. He’s hot on Biden’s heels in the latest polling from South Carolina, a state where the majority of the Democratic electorate is black. He’s just not the sort of niche candidate that he was four years ago. That’s not to say he doesn’t have special vulnerabilities: He’s going to give suburbanites sticker shock, risking the Democrats’ advantage in House elections, and he’s, uh, probably not going to win Florida. But he also has special strengths, notes Luke Thompson:
By contrast, Trump has some low hanging fruit on the electoral map. MN, NH and ME-AL are all reachable, esp given the high third party voting rate in MN. But that’s 16 electoral votes combined. — Luke Thompson (@ltthompso) February 23, 2020
So Sanders, much more than other Dems, checks Trump’s ability to grow. He probably grows Trump’s margins in NC, FL, AZ, and GA, and shrinks his own margins in, say, VA. But he would likely hold set there plus in NV, CO, and NM which are blue and getting bluer. — Luke Thompson (@ltthompso) February 23, 2020
He may be the Democrats’ most appealing option among rural voters, which puts the Rust Belt in play. He’d need a clean sweep there — Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, especially if Thompson is right about him underperforming in other swing states. And he’ll probably have to rethink his support for a national ban on fracking if he wants to win PA. But if he took all three and held serve in Hillary’s 2016 states, he’d win with 278 electoral votes.
Is that a likely outcome? Nah. I’d bet on Trump. Nominating Sanders could even backfire catastrophically on Democrats by scaring suburbanites into flipping the House back to red, notes Thompson, engineering a Trump second term with no one in Congress willing to check him. (House Democrats are going to run away from him.) But it’s not “political suicide.”
It’s just a very, very, very high-stakes gamble that probably won’t pay off for Democrats with major legislative gains even if he wins.
One more data point for you. Where are these results from?
Answer: Those are the last four polls (all since New Year’s) taken in the great state of Wisconsin. In Michigan, Bernie leads Trump by an average of five points. In Pennsylvania, Bernie leads by an average of three. And nationally, Bernie leads by an average of 4.4 points, the biggest advantage of any Democrat running. Biden is a tick behind at 4.3.
Right, right, Trump and the GOP haven’t gone to work on him yet — wait until they start hammering him on the fracking ban — but bear in mind that everything’s going well for Trump at the moment too. Booming economy, no coronavirus epidemic (yet), no major foreign troubles, some of the best job approval numbers he’s ever seen. It’s possible that his fortunes will turn even brighter in the next nine months but it’s also possible that we’re seeing him right now at peak strength — and he’s still in a toss-up with Sanders in states he needs to win. This isn’t “political suicide” by Democrats. It’s more like Russian roulette. Which I guess is fitting in Bernie’s case.


hotair--2020-02-24--A vaccine stored in Houston may work on coronavirus, awaits testing

What if a vaccine is sitting in a freezer in Houston that has the potential to cross-protect human beings from both the coronavirus and SARS ?
You would think that pharmaceutical companies and federal scientific agencies would be rushing to offer financial resources to begin clinical testing .
That , however , is not the case .
It turns out that a vaccine developed in the early 2000s during the SARS outbreak by researchers at Baylor College of Medicine and University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston protected mice against severe acute respiratory syndrome ( SARS ) .
It may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of the coronavirus , now named COVID-19 .
It looks promising because COVID-19 resembles SARS which spread from November 2002 to July 2003 , mostly in mainland China and Hong Kong but also in Toronto .
Peter Hotez , a Baylor vaccine researcher and infectious disease specialist calls COVID-19 “ SARS-2 ” .
COVID-19 shares 82 percent of its genes with SARS and infects people through the same cell receptor , one of the “ spike-like ” proteins that stud the surface of coronaviruses and gives the family their name .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The two viruses , which have mostly resulted in deaths in the elderly and people with serious underlying conditions , both can cause a severe form of viral pneumonia characterized by fever , cough and breathing difficulties .
The early thinking is that COVID-19 is less lethal than SARS but more contagious .
Hotez has been working the phones looking for the funding to begin clinical trials on the vaccine .
There is no licensed treatment or vaccine right now for COVIC-19 .
All that is available is supportive care to treat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidate for clinical testing because it has been stored in a freezer and samples have been tested every six months .
It is “ stable ” .
“ It may require some tweaking , but it ’ s stable , ” said Dr. James LeDuc , director of the Galveston National Laboratory on the UTMB Galveston campus .
“ Every virus is different , features some adaptations.
” The laboratory , a high-security biocontainment facility for the study of exotic disease , recently received the live COVID-19 , which it will use to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see whether the SARS vaccine protects against it too .
The lab ’ s researchers created mice engineered to replicate the human disease .
The vaccine never progressed to human testing during the SARS outbreak because the manufacturing of it wasn ’ t completed until 2016 .
By then , the threat of SARS was long gone .
Pharmaceutical companies weren ’ t interested in it any longer and took a pass on funding clinical testing .
The hope now is that the vaccine can provide at least some if not full protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are hesitant to step up and fund clinical testing now – preferring to take a wait and see approach if COVID-19 becomes a seasonal infection like the flu – Hotez is counting on two grant proposals for funding .
He knows he isn ’ t the only scientist looking for a vaccine .
Instead , Hotez is pinning his hopes for clinical trial funding on two grant proposals — one to the British government ; and another to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations , an Oslo-based coalition of charities ( the Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) and governments that “ aims to derail epidemics by speeding up the development of vaccines.
” The Baylor-UTMB venture is just one of the many ongoing efforts to halt the coronavirus epidemic .
About 300 scientists dialed in remotely to a World Health Organization meeting last week to fast-track tests , drugs and vaccines to help slow the outbreak .
UT-Austin scientists published a paper in Science on their creation of the first 3D atomic-scale map of the spike protein — the part of the virus that attaches to and infects human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ map for better vaccine development .
At least eight initiatives to develop new vaccines have been announced , most of which use new technology , such as a type sometimes called genetic immunization , that is considered highly promising but has not yet led to licensure .
One Houston firm , Greffex , said it has used genetic engineering to create a COVID-19 vaccine it will now take to animal testing .
Hotez thinks the Baylor-UTMB vaccine has an advantage because it has already been tested on animals and it is based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is if the funding can be found and clinical testing performed in time to help with the spread of the current emerging pandemic .
The process could take up to a year and by then the spread of the disease may have played out .
The only hope of speeding up the process depends on the outbreak becoming even worse than it is now , which no one wants .

What if a vaccine is sitting in a freezer in Houston that has the potential to cross-protect human beings from both the coronavirus and SARS? You would think that pharmaceutical companies and federal scientific agencies would be rushing to offer financial resources to begin clinical testing. That, however, is not the case.
It turns out that a vaccine developed in the early 2000s during the SARS outbreak by researchers at Baylor College of Medicine and University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston protected mice against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). It may be the best candidate to stop the spread of the coronavirus, now named COVID-19. It looks promising because COVID-19 resembles SARS which spread from November 2002 to July 2003, mostly in mainland China and Hong Kong but also in Toronto. Peter Hotez, a Baylor vaccine researcher and infectious disease specialist calls COVID-19 “SARS-2”.
COVID-19 shares 82 percent of its genes with SARS and infects people through the same cell receptor, one of the “spike-like” proteins that stud the surface of coronaviruses and gives the family their name. The viruses originally jump from animals to people. The two viruses, which have mostly resulted in deaths in the elderly and people with serious underlying conditions, both can cause a severe form of viral pneumonia characterized by fever, cough and breathing difficulties. The early thinking is that COVID-19 is less lethal than SARS but more contagious.
Hotez has been working the phones looking for the funding to begin clinical trials on the vaccine. There is no licensed treatment or vaccine right now for COVIC-19. All that is available is supportive care to treat the symptoms. The vaccine is a candidate for clinical testing because it has been stored in a freezer and samples have been tested every six months. It is “stable”.
“It may require some tweaking, but it’s stable,” said Dr. James LeDuc, director of the Galveston National Laboratory on the UTMB Galveston campus. “Every virus is different, features some adaptations.” The laboratory, a high-security biocontainment facility for the study of exotic disease, recently received the live COVID-19, which it will use to test the vaccine in mice, to see whether the SARS vaccine protects against it too. The lab’s researchers created mice engineered to replicate the human disease.
The vaccine never progressed to human testing during the SARS outbreak because the manufacturing of it wasn’t completed until 2016. By then, the threat of SARS was long gone. Pharmaceutical companies weren’t interested in it any longer and took a pass on funding clinical testing. The hope now is that the vaccine can provide at least some if not full protection of COVID-19.
Since the pharmaceutical companies are hesitant to step up and fund clinical testing now – preferring to take a wait and see approach if COVID-19 becomes a seasonal infection like the flu – Hotez is counting on two grant proposals for funding. He knows he isn’t the only scientist looking for a vaccine.
Instead, Hotez is pinning his hopes for clinical trial funding on two grant proposals — one to the British government; and another to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, an Oslo-based coalition of charities (the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a sponsor) and governments that “aims to derail epidemics by speeding up the development of vaccines.” The Baylor-UTMB venture is just one of the many ongoing efforts to halt the coronavirus epidemic. About 300 scientists dialed in remotely to a World Health Organization meeting last week to fast-track tests, drugs and vaccines to help slow the outbreak. UT-Austin scientists published a paper in Science on their creation of the first 3D atomic-scale map of the spike protein — the part of the virus that attaches to and infects human cells — that should provide a road map for better vaccine development. At least eight initiatives to develop new vaccines have been announced, most of which use new technology, such as a type sometimes called genetic immunization, that is considered highly promising but has not yet led to licensure. One Houston firm, Greffex, said it has used genetic engineering to create a COVID-19 vaccine it will now take to animal testing.
Hotez thinks the Baylor-UTMB vaccine has an advantage because it has already been tested on animals and it is based on classic vaccine technology. The big question is if the funding can be found and clinical testing performed in time to help with the spread of the current emerging pandemic. The process could take up to a year and by then the spread of the disease may have played out. The only hope of speeding up the process depends on the outbreak becoming even worse than it is now, which no one wants.


hotair--2020-02-24--Biden: I never said South Carolina was my firewall

In today ’ s edition of “ Is Joe Biden Losing the Narrative , ” we are pointed to his long-awaited return to the Sunday talk shows .
He went on Face the Nation yesterday and was confronted with some recent polling showing that his once-massive lead in the Palmetto state had all but evaporated and even his support among Black voters had been cut in half over the past month .
Host Margaret Brennan then pointed out that South Carolina was supposed to be his firewall , in large part because of his strong minority voter support , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case .
Amazingly , Biden responded by saying that he ’ d never said South Carolina was his firewall .
Huh ?
( Free Beacon ) “ South Carolina was your firewall , ” Brennan said .
“ You ’ ve said it [ sic ] my firewall , ” Biden replied .
“ The campaign has said it ’ s your firewall , ” Brennan said .
“ No , that ’ s not right , ” Biden said .
“ I ’ ve said I ’ m going to do well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well there , and I ’ ll do well beyond there as well.
” Biden has explicitly called the state his firewall .
In a Feb. 2 interview , for example , he told MSNBC , “ I think I have a real firewall in South Carolina .
As you can see from that excerpt , it took no time at all for the media to produce examples of Biden calling the state his firewall .
Why try to deny it now ?
This brings me back to an observation that I believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains relevant to this day .
If this were any other candidate in the field we could probably just write it off as a typical politician telling a lie to make himself look better on national TV .
But given his recent history , is it possible that Joe wasn ’ t lying and that he has simply forgotten saying that on multiple occasions ?
I ’ m not a medical expert in any way shape or form , and perhaps this was just a ploy on Uncle Joe ’ s part , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than worrisome .
Whether it ’ s believing he was once arrested in South Africa absent any proof of such an event or telling supporters in Iowa how great it was to be in New Hampshire , Joe Biden seems to have evolved past the stage of simply making gaffes .
Having lost a mother who slipped away from us into dementia , perhaps I ’ m just overly sensitive to such things .
But these types of lapses do appear to be common in such cases .
Then again , perhaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senior moment ” that we ’ re seeing .
If his doctors say that he ’ s fine , we should probably take their word for it , at least for the time being .
Biden went on to blame Tom Steyer for his shifting fortunes in South Carolina .
But that ’ s not entirely clear either .
It ’ s true that Steyer ’ s relentless advertising campaign in that state has boosted him up to double digits and he ’ s currently running third .
But that doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ground Biden has lost .
Back in September , Bernie Sanders was polling in single digits there .
But as of last week , one poll had Biden ’ s lead over Sanders down to only two points and another one had them tied .
at 23 % each .
Steyer may have stolen a little of Biden ’ s thunder , but it ’ s mostly Sanders who has made inroads .
If Joe isn ’ t careful , he could wind up coming in second and letting Bernie bag yet another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down in South Carolina and campaigning hard , along with the rest of his competition .
Personally , I ’ ll just be waiting to see if he tells anyone how great it is to be back in Nevada .

In today’s edition of “Is Joe Biden Losing the Narrative,” we are pointed to his long-awaited return to the Sunday talk shows. He went on Face the Nation yesterday and was confronted with some recent polling showing that his once-massive lead in the Palmetto state had all but evaporated and even his support among Black voters had been cut in half over the past month. Host Margaret Brennan then pointed out that South Carolina was supposed to be his firewall, in large part because of his strong minority voter support, and asked if that was no longer the case. Amazingly, Biden responded by saying that he’d never said South Carolina was his firewall. Huh? (Free Beacon)
“South Carolina was your firewall,” Brennan said. “You’ve said it [sic] my firewall,” Biden replied. “The campaign has said it’s your firewall,” Brennan said. “No, that’s not right,” Biden said. “I’ve said I’m going to do well there, and I’ll do well there, and I’ll do well beyond there as well.” Biden has explicitly called the state his firewall. In a Feb. 2 interview, for example, he told MSNBC, “I think I have a real firewall in South Carolina.
As you can see from that excerpt, it took no time at all for the media to produce examples of Biden calling the state his firewall. Why try to deny it now?
This brings me back to an observation that I believe was first made here by Allahpundit but remains relevant to this day. If this were any other candidate in the field we could probably just write it off as a typical politician telling a lie to make himself look better on national TV. But given his recent history, is it possible that Joe wasn’t lying and that he has simply forgotten saying that on multiple occasions?
I’m not a medical expert in any way shape or form, and perhaps this was just a ploy on Uncle Joe’s part, but the pattern on display has become more than worrisome. Whether it’s believing he was once arrested in South Africa absent any proof of such an event or telling supporters in Iowa how great it was to be in New Hampshire, Joe Biden seems to have evolved past the stage of simply making gaffes.
Having lost a mother who slipped away from us into dementia, perhaps I’m just overly sensitive to such things. But these types of lapses do appear to be common in such cases. Then again, perhaps it’s just the occasional “senior moment” that we’re seeing. If his doctors say that he’s fine, we should probably take their word for it, at least for the time being.
Biden went on to blame Tom Steyer for his shifting fortunes in South Carolina. But that’s not entirely clear either. It’s true that Steyer’s relentless advertising campaign in that state has boosted him up to double digits and he’s currently running third. But that doesn’t come close to accounting for all the ground Biden has lost. Back in September, Bernie Sanders was polling in single digits there. But as of last week, one poll had Biden’s lead over Sanders down to only two points and another one had them tied. at 23% each. Steyer may have stolen a little of Biden’s thunder, but it’s mostly Sanders who has made inroads. If Joe isn’t careful, he could wind up coming in second and letting Bernie bag yet another upset victory.
Uncle Joe is now down in South Carolina and campaigning hard, along with the rest of his competition. Personally, I’ll just be waiting to see if he tells anyone how great it is to be back in Nevada.


hotair--2020-02-24--The Nevada caucus results are still changing and Mayor Pete still isn't happy

Yesterday morning we still had less than half of the precincts in Nevada reporting , but it was obvious that Bernie Sanders had scored a big win in the caucuses .
What was less clear was the standing of the second , third and fourth place finishers .
If the exit polls were anything to go by , it appeared that Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden were basically tied .
Well , so much for the exit polls .
We ’ re finally up to more than 95 % of the precincts being counted and NBC News reports that Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important lead over Mayor Pete .
Yesterday it looked like they were both at 18 % .
But assuming these numbers hold up ( always a big assumption when dealing with caucus states ) , Biden has crept up to around 20 % while Buttigieg has dipped to a bit over 13 % .
That ’ s critical because the bizarre caucus rules in Nevada require a candidate to get at least 15 % in order to nab any earned delegates .
This finish means that Buttigieg would leave Nevada without a single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than was originally estimated .
As Taylor pointed out last night , this has led Buttigieg to request a fresh look at the results , claiming that multiple “ irregularities ” had been reported and the numbers can ’ t be trusted .
( Associated Press ) Pete Buttigieg ’ s campaign has questioned his third-place finish in Nevada ’ s caucuses and called for the state ’ s Democratic party to release a more detailed breakdown of votes and address reports of more than 200 problems allocating votes in Saturday ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic Party is suggesting that Buttigieg ’ s campaign seek a recount if it wants to challenge results .
In a letter sent to the state party late Saturday night and provided to The Associated Press on Sunday , the Buttigieg campaign said the process of integrating four days of early voting into in-person caucuses held Saturday was “ plagued with errors and inconsistencies.
” It doesn ’ t sound like the Nevada Democratic Party is interested in redoing all of the work unless Buttigieg wants to pay for a recount .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a recount would even be useful .
You can say that this is all just sour grapes on the part of the Buttigieg campaign , but he ’ s raising some valid points that we were warned about before the Nevada caucuses even began .
They didn ’ t use the flawed phone app for reporting as originally planned , but the system they replaced it with wasn ’ t much better .
Precinct captains were going on social media describing the confusion muddling the process at many caucus locations .
One of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail out early voting ballots four days in advance .
This reportedly led to problems integrating those ballots with the people who showed up to caucus .
And because voters were allowed to pick up to five ranked candidates , more confusion ensued as to which person received the mail-in votes .
Worst of all , in at least some precincts , there was apparently no way to securely confirm that some of the people who mailed in ballots hadn ’ t shown up to caucus anyway , meaning some of them may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were counting heads , not holding a formal roll call in most cases .
It seems impossible at this point to go back and recreate those conditions and get an accurate total count .
So while Pete Buttigieg does indeed have a valid complaint , there ’ s no telling whether taking another stab at it would help him or sink him further behind Biden .
( But since he ’ s currently slated to get zero delegates , he really has nothing to lose . )
Nevada may not have been quite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa… at least so far .
But it ’ s quickly turning into yet another example of why the caucus system needs to go .
The voters simply aren ’ t going to have any confidence that the final results are accurate .

Yesterday morning we still had less than half of the precincts in Nevada reporting, but it was obvious that Bernie Sanders had scored a big win in the caucuses. What was less clear was the standing of the second, third and fourth place finishers. If the exit polls were anything to go by, it appeared that Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden were basically tied. Well, so much for the exit polls.
We’re finally up to more than 95% of the precincts being counted and NBC News reports that Joe Biden has opened up a slim but important lead over Mayor Pete. Yesterday it looked like they were both at 18%. But assuming these numbers hold up (always a big assumption when dealing with caucus states), Biden has crept up to around 20% while Buttigieg has dipped to a bit over 13%. That’s critical because the bizarre caucus rules in Nevada require a candidate to get at least 15% in order to nab any earned delegates. This finish means that Buttigieg would leave Nevada without a single delegate, while Biden would pick up more than was originally estimated.
As Taylor pointed out last night, this has led Buttigieg to request a fresh look at the results, claiming that multiple “irregularities” had been reported and the numbers can’t be trusted. (Associated Press)
Pete Buttigieg’s campaign has questioned his third-place finish in Nevada’s caucuses and called for the state’s Democratic party to release a more detailed breakdown of votes and address reports of more than 200 problems allocating votes in Saturday’s caucuses. But the Nevada State Democratic Party is suggesting that Buttigieg’s campaign seek a recount if it wants to challenge results. In a letter sent to the state party late Saturday night and provided to The Associated Press on Sunday, the Buttigieg campaign said the process of integrating four days of early voting into in-person caucuses held Saturday was “plagued with errors and inconsistencies.”
It doesn’t sound like the Nevada Democratic Party is interested in redoing all of the work unless Buttigieg wants to pay for a recount. But it’s also not clear whether a recount would even be useful.
You can say that this is all just sour grapes on the part of the Buttigieg campaign, but he’s raising some valid points that we were warned about before the Nevada caucuses even began. They didn’t use the flawed phone app for reporting as originally planned, but the system they replaced it with wasn’t much better. Precinct captains were going on social media describing the confusion muddling the process at many caucus locations.
One of the biggest issues was the decision to mail out early voting ballots four days in advance. This reportedly led to problems integrating those ballots with the people who showed up to caucus. And because voters were allowed to pick up to five ranked candidates, more confusion ensued as to which person received the mail-in votes. Worst of all, in at least some precincts, there was apparently no way to securely confirm that some of the people who mailed in ballots hadn’t shown up to caucus anyway, meaning some of them may have voted twice.
The precinct captains were counting heads, not holding a formal roll call in most cases. It seems impossible at this point to go back and recreate those conditions and get an accurate total count. So while Pete Buttigieg does indeed have a valid complaint, there’s no telling whether taking another stab at it would help him or sink him further behind Biden. (But since he’s currently slated to get zero delegates, he really has nothing to lose.)
Nevada may not have been quite as much of a total disaster as Iowa… at least so far. But it’s quickly turning into yet another example of why the caucus system needs to go. The voters simply aren’t going to have any confidence that the final results are accurate.


hotair--2020-02-24--Bernie to 60 Minutes: You know, Fidel may have been an oppressor, but boy could his victims read! <s

Bernie to 60 Minutes: You know, Fidel may have been an oppressor, but boy could his victims read! Update: A few Pinocchios?

And if Cuba had trains , they ’ d probably run on time , too .
Now that Bernie Sanders has the inside track on the Democratic presidential nomination , some of his more colorful defenses of left-wing dictatorships and communism have finally gotten attention from the mainstream media .
Sanders sat down for a 60 Minutes interview with Anderson Cooper , who played clips of Sanders praising Fidel Castro for having “ totally transformed the society , you know ?
” Sanders didn ’ t disavow the sentiment , but instead praised Castro ’ s “ literacy program ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had some positive things to say about the former Soviet Union and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua .
Here he is explaining why the Cuban people didn ’ t rise up and help the U.S. overthrow Cuban leader Fidel Castro : “ …he educated their kids , gave them health care , totally transformed the society , you know ?
” Bernie Sanders : We ’ re very opposed to the authoritarian nature of Cuba but you know , it ’ s unfair to simply say everything is bad .
You know ?
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know what he did ?
He had a massive literacy program .
Is that a bad thing ?
Even though Fidel Castro did it ?
Bernie Sanders : That ’ s right .
And we condemn that .
Unlike Donald Trump , let ’ s be clear , you want to– I do not think that Kim Jong Un is a good friend .
I don ’ t trade love letters with a murdering dictator .
Vladimir Putin , not a great friend of mine .
As one person put it on Twitter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can win the presidency without Florida .
Literacy was an issue in pre-Castro Cuba , mainly in the rural areas of the country , but there would have been other solutions to it beside turning the island into a prison camp .
( The official literacy rate at the time was between 60-76 % . )
Those who had to escape Castro , and even those Cuban-Americans whose families escaped Fulgencio Batista — a different sub-demographic , politically , and more liberal — are not going to enjoy being painted as illiterate peasants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a counterbalance to Castro ’ s oppression and impoverishment of the Cubans .
Sanders ’ attempts to draw a parallel to Donald Trump ’ s personal diplomacy with Kim and Putin reek of desperation .
Trump never praised their form of government ; he only overdid it on a personal basis with both men for diplomatic purposes .
That ’ s certainly a legitimate point of criticism , but it ’ s not the same as Sanders ’ decades-long praise for systems of government that oppressed and mass-murdered their own systems of government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imposing those systems .
Even today , Sanders can ’ t avoid the usual you got ta break a few eggs to make an omelette rationalization to defend Castro .
Note three words that never appear in Sanders ’ explanation : I was wrong .
That ’ s because Sanders doesn ’ t think he was wrong to support Castro , the Sandinistas , or the Soviets .
History proves otherwise , and Democrats who nominate this socialist crank to the top of their ticket will end up in its dustbin .
Update @ @ @ @ @ @ @ e-mails me to remind us of this Washington Post fact-check on these claims when Justin Trudeau trotted them out .
Glenn Kessler gave the Canadian PM three Pinocchios for largely the same argument a little over three years ago : As for health care and education , Cuba was already near the top of the heap before the revolution .
Cuba ’ s low infant mortality rate is often lauded , but it already led the region on this key measure in 1953-1958 , according to data collected by Carmelo Mesa-Lago , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University of Pittsburgh .
In terms of life expectancy , Cuba was in fourth place in the mid-1950s — and advanced to third in 2005-2007 .
Literacy was also high — fourth place in 1950s — and Cuba advanced to second place in 2005-2007 .
“ We suspect that overall healthcare outcomes would not have been much different given the remarkably low levels of infant mortality in Republican Cuba , ” Ward-Peradoza and Devereux said .
But they said the revolution probably improved education .
Most of the gains came not from Castro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to boost Cuba for propaganda purposes .
When the Soviet Union collapsed in its mass of economic contradictions , so did “ Castro ’ s ” gains : Mesa-Lago said many gains were lost after the Soviet Union collapsed and ended its support for the regime .
He said that Trudeau ’ s remarks thus were out of date .
“ This was true by the end of the 1980s , as I have proved in my books and articles , but not after the huge economic crisis of the 1990s when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years ; after that , health and education indicators badly deteriorated and , despite some recovery in 2000-2003 , still several of them are below 1989 levels , ” he said .
Data collected by Mesa-Lago show that from 1989 to 2014 , the number of hospital beds declined 29 percent , hospitals fell 37 percent and family doctors plummeted 61 percent .
Reporters have also documented that Cuban hospitals are ill-equipped .
A 2004 series on Cuba ’ s health-care system in Canada ’ s National Post said pharmacies stock very little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black market .
“ One of the myths Canadians harbor about Cuba is that its people may be poor and living under a repressive government , but they have access to quality health and education facilities , ” the Post said .
“ It ’ s a portrait encouraged by the government , but the reality is sharply different.
” Hans made similar points when Obama tried praising Castro during his odd dance with Raúl .

And if Cuba had trains, they’d probably run on time, too. Now that Bernie Sanders has the inside track on the Democratic presidential nomination, some of his more colorful defenses of left-wing dictatorships and communism have finally gotten attention from the mainstream media. Sanders sat down for a 60 Minutes interview with Anderson Cooper, who played clips of Sanders praising Fidel Castro for having “totally transformed the society, you know?”
Sanders didn’t disavow the sentiment, but instead praised Castro’s “literacy program”:
Bernie Sanders defends his 1980s comments about Fidel Castro in an interview on 60 Minutes. https://t.co/ySqvQKoiBU pic.twitter.com/lTwuXWp9sA — 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) February 24, 2020
Back in the 1980s, Sanders had some positive things to say about the former Soviet Union and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Here he is explaining why the Cuban people didn’t rise up and help the U.S. overthrow Cuban leader Fidel Castro: “…he educated their kids, gave them health care, totally transformed the society, you know?” Bernie Sanders: We’re very opposed to the authoritarian nature of Cuba but you know, it’s unfair to simply say everything is bad. You know? When Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel Castro did it? Anderson Cooper: A lot of p– dissidents imprisoned in– in Cuba. Bernie Sanders: That’s right. And we condemn that. Unlike Donald Trump, let’s be clear, you want to– I do not think that Kim Jong Un is a good friend. I don’t trade love letters with a murdering dictator. Vladimir Putin, not a great friend of mine.
As one person put it on Twitter last night, Bernie must figure he can win the presidency without Florida. Literacy was an issue in pre-Castro Cuba, mainly in the rural areas of the country, but there would have been other solutions to it beside turning the island into a prison camp. (The official literacy rate at the time was between 60-76%.) Those who had to escape Castro, and even those Cuban-Americans whose families escaped Fulgencio Batista — a different sub-demographic, politically, and more liberal — are not going to enjoy being painted as illiterate peasants. Nor will they see illiteracy as a counterbalance to Castro’s oppression and impoverishment of the Cubans.
Sanders’ attempts to draw a parallel to Donald Trump’s personal diplomacy with Kim and Putin reek of desperation. Trump never praised their form of government; he only overdid it on a personal basis with both men for diplomatic purposes. That’s certainly a legitimate point of criticism, but it’s not the same as Sanders’ decades-long praise for systems of government that oppressed and mass-murdered their own systems of government and praise for the dictators specifically for imposing those systems.
Even today, Sanders can’t avoid the usual you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette rationalization to defend Castro. Note three words that never appear in Sanders’ explanation: I was wrong. That’s because Sanders doesn’t think he was wrong to support Castro, the Sandinistas, or the Soviets. History proves otherwise, and Democrats who nominate this socialist crank to the top of their ticket will end up in its dustbin.
Update: Speaking of dustbins, Hans Bader e-mails me to remind us of this Washington Post fact-check on these claims when Justin Trudeau trotted them out. Glenn Kessler gave the Canadian PM three Pinocchios for largely the same argument a little over three years ago:
As for health care and education, Cuba was already near the top of the heap before the revolution. Cuba’s low infant mortality rate is often lauded, but it already led the region on this key measure in 1953-1958, according to data collected by Carmelo Mesa-Lago, a Cuba specialist and professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh. In terms of life expectancy, Cuba was in fourth place in the mid-1950s — and advanced to third in 2005-2007. Literacy was also high — fourth place in 1950s — and Cuba advanced to second place in 2005-2007. “We suspect that overall healthcare outcomes would not have been much different given the remarkably low levels of infant mortality in Republican Cuba,” Ward-Peradoza and Devereux said. But they said the revolution probably improved education.
Most of the gains came not from Castro’s revolution but from Soviet attempts to boost Cuba for propaganda purposes. When the Soviet Union collapsed in its mass of economic contradictions, so did “Castro’s” gains:
Mesa-Lago said many gains were lost after the Soviet Union collapsed and ended its support for the regime. He said that Trudeau’s remarks thus were out of date. “This was true by the end of the 1980s, as I have proved in my books and articles, but not after the huge economic crisis of the 1990s when the economy sank by 35 percent in three years; after that, health and education indicators badly deteriorated and, despite some recovery in 2000-2003, still several of them are below 1989 levels,” he said. Data collected by Mesa-Lago show that from 1989 to 2014, the number of hospital beds declined 29 percent, hospitals fell 37 percent and family doctors plummeted 61 percent. Reporters have also documented that Cuban hospitals are ill-equipped. A 2004 series on Cuba’s health-care system in Canada’s National Post said pharmacies stock very little and antibiotics are available only on the black market. “One of the myths Canadians harbor about Cuba is that its people may be poor and living under a repressive government, but they have access to quality health and education facilities,” the Post said. “It’s a portrait encouraged by the government, but the reality is sharply different.”
Hans made similar points when Obama tried praising Castro during his odd dance with Raúl.


hotair--2020-02-24--Warren to Bloomberg: Not good enough, buster!

Michael Bloomberg ’ s dumpster fire of a debate performance in Nevada continued to have repercussions even after the caucuses ended .
One of the bones of contention was the revelation that some unknown number of women had signed non-disclosure agreements ( NDAs ) as part of the resolution of complaints they had made .
( Bloomberg claims they concerned “ jokes he made ” that they didn ’ t like . )
On the debate stage , Elizabeth Warren called him out , saying that the women should be able to speak freely and Bloomberg should release them from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billionaire actually conceded the argument… sort of .
There were three women under discussion who were specifically under those restrictions and Mike said that they should “ contact his office ” about a release .
But Warren wasn ’ t going to let it go at that .
She responded by saying that that just wasn ’ t going to be good enough and Bloomberg needed to do much , much more .
( Reuters ) “ That ’ s just not good enough , ” Warren told reporters while campaigning in Las @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to do a blanket release so that all women who have been muzzled by non-disclosure agreements can step up and tell their side of the story in terms of what Michael Bloomberg has done , ” she said .
When challenged by Warren at the debate , Bloomberg had said of the non-disclosure agreements : “ None of them accuse me of doing anything other than maybe they didn ’ t like a joke I told.
” The only thing that would have made this response better would have been if Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough of Bloomberg ’ s malarkey .
( I don ’ t think Biden has a copyright on that word yet . )
So will Bloomberg backpedal even further and toss out an offer for a blanket release ?
Don ’ t hold your breath .
What should be obvious at this stage is that Elizabeth Warren isn ’ t particularly worried about the fates of the individual women in question .
Right now the rest of the candidates are in full-blown panic mode over Bloomberg ’ s dramatic rise in the polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having on their standings in the primary .
By this stage of the game , we were supposed to be down to basically a two-person race between Sanders and either Biden or Buttigieg if events had followed the standard script .
But now Bloomberg is splitting off support from most of them and threatening to shove the crowd further toward a brokered convention .
( Which he ’ s already working to buy by greasing the palms of superdelegates . )
What Warren is doing is shouldering the burden for all of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she ’ s the best suited in terms of optics to go after Mike on the NDA question .
She ’ s managing to paint him as being no better than Trump when it comes to his treatment of and views on women .
And it ’ s not as if Trump doesn ’ t have his own herd of NDAs out there in the background .
But Bloomberg can ’ t afford to go the Full Monty on this one .
Somebody who ’ s been around as long as him in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot more than just three NDAs out there and a lot more than three women complaining about his behavior .
If he just opens the bag , he will be facing an endless series of headlines covering interviews with every former female associate and employee with a story to tell .
Even if it doesn ’ t kill his primary chances , the same stories will be brought up endlessly by the RNC during the general election .
And there could be lawsuits aplenty as well .
If I had to guess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NDAs Bloomberg is offering to lift are probably binding women with stories that Mike is pretty sure he can deflect or at least deflate a bit .
They might literally be women who were upset about an off-color joke he told .
That could be survivable ( Trump managed to be elected with worse tales floating around ) , but if the field expands to potentially dozens of women with more serious allegations , that will not only kill his chances at the White House but will likely follow him for the rest @ @ @ @

Michael Bloomberg’s dumpster fire of a debate performance in Nevada continued to have repercussions even after the caucuses ended. One of the bones of contention was the revelation that some unknown number of women had signed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as part of the resolution of complaints they had made. (Bloomberg claims they concerned “jokes he made” that they didn’t like.) On the debate stage, Elizabeth Warren called him out, saying that the women should be able to speak freely and Bloomberg should release them from the NDAs.
Before long, the billionaire actually conceded the argument… sort of. There were three women under discussion who were specifically under those restrictions and Mike said that they should “contact his office” about a release. But Warren wasn’t going to let it go at that. She responded by saying that that just wasn’t going to be good enough and Bloomberg needed to do much, much more. (Reuters)
“That’s just not good enough,” Warren told reporters while campaigning in Las Vegas on Friday. “Michael Bloomberg needs to do a blanket release so that all women who have been muzzled by non-disclosure agreements can step up and tell their side of the story in terms of what Michael Bloomberg has done,” she said. When challenged by Warren at the debate, Bloomberg had said of the non-disclosure agreements: “None of them accuse me of doing anything other than maybe they didn’t like a joke I told.”
The only thing that would have made this response better would have been if Warren had thrown in something about having had enough of Bloomberg’s malarkey. (I don’t think Biden has a copyright on that word yet.) So will Bloomberg backpedal even further and toss out an offer for a blanket release? Don’t hold your breath.
What should be obvious at this stage is that Elizabeth Warren isn’t particularly worried about the fates of the individual women in question. Right now the rest of the candidates are in full-blown panic mode over Bloomberg’s dramatic rise in the polls and the disruptive influence he’s having on their standings in the primary. By this stage of the game, we were supposed to be down to basically a two-person race between Sanders and either Biden or Buttigieg if events had followed the standard script. But now Bloomberg is splitting off support from most of them and threatening to shove the crowd further toward a brokered convention. (Which he’s already working to buy by greasing the palms of superdelegates.)
What Warren is doing is shouldering the burden for all of the non-Bloomberg candidates. As a woman, she’s the best suited in terms of optics to go after Mike on the NDA question. She’s managing to paint him as being no better than Trump when it comes to his treatment of and views on women. And it’s not as if Trump doesn’t have his own herd of NDAs out there in the background.
But Bloomberg can’t afford to go the Full Monty on this one. Somebody who’s been around as long as him in positions of influence and power probably has a lot more than just three NDAs out there and a lot more than three women complaining about his behavior. If he just opens the bag, he will be facing an endless series of headlines covering interviews with every former female associate and employee with a story to tell. Even if it doesn’t kill his primary chances, the same stories will be brought up endlessly by the RNC during the general election. And there could be lawsuits aplenty as well.
If I had to guess, I would say that the three NDAs Bloomberg is offering to lift are probably binding women with stories that Mike is pretty sure he can deflect or at least deflate a bit. They might literally be women who were upset about an off-color joke he told. That could be survivable (Trump managed to be elected with worse tales floating around), but if the field expands to potentially dozens of women with more serious allegations, that will not only kill his chances at the White House but will likely follow him for the rest of his life.