The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Uncle Ted]

really?

I have heard of many tragic cases as well. It doesn't mean that either Paul or I believe them.

[old_gregg]

I have heard of many tragic cases as well. It doesn't mean that either Paul or I believe them.

good point. i've heard of many tragic cases of children unable to defend themselves from bullies at school because the tyrannical USFG prevented them from carrying loaded guns. whether or not i believe these cases, it seems sensible to make policy based on their alleged existence.

[Jeff Lebowski]

As a MD you should write an op ed in one of your professional journals and ask why the hell 21% of the pediatric specials (yes, your fellow MDs) don't follow the government's guidelines in vaccinating their own kids and why 7% don't even vaccinate their kids at all. The MD professionals or AMA or whatever should be ashamed of their own. What the fuck is up with that?

Come on, Ted. You are grossly misrepresenting the content of that article. I downloaded it and checked it out. Here are the vaccination rates among pediatricians for the most common vaccines:

Paul has made it very clear he has no problem with getting voluntarily vaccinated... Why the hell makes you think he is in the antivaxxers camp?

The fact that he got vaccinated does not change the fact that he made a grossly irresponsible statement that clearly seemed to be him pandering the looney fringe.

[ERCougar]

Grandma Clinton now has changed her tune a bit...


http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/03/obama-and-clint.html




As a MD you should write an op ed in one of your professional journals and ask why the hell 21% of the pediatric specials (yes, your fellow MDs) don't follow the government's guidelines in vaccinating their own kids and why 7% don't even vaccinate their kids at all. The MD professionals or AMA or whatever should be ashamed of their own. What the fuck is up with that?

Paul has made it very clear he has no problem with getting voluntarily vaccinated... Why the hell makes you think he is in the antivaxxers camp?

Good...She's learned something in the intervening seven years.

Those specialists are stupid and should be ashamed of themselves, but not to the degree that Paul should because they're not legitimizing anti science hysterical nonsense by talking. Oh yeah, and they're not considering a presidential run.

Finally, I don't care much about Paul's personal decision to vaccinate (himself). I care very much about what he says on a national stage. He has a certain automatic (if undeserved) influence with people as a physician. He's not an anti vaxxer...He's worse.

[Moliere]

I'm not understanding this fight. Vaccines are not a partisan issue at all (last I remember bit the right and left polled the same when asked about them, however the left pretty much started the anti-vaccine mess) and Paul is not a serious candidate for president.

[Uncle Ted]

Come on, Ted. You are grossly misrepresenting the content of that article. I downloaded it and checked it out. Here are the vaccination rates among pediatricians for the most common vaccines:

OK, here is the quote from the article (I added some highlighting):

Specialists were found to be less likely to follow the overall schedule. 41 generalists (9.9%) and 29 specialists (21%) reported they would skip at least one vaccine for their future child (Chi square = 0.001). Specifically, generalists in 2009 were more likely to give a future child Hepatitis A (OR: 3.6; 95% CI 1.3 - 10.4), Rotavirus (OR: 2.2; 95% CI 1.1 - 4.4), Meningo- coccal (OR: 9.9; 95% CI 3.3 - 29.9), and Influenza (OR: 5.4; 95% CI 1.1 - 26.7) vaccines. Pediatric specialists reported a stronger desire to postpone future MMR vac- cination (OR: 4.4 95% CI 2.3 - 8.6), but even 5% of general pediatricians reported they also would postpone this vaccine beyond 18 months. Of the respondents who would elect to withhold at least one vaccine for future progeny (63 of 70 who actually reported having children), the most common reason given was “safety” and “too many vaccines given at once” (Table 4). This pattern was also seen for those respondents who have children and elected not to receive vaccines as recommended by the ACIP (Table 5). Place of work such as in “private practice” or “for the government” did not demonstrate to play a role in choosing to vaccinate in either specialists or generalists.

The fact that he got vaccinated does not change the fact that he made a grossly irresponsible statement that clearly seemed to be him pandering the looney fringe.

Let's see... oh, here is an article out of the NYTimes...

Senator Rand Paul, facing a backlash over his comments that cast doubt on whether he believes vaccines can pose a health risk to children, asserted on Tuesday that he believes vaccinations are indeed safe and that all parents should have their children inoculated.

It just annoys me that I’m being characterized as someone who’s against vaccines,” Mr. Paul said as he settled into a chair in an examination room in the Capitol physician’s office.


“There’s 400 headlines now that say ‘Paul says vaccines cause mental disorders,'” he added. “That’s not what I said. I said I’ve heard of people who’ve had vaccines and they see a temporal association and they believe that.”


Speaking on CNBC yesterday, Mr. Paul said he was aware of “many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines.”


Mr. Paul clarified on Tuesday that he believed the science was definitive on the matter and that vaccines are not harmful. As a physician himself (he is an ophthalmologist), he said he was irked to see his views characterized otherwise. “I think the science is clear that if you compare the risks of taking a vaccine to the ill effects of taking a vaccine, it’s overwhelming.”

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/firs...cination/?_r=0

It seems the only pandering going on is by the looney liberal media. Did Paul make it clear enough for you? Or do you need Reverend Al to tell you what Rand said?...




Rally the "pimps" and the "hoes"!

Embedded Tweet

[Jeff Lebowski]

I don't think that refutes my point at all. You are really grasping at straws at this point, old buddy.

I don't blame Paul for backpedaling. That was an awful gaffe.

[Uncle Ted]

I don't think that refutes my point at all. You are really grasping at straws at this point, old buddy.

I don't blame Paul for backpedaling. That was an awful gaffe.

LOL... Paul isn't backpedaling. He said upfront that he believed in vaccinating. What exactly made you think otherwise? Was it something the Reverend said?

[All-American]

The 2016 Presidential Election Primary Thread

LOL... Paul isn't backpedaling. He said upfront that he believed in vaccinating. What exactly made you think otherwise? Was it something the Reverend said?

Because six years of the Obama administration have blurred the lines between things you think people should be able to have and things other people should be forced to give you.

[Northwestcoug]

Ted, you sure have a way with directing the conversation the way you want it, and ignoring others' comments when they detract from your position. Very politically astute. You could do politics. Maybe Rand Paul needs a spokesperson!

[Jeff Lebowski]

LOL... Paul isn't backpedaling. He said upfront that he believed in vaccinating. What exactly made you think otherwise? Was it something the Reverend said?

Haha.

Some fun tidbits about Rand Paul:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...es-114845.html

Sen. Rand Paul doubled down Monday on his earlier comments that vaccines should be “voluntary,” telling CNBC, “I don’t understand the point of why that would be controversial.” He also alleged he was the victim of media bias.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/02/politi...cts/index.html

The flap, however, suggests that Paul is still struggling with many of the same issues that have caused GOP operatives to view his likely presidential bid with some skepticism. His staff has long been aware of a perception that he's thin-skinned when met with criticism, and while his pointed responses are typically delivered with clear intent — as with when he attacked New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie as the "king of bacon" — they could complicate his personal appeal to voters, especially if he's pitted against a female candidate.

Hmm.... That sound really familiar...

[Jeff Lebowski]

This one is particularly interesting:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/us...-surgeons.html

Rand Paul has a long association with a nutjob physician's association that promotes junk science, including anti-vaccine nonsense.

Back in 2009, when Rand Paul was pursuing his long-shot bid to win Kentucky’s Republican Senate primary, he spoke to a small physicians’ association that has publicized discredited medical theories, including possible links between vaccines and autism and between abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer.

At the time, Mr. Paul, an ophthalmologist, was no stranger to the group, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. He boasted at its annual meeting that he had been a member for more than two decades and that he relied on its research, statistics and views about the role of government in medicine.

[Northwestcoug]

Haha.

Some fun tidbits about Rand Paul:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...es-114845.html

Hmm.... That sound really familiar...

I like this fun tidbit:

Evans also pressed the Republican on a Washington Post article about Paul’s efforts in the early 2000s to protest the group that certifies ophthalmologists by starting his own National Board of Ophthalmology. Ultimately, Paul was able to certify only about 50 or 60 doctors and the state of Kentucky dissolved his board.

Nothing quixotic about that.

When you have strike one (i.e. son of Ron Paul) already and you have national aspirations, you should try your best to not act like Ron Paul's son...

[ERCougar]

Because six years of the Obama administration have blurred the lines between things you think people should be able to have and things other people should be forced to give you.

Yeah, no.

Let me help you guys out with a thought experiment. Suppose you built a house on the coast of a large lake. You decide to cut some plumbing costs and just build a bathroom that drains into the lake. Problem is, that lake is the area's water public water supply. The authorities ask you to stop, but you resist because after all, it's your God-given right to poop wherever you want. Also, we have immune systems, right? And when is the last time anyone in town got sick from the water?

Soon, others follow your example. It's a big lake, so for a while, no one gets sick. Inevitably, however, there are outbreaks, even a few deaths, particularly among kids. The authorities again ask you to stop pooping in the water. You refuse, because after all, none of your kids are sick, and you think people should stop running around, afraid of disease. You have a unique combination of chiropractic care and essential oils that you're willing to use to help anyone else prime their immune systems so they don't get sick either. Meanwhile, one of the local physicians start spouting off that while he doesn't poop in the water, he feels like everyone should make that choice for themselves. So a few people keep pooping, and kids keep dying.

Get it? (Hint: the physician is Rand Paul.)

[Uncle Ted]

This one is particularly interesting:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/us...-surgeons.html

Rand Paul has a long association with a nutjob physician's association that promotes junk science, including anti-vaccine nonsense.

Oh my... this article is written with an obvious liberal slant. The authors refers to Paul as "Mr. Paul" in the entire article while the authors have no problem calling everyone else in the article "Dr". Come on JL, you can do better than that.