The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: death
Ronny Jackson

Flummoxed Wingnuts Insist Biden Was 'Jacked Up On Drugs' During Speech

President Joe Biden’s fiery Thursday night State of the Union speech was bad news for the preferred narrative from pro-Trump commentators that Biden is a dementia patient on the brink of death. So they responded by baselessly claiming he must have been on performance-enhancing drugs.

The right has sought to leverage Biden’s age, stutter, and well-known tendency to make verbal gaffes since his 2020 presidential campaign. Republican Party operatives promote out-of-context snippets featuring his miscues, which are then amplified by the right-wing media megaphone and leak into the mainstream press. Fox News and its rivals depict the president as an addled old man whose reelection campaign constitutes elder abuse.

That portrayal crashed and burned on Thursday night, with news outlets describing Biden as making “a forceful case” during a “feisty,” “scrappy,” “energetic” “stemwinder” that may have “reset the 2024 campaign.” As it became clear that no one would buy this speech as evidence that Biden is too old to be president, you could see the right settle in real time on an alternate, evidence-free narrative: Biden was on drugs.

Fox anchor Julie Banderas provided a case study in this progression. As Biden prepared to begin his speech at 9:21 p.m., she posted that she was watching the speech “from bed. Didn’t need to a take a Melatonin tonight, this should do it.” By 9:45 p.m., with her preferred narrative dead, she grasped for a new one and alleged that Biden was on cocaine: “I think I just got to the bottom of the untraceable little baggie found at the White House.”

Her right-wing allies quickly converged on the same narrative.

  • OutKick’s Clay Travis, 9:44 p.m.: “What drugs have they shot him up with tonight? This is not how normal people talk.”
  • Right-wing cartoonist Ben Garrison, 9:45 p.m.: “They really jacked up Joe with the drugs tonight- think there's a IV bag under his jacket?”
  • TownHall’s Kurt Schlicter, 9:49 p.m.: “Maybe the paramedic who called into @HughHewitt this morning and told me Biden would be on cocaine was right!”
  • Podcaster Monica Crowley, 9:53 p.m.: “Biden, pumped full of god-knows-what drugs to make it through this pack of lies, blasts Pharma.”
  • Fox contributor Mollie Hemingway, 9:54 p.m.: “Plot twist: It was Joe Biden's cocaine in the White House!”
  • RealClearInvestigations’ Mark Hemingway, 9:57 p.m.: “The rushed jittery pace of this speech is the drugs, right?”
  • Fox host Greg Gutfeld, 10 p.m.: “Think we found out who that coke belonged to.”

Donald Trump himself claimed Biden was in an altered state during the speech. “THE DRUGS ARE WEARING OFF!” he posted at 9:59 p.m.

Even Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX), the former White House doctor whom the Navy demoted following an inspector general report finding he drank and took Ambien while on duty and whose medical operation reportedly functioned as a pill mill for Trump White House staffers, got into the act.

“Whatever they gave to Biden is wearing off! He is struggling big time! As I have been saying for years now, Joe Biden is NOT fit to be President!” he posted at 10:22 p.m.

Fox host and close Trump ally Sean Hannity took the narrative to the right-wing network in the 11 p.m. hour, trying to coin a new nickname for Biden: “Jacked-up Joe.”

“Everybody knew that Joe had a very big challenge coming into tonight because — and we’ll show tapes throughout the night of his cognitive decline,” he later explained. “Clearly, well, Jacked-up Joe perhaps overcompensated and I think that's being charitable.”

Hannity clearly thought this moniker was very clever: He and his guests described Biden as “jacked-up” at least 9 times over the course of the show.

This is what it looks like when the right is floundering for a response after one of its cherished talking points publicly implodes: They just start making stuff up. Reporters should keep that in mind in the future when assessing whether to treat right-wing claims about the president’s mental stamina with credulity.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Studies: Trump's Fake COVID 'Cure' Killed Nearly 17,000 Americans(VIDEO)

Studies: Trump's Fake COVID 'Cure' Killed Nearly 17,000 Americans(VIDEO)

Donald Trump began shilling for the use of hydroxychloroquine at the very first of what became his daily White House update on the COVID-19 pandemic. The drug is primarily used as an anti-parasitic, mostly in the treatment of malaria, and there was never any good evidence that it was effective in addressing COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine can lower the number of infection-fighting white blood cells, making it possibly the worst type of medication for anyone trying to fight off an infection.

However, in the earliest days of the pandemic, Trump declared the drug a “game changer” and began stockpiling millions of pills. Under pressure from Trump and TV host Dr. Oz, the FDA authorized emergency use of hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment for COVID-19. The drug didn’t work. The U.S. ended up with a mountain of worthless pills. And Trump went right on promoting its use long after the FDA officially warned consumers not to use it.

It’s impossible to know how much Trump’s promise that hydroxychloroquine was an effective treatment caused people to disregard the threat of COVID-19 or how much this opened the door to conspiracy theories about vaccines. But a new study in Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy puts an estimated number on deaths directly resulting from the use of this drug to treat COVID-19 patients: 16,990.

That hydroxychloroquine was more likely to kill than to cure was known very early. A study released just one month after Trump began promoting the drug showed that patients given Trump’s wonder treatment were more likely to die. The treatment was found to have a strong association with heart issues, and the results were so clear and overwhelming that the trial use of the drug was suspended ahead of schedule.

Those same results have now been confirmed by researchers in France who looked at the use of hydroxychloroquine across six countries. In all cases, the use of the drug with COVID-19 patients increased the rate of deaths. Overall, patients who were administered hydroxychloroquine were 11 percent more likely to die than those who were not.

Of course, there was one brilliant paper later cited by Trump that concluded treatment with hydroxychloroquine “improves survival by over 100 percent” even though 78 percent of the people in the study died. That’s science, people. Science that shockingly never made it into an actual peer-reviewed journal.

Due to the level of promotion hydroxychloroquine received, that 11 percent increased rate of death extends across millions of patients, both in the U.S. and overseas. In some locations, as many as 84 percentof patients diagnosed with symptomatic COVID-19 were prescribed hydroxychloroquine.

The result is that an estimated 16,990 people died unnecessarily.

As scientists behind the study conclude, the story of hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 illustrates “the hazard of drug repurposing with low-level evidence.” But it wasn’t the only time Trump declared that something unrelated would provide a cure for COVID-19. Trump also promoted the horse deworming medicine ivermectin, which led to a run on the treatment at farm supply stores. Trump also pushed the use of convalescent plasma before any trials had shown it was effective.

The plasma idea, unlike the use of a malaria drug or horse paste, at least had the benefit of being based on a somewhat reasonable theory. However, it still didn’t work. And, as should go without saying, neither did the dewormer.

Because Donald Trump can never be wrong, plenty of other Republicans were happy to hop on the quack medicine train. That included Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

For his new surgeon general, DeSantis went straight to hydroxychloroquine promoter, anti-masker, and anti-vaccine guy Dr. Joseph Ladapo. That would be this guy:

Lapado was back in the news this week after he appeared on Steve Bannon’s show to tell people to stop getting vaccinated. Because mRNA vaccines are an affront to God.

Thanks to his sage advice and the guiding wisdom of DeSantis, Florida ended up with its own unused stockpile of hydroxychloroquine. DeSantis bought one million doses from Israel, so the fact that the number of leftover pills was listed as “thousands” is disturbing. Nearly 87,000 people died of COVID-19 in Florida. How many of them were given ineffective snake oil rather than a vaccine that Ladapo finds spiritually offensive?

Overall, it seems clear that hydroxychloroquine is a killer, not a cure, when it comes to COVID-19. But still, it’s not as big a threat as Trump, DeSantis, and Ladapo.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

When In Doubt, Please Show Up

When In Doubt, Please Show Up

How many times has this happened in the last two months? I’m not sure, but every time it still catches me off guard.

In this particular moment, I was on a conference call when we took a break from the work and started talking about our summers. At some point, I just couldn’t keep pretending this summer was like any other. “My brother killed himself,” I said, “on the first day of July. So, summer changed after that.”

I owe Chuckie that, it seems — not to pretend he didn’t die, and not to lie about how it happened.

The discomfort was immediate. They were so sorry, they said. I know them to be good people, and I believe them. They knew about Chuckie, one of them added, but they weren’t sure if it was right to bring it up. I believe this, too. Before it was my family’s turn, when we were lucky, I didn’t always know what to do.

Now, I do. No luck involved.

There are people who are uncomfortable with death, period. They don’t know what to say, or what to do. Having held the hands of both of my parents as they took their last breath, I learned that one needn’t have the right words to do the right thing. For years after their deaths, I was apologizing to people who’d had a right to expect better of me in their times of grief.

Suicide is different. Even those accustomed to sending sympathy cards and attending wakes and funerals, stumble. What words could possibly help?

Well, here’s my short list of what doesn’t:

Don’t tell us survivors that if only our loved ones had prayed harder to Jesus, they would still be alive. My brother did pray, as did all of us who loved him, and still he died. We blame alcohol and depression, not him, and not Jesus.

Don’t immediately tell us that our loved ones are in a better place, unless you can show us the brochure. We are in shock. We can barely breathe. We don’t need you pretending to know more than we do.

Don’t ask us how our loved ones killed themselves. If you don’t understand why, please just stay away. This job is not for you.

I am not writing this column to make anyone feel bad or to chastise those who didn’t reach out. I am writing to affirm those who did, and to keep my silent promise to the thousands of survivors who, since my brother’s death, have shared their stories about life after a loved one has committed suicide.

So much grief hidden from public view, so much pain compounded by secrecy, shame and unwarranted guilt.

“For forty years, we’ve never talked about it,” one man wrote about his father’s suicide. “And for forty years, this hole in my heart hasn’t healed.”

Here’s what helps, they tell me.

Mention our loved ones, please, if you knew them. In texts and emails, or in person, say their names. Not a day goes by that we aren’t thinking about them. It helps to know you are, too.

If you have a story about them, please share it. How our loved ones died is the hardest thing about their deaths, but the least meaningful thing about them. Every new detail we hear about them breathes life into the people we want to remember.

If you don’t know what to say, say that. Much of the time, we don’t know what to say either. Even if we’ve feared, for years, that this day would come, most of us never really believed it would happen, which we only discover after it does.

As I write this, a tower of handwritten notes leans next to my computer, on the right. I will never get rid of these letters. A handwritten note is that extra mile we were raised to believe in. Seeing a person’s handwriting, and running our fingers across its loops and indentations, makes us feel less alone.

Again, no matter how you reach out, remember: If you don’t know what to say, just say that. We’ll know what you mean.

I am reminded of a text message from one of my former students, sent from hundreds of miles away.

“I don’t know what to say,” he wrote, “but you always told us it’s important to show up. So, this is me, showing up. I’m sorry you lost your brother.”

For just a moment, I fell apart, for all the right reasons.

 

Connie Schultz is a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist and professional in residence at Kent State University’s school of journalism. She is the author of two non-fiction books, including “…and His Lovely Wife,” which chronicled the successful race of her husband, Sherrod Brown, for the U.S. Senate. Her novel, “Erietown,” will be published by Random House in Spring 2020. To find out more about Connie Schultz (schultz.connie@gmail.com) and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

What’s The Best Way To Choose A Guardian For Your Kids?

What’s The Best Way To Choose A Guardian For Your Kids?

Dear Carrie: My husband and I can’t come to an agreement on whom to appoint as a guardian for our three young children. He says his brother, I say my sister. How can we reach an agreement? — A Reader

Dear Reader: Although my kids are now grown up, your question takes me right back to when my husband Gary and I were trying to make this same decision. Like you, we were fortunate enough to have a few choices, but choosing among them seemed impossible. And let’s be honest, there are always pros and cons to every possible choice, because no one, no matter how special, can really take your place.

Because it’s such an emotional decision — and because it’s so important (if you don’t name a guardian, the state will choose one for you) — I think the best way to go about it is to make a list of all the important considerations. Then you and your husband can examine each one from a practical perspective as well as an emotional one and, hopefully, come to an agreement. That’s what our estate-planning attorney helped us to do and I’m happy to pass his insights on to you.

Ask Yourself These Questions

Answering the following questions will help you zero in on what’s most important as you consider the possibility of someone else raising your children.

–Does the prospective guardian share your values? Whether it’s religious, moral, political or personal, ideally you want someone to raise your children with the beliefs and attitudes that you hold dear. Of course, no two people think exactly alike, but if, for instance, you want your kids to grow up in a socially liberal environment, you’d want a guardian to have an open mind on social issues.

–How intimately does this person know you and your family? How comfortable are your kids with this person? The closer your kids are to a potential guardian, the easier it will be on them during what is a very difficult transition.

–How many children does the prospective guardian already have? What is their parenting style? If someone already has a full house, there may not be room for your kids. And in terms of parenting, you want someone who could provide a sense of continuity when it comes to things like discipline and personal responsibility.

–What’s the age and health of the individual you’re considering? Since you mention your siblings, age may not be a factor, but it’s good to think about these things. Depending on the age of your children at the time, this could be a long-term commitment.

–Where does the guardian live? Do you want your children to be uprooted? It’s one thing to move a toddler across country but quite another to tear a teenager away from junior high or high school where friends and social networks have already been established.

Focusing on these issues may point more toward one or another potential guardian. But once you’ve answered these questions to your mutual satisfaction, there’s still another important consideration.

Think About Financial Stability

Hopefully you and your husband have enough life insurance to provide for your kids financially through college. It’s one thing to ask someone to care for your kids and quite another to ask them to support them.

But whatever your financial circumstances, whether it’s through personal assets or insurance, your children will most likely have some type of inheritance that needs to be managed carefully. Fortunately, you can choose to appoint both a personal guardian and what’s called a guardian of the estate. They don’t have to be the same individual.

So let’s say your sister is the most financially savvy and your husband’s brother has the best family set up to care for the children. You could involve each according to their circumstances. However, it’s very important that the guardian of the person and the guardian of the estate get along and agree on what’s best for the kids.

Get the Guardian’s Consent

Once you and your husband agree, the next step is to talk to the prospective guardian. Make sure he or she understands why you’ve chosen them and is willing to take on the responsibility. Actually, I think it’s a good idea to have a second choice in case the first one is unable at the time to fulfill the role.

Realize That You Can Revisit Your Choice Every Few Years

Nothing is cast in stone, not even your will. If something changes over the years, don’t hesitate to change your guardian choice. No one’s feelings should be hurt. The deciding factor should always be what’s best for your children at the time.

Believe me, I know this whole process isn’t easy, and hopefully your guardian will never have to step in. But make the choice now, and put it in writing. Then as you and your family go about living a full and happy life, you can rest a bit easier knowing your kids are taken care of — just in case.

Carrie Schwab-Pomerantz, Certified Financial Planner, is board chairwoman and president of the Charles Schwab Foundation and author of “The Charles Schwab Guide to Finances After Fifty.” Read more at http://schwab.com/book. You can email Carrie at askcarrie@schwab.com. For more updates, follow Carrie on LinkedIn and Twitter (@CarrieSchwab). This column is no substitute for individualized tax, legal or investment advice. Where specific advice is necessary or appropriate, consult with a qualified tax adviser, CPA, financial planner or investment manager. To find out more about Carrie Schwab-Pomerantz and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Photo: What will these parents do if they can’t care for their child? REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst