HomeUncategorized9/11 Reflection by Marcetic and OT 9/10

Leave a Reply

Photo and Image Files
Audio and Video Files
Other File Types
24 Comment threads
20 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
orlbucfanBennypolarbear4wi63jcitybone Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Thanks PB for getting it rolling.




The GQP is already claiming Voter fraud in the Cali recall 22 oughta be a real shit Storm.
GQP voter fraud defination: Any election we dont win is infected with voter fraud.



In Wi it could be 99% approve and the state legislature will never send anything to Evers in support of a vax mandate.



Around 15.5 million U.S. adults under the age of 65 and 2.3 million seniors were unable to afford at least one doctor-prescribed medication this year, according to a study released Thursday as the Biden administration unveiled its plan to reduce the nation’s sky-high drug prices.

The new study (pdf) was based on four nationally representative surveys conducted in recent months by the polling outfit Gallup in partnership with West Health, a nonprofit organization focused on lowering healthcare costs.

Asked whether “you or a family member skipped a pill to save medication in order to save money” over the past 12 months, 10% of survey respondents answered in the affirmative, with the impact falling most heavily on lower-income households.

Seven percent of poll respondents told Gallup/West Health that there has “been a time in the last three months” when they or a member of their household have been “unable to pay for medicine or drugs that a doctor had prescribed” because they “did not have enough money.” People who are immunocompromised couldn’t afford their prescription medicines at almost twice the rate of Americans generally, Gallup and West Health found.

“Prescription drugs don’t work if you cannot afford them,” Dan Witters, a senior researcher at Gallup, said in a statement. “Across multiple studies, we are measuring adults from all age, race, and ethnic groups, political parties, and income levels are reporting that they are struggling to afford medications. And amidst these reports are strong and consistent sentiment for more government action to rein in costs.”

The study was published as the Biden administration released the details of its proposal to slash U.S. prescription drug prices, which are often two to four times higher than those of other rich nations.

Under the Biden administration’s plan, the Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary would be empowered to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D drug costs directly with pharmaceutical companies, and the resulting prices would be made available to Medicare recipients, private insurance plans, and employers that opt to participate.

The plan would also impose a cap on “catastrophic spending” to shield Medicare Part D enrollees from massive out-of-pocket costs. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly 1.5 million Medicare Part D beneficiaries in 2019 had out-of-pocket prescription drug spending above the catastrophic coverage threshold, which is currently $6,550.

“Life-saving prescription medication should not cost anyone their life savings,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a statement. “Yet too often, many low-income families cannot take their prescription medications because of cost concerns… By promoting negotiation, competition, and innovation in the healthcare industry, we will ensure cost fairness and protect access to care.”


Over Big Pharma dead body would this pass thier owned congresscritters



Extending dental coverage would therefore be a huge win for health justice — even the widely touted Canadian health system doesn’t provide dental coverage. Yet corporate Democrats in the House and Senate are already pushing back. Seeing the sparse benefits and high out-of-pocket costs of private dental insurance as something to emulate, moderate Democrats propose covering a minimal percentage of benefit costs or means-testing the program so only lower-income Medicare beneficiaries would qualify.

The political dynamic is familiar. Given the opportunity to take on the care-denying, profit-driven health insurance industry, the Democrats who front for them parse public benefits — undermining the universality that would make the public program stronger politically, while maintaining a role for their patrons to profit at our expense.

The priority for the House Democratic leadership is to give subsidies to commercial insurers through the Affordable Care Act (ACA), expand Medicaid that relies on for-profit HMOs, and then expand Medicare. They propose funding it all with the savings achieved from negotiating drugs prices through Medicare. This, too, would make for a weaker expansion. Prescription drug savings are not enough to cover these priorities. In fact, using savings from public Medicare for the profits of private insurers shows neoliberalism is alive and well.

Another reflection of the House Democratic leadership’s twisted priorities is their plan to postpone implementation of dental benefits until 2028, seemingly to limit the amount spent on dental benefits so more money is available for ACA subsidies. Not only would this divert savings achieved from Medicare drug price negotiations away from Medicare — thereby undermining political support from seniors in the short term — deferring benefits so far into the future would undercut support for the expansion itself.

Getting the plan design and timeline right means getting the politics right. The plan to defer dental benefits is a clear signal that we must push for a high-benefit, comprehensive program that helps seniors now and puts us on the path to Medicare for All.

Dentists are also fighting the Medicare expansion. Unlike most doctors today, dentists have individual or small group practices and run their businesses as they wish, charging what the market will bear. A big, universal public program that limits their prerogative to do so is a threat — so their trade association, the American Dental Association, is lobbying against the inclusion of dental.

But it is the large health insurance companies, so used to feeding at the public trough of an increasingly privatized Medicare, that stand to lose the most and who are fighting the hardest. The private companies that run Medicare Advantage plans like to use dental (and vision and hearing) benefits to attract enrollment — inadequate dental coverage is a financial boon for them.

The health of seniors and the future of traditional Medicare hangs in the balance. As Sanders says, this fight, including lowering the eligibility age, is about stopping the continuing incursion of commercial insurance into Medicare and beating back the pharmaceutical companies. Lowering drug costs to beneficiaries and improving benefits is politically popular. The more prescription drugs are covered, the more money — initially estimated at $450 billion in the stand-alone bill, HR 3 — there is available to expand Medicare benefits and eligibility. The savings shouldn’t be funneled into the overflowing coffers of private insurance companies.

We cannot separate our teeth from the rest of our bodies. We cannot let the market imperative for profits separate us from the services essential to our health. That’s what at stake in the fight over dental benefits in Medicare — and the ongoing fight for Medicare for All.


Manchin does not represent a Dem wing. Policies that Bernie supports are overwhelmingly popular with Dems. Manchin not so much. Manchin represents the interests of the wealthy and corporations.


Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are hurtling toward a showdown over President Biden’s $3.5 trillion spending plan as they draw red lines around their legislative priorities.

The two veteran lawmakers are at opposite ends of the Senate Democratic Caucus, with no close working relationship and some high-profile public splits in their past.

But the White House and Democratic leaders will need to figure out a way to bring them together, and satisfy their contradictory demands, or suffer a massive defeat of the party’s top goals.

“They really do mirror each other in terms of representing different ends of the Democratic coalition. … They’re kind of avatars of like the two wings of the Democratic Party,” said Democratic strategist Joel Payne.

Asked about the relationship between the two, a former Manchin aide added: “There is no relationship. … They do not talk.”



“When everything is put together, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) review of the current data, there is only scant evidence that ivermectin has any effect on COVID-19, and any positive effect is likely to be small.

An actual double-blind trial in Argentina, the IVERCOVID19 study, found no net benefit for giving COVID-19 patients ivermectin on a whole range of measures from length of illness to prospects of serious disease or death. Whether there is any reason to take ivermectin, alone or in conjunction with other drugs, should be settled by a series of large trials, including the PRINCIPLE trial and the RECOVERY trial, both of which are investigating the use of ivermectin, along with other treatments.

However, all the focus on ivermectin has resulted in media largely ignoring a treatment that has looked good since initial trials in early 2020: fluvoxamine. Used in the treatment of depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), connections between fluvoxamine and COVID-19 were established early and thought to be linked to the drug’s anti-inflammatory properties. Though the last update from the NIH in April showed that fluvoxamine appeared to be highly effective in a small trial, it still suggested that there was not enough evidence to recommend the use of the drug pending the outcome of larger, more controlled evaluations.

And now the results of one of those trials is in. The TOGETHER trial, in which a double-blind trial against placebo was conducted on over 3,000 patients in Brazil for a period of six months. Of those patients, 739 got fluvoxamine, 733 got a placebo, and 1766 got “other treatments.” Patients who received fluvoxamine within the first few days after testing positive were 31% less likely to end up with severe COVID-19 that required respiratory assistance. Those results are not as miraculous as the widely circulated testimonials about ivermectin, but they have the benefit of being backed up by real data from a large, well-conducted study that is currently under intense review.“


I was lucky enough to get Moderna.


A new report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Friday found that unvaccinated people were 10 times more likely to face hospitalization after contracting COVID-19.

Along with the finding, the CDC reported that unvaccinated individuals were more than 11 times more likely to die from the disease and were five times more likely to face infection, according to data gathered from analysis of over 600,000 cases between April and mid-July.

“The bottom line is this: We have the scientific tools we need to turn the corner on this pandemic,” CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said at the White House COVID-19 briefing on Friday. “Vaccination works and will protect us from the severe complications of COVID-19.”

In a second study released on Friday, the CDC found that the Moderna vaccine was more effective in preventing hospitalization than the Pfizer or Johnson & Johnson shots, according to the Washington Post. Vaccine effectiveness of Moderna recipients totaled 95 percent, while the effectiveness of the Pfizer jab was 80 percent, with Johnson & Johnson the lowest at 60 percent.


Moderna should have a Flu/Covid booster this fall


My soon to be new supervisor already got a Moderna booster because of some immuno issues.


9-11 was perfect timing for the Pentegon as questions were being asked about funding they couldnt account for. i believe it was over a trillion dollars the Pentegon lost track of. Their was never a follow up on that as of 9-12 to present day and i doubt those questions will be asked anytime soon. The MIC has a no limit CC with the tax payer now.