| EdDriscoll.com |
|
Saturday, April 26, 2003
Posted
4/26/2003 11:58:15 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/26/2003 11:50:11 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/26/2003 04:35:16 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/26/2003 02:40:44 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Whatever the facts, the SARS epidemic will always be more about psychology than epidemiology. If we live in a global village when it comes to the dissemination of news information, then we live in a global cocoon when it comes to the dissemination of fear and rhetoric. The media have a role to play here, and must take it very seriously. The essential problem is shoddy reporting. In order to make the illness appear more widespread, journalists seldom report on the attack rate within discrete, at-risk populations — SARS in Toronto is a disease affecting health-care workers and elderly patients within hospital settings, and with underlying illness. In the province of Ontario, doctors estimate that the case-fatality rate for those who actually contract SARS is less than one percent for patients under 50. Journalists habitually lump together "probable" and "suspected" cases, without ever explaining why. Lumping the two categories together can make the picture of SARS appear bleaker than it might otherwise seem, since, at this stage in the outbreak, many suspected cases may be excluded after investigation and follow-up. Just as disturbing, most media reporting has succumbed to political correctness. Canadians are clueless as to the ethnicity and country of origin of the victims.Read the whole thing. And check out this post by InstaPundit, who says, "I can't see Bush overexerting himself on Chretien's behalf." Gee, I wonder why?
Posted
4/26/2003 01:40:14 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/26/2003 09:35:35 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/26/2003 01:01:44 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/26/2003 12:55:52 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Friday, April 25, 2003
Posted
4/25/2003 05:45:47 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/25/2003 05:14:53 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/25/2003 03:28:43 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Some say that Santorum will suffer a Trent Lott-like fate, and ultimately lose his leadership post. But that's unlikely. What's more likely is that Santorum will stay right where he is. As a result, at a time when the GOP needs to be hitting harmoniously on all cylinders, foreign and domestic, various factions within the party will be sniping at each other over an issue that has nothing to do with anything on the legislative horizon for 2003. Moreover, long term, Santorum's continued presence will send a signal to potential swing voters that for all the successes of President Bush, for all the earnestness of his outreach efforts, the Republican Party is still home to haters. And some potential voters will be deterred. See? That's my point: Santorum is a Democratic plant. It's the only explanation.Well, maybe not the only explanation, but an interesting one, nonetheless.
Posted
4/25/2003 01:42:32 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/25/2003 11:08:16 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Thursday, April 24, 2003
Posted
4/24/2003 11:42:37 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/24/2003 05:10:42 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/24/2003 02:04:02 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/24/2003 11:38:33 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/24/2003 10:30:23 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Anyway, the really beautiful stuff comes from Teresa. She said, "They [the Republicans] will probably say he's French, he's Jewish . . . he's a monkey. I just find it sad." Whoa, whoa: Jewish? monkey? You mean, the GOP — my GOP — will attack Kerry for having a smidgeon of Jewish ancestry, somewhere (so he says — but wasn't he supposed to be Irish?)? The Democrats had an actual Jew on the ticket in 2000. I don't recall my party going all brownshirt on him. And where did "monkey" come from? (I know: Darwin.) But here's the kicker: Mrs. Heinz Kerry sniffed about the White House, "They probably don't even speak French." Aside from the delicious hauteur of that comment: How much you wanna bet the lady's French stinks? I've heard it before: rich (American) lady's French. It's not pretty. I almost pity the Kerry campaign. They're going to have to do something about this live wire.In other campaign news, Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean was asked by Wolf Blitzer if the Iraqi people are better off now than they were under Saddam: Dean said, "We don't know that yet. We don't know that yet, Wolf. We still have a country whose city is mostly without electricity. We have tumultuous occasions in the south where there is no clear governance. We have a major city without clear governance."Could anyone arrange some face time between Dean and Adnan Shaker? Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that "the Justice Department's public integrity section has opened a criminal investigation into donations made to the presidential campaign of Senator John Edwards by employees at a prominent Arkansas law firm, according to lawyers close to the matter." Err, a prominent Arkansas law firm? That has a familiar ring to it...
Posted
4/24/2003 12:48:11 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
Posted
4/23/2003 03:43:10 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/23/2003 01:58:32 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/23/2003 01:54:05 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/23/2003 08:57:20 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/23/2003 08:00:34 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/23/2003 07:31:55 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Tuesday, April 22, 2003
Posted
4/22/2003 10:54:55 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 03:20:32 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 02:54:03 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 02:24:00 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 01:01:24 PM
by Edward Driscoll
The movie and television company had been planning a splashy introduction of an extended documentary on Fidel Castro by — Oliver Stone. It was all packed up, ready to go. In fact it had been screened in February at a movie festival in Berlin. Castro had given three whole days to Oliver Stone, and that proved to be total immersion — Stone came away a devout apostle of Castro and Castroism.With our aircraft carriers standing down in the Gulf and returning home, would a detour in the Caribbean be possible?
Posted
4/22/2003 11:41:59 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 10:57:43 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 10:52:26 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Posted
4/22/2003 10:43:43 AM
by Edward Driscoll
Monday, April 21, 2003
Posted
4/21/2003 04:21:44 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Sunday, April 20, 2003
Posted
4/20/2003 01:56:40 PM
by Edward Driscoll
Home |