it's the important issues that need to be tackled

[rone]

[Kerry] soon returned to the attack, calling the shortage of flu vaccine another example of how the Bush administration deals with problems facing the nation.

"This story is a demonstration of this administration, how they deal with everything," Kerry said. "Because of the failure of judgment, failure to act, we have a shortfall of 48 million flu shots."

Of all the freaking things this administration has done wrong... Kerry is sticking to the flu shots.  Because he really needs the old fart vote!  Terrorists might not get them for a while, but they might DIE this flu season thanks to the Bush Administration's failure to manufacture enough flu shots in their SEKRIT LABS!!1

Actually, now we know what that bulge on Bush's back is: that's where he's keeping all the flu shots!

Comments

[pennyhill.livejournal.com]

Bulge on his back - flu vaccine. Bwahahaha.

I am not certain about Kerry's rationale in calling this the Bush administration's failure.* Chiron reported contamination, said it was fixing the problem and that it'd be late with vaccine, but would have it. Days or maybe a week later the Brits shut down the plant in England where the stuff is manufactured. I suppose you could say "outsourcing" was the problem, but I think we should blame the English. Yeah, let's piss off the only friend we have left.

* Kerry is quite intelligent, and I'm wondering if this is
(a) another "sound bite" pulled out of a longer comment that the media didn't understand or have the patience to listen to, or
(b) indicative of a campaign melt-down. They made that stoopit blunder regarding another candidate's progeny at the last debate. I hope to god the train is not derailing.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Kerry had all he needed to slamdunk the third debate, and didn't do so, from almost all accounts. I think it's derailing.

[palecur.livejournal.com]

Hey, you might get some lambic out of the deal. I think he'll get a second term, but no way he's beating the spread.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

THANK YOU MISTER SILVER LINING

[kodi]

Actually, now we know what that bulge on Bush's back is: that's where he's keeping all the flu shots!

And there's your "October Surprise" - shortly before the election, Bush will release his supply of flu vaccine, sealing up the high-risk population vote.

[lots42.livejournal.com]

How could this POSSIBLY be Bush's fault? It was ENGLAND who said 'Hey, flu producer, you're fired!'

[wisn.livejournal.com]

Simply put - because I'm not a public health expert - the American authorities should have been aware of and watching the investigation of Chiron and had contingency plans instituted, including prioritization of vaccine recipients, and made an effort to allay public reaction when Chiron's shutdown was publicized.

Instead, the word from above appears to be, 'y'all fight it out amongst yourselves,' which from an epidemiological POV tends to be the worst method for managing contagious disease, since it concentrates the vaccines among those who can afford it and have proper connections rather than those who are at highest risk to transmit contagion.

Regarding rone's question why Kerry campaigns on this, it's because he's attempting to frame an issue which Americans relate to personally before the Bush administration can (you can get sick from the flu = personal, immediate problem. medical firm had been selling the US potentially harmful vaccines = remote, abstracted problem). I agree he could have done a better job in the debates, but he's not pointing up the flu vaccine distribution failure to the exclusion of other substantive issues.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

It's a cheap and nearly unsubstantive issue to focus on.

[pennyhill.livejournal.com]

Good analysis/extrapolation of the "should have" thinking. I agree with it. A thought about your statement, "... concentrates the vaccines among those who can afford it and have proper connections rather than those who are at highest risk to transmit contagion." The highest priority is for those who are at risk of DYING from the flu - the very young, the very old, and those with compromised immune systems. The news reports seem to convey that priorities are in place regarding those who get the vaccine. But you are correct: clearly this was not handled well from a public information standpoint.

On the topic of the vaccine itself, they guess several months to a year (or more?) in advance of flu season about what strain of flu will be the worst (most likely to kill) and manufacture an immunization for that specific strain of flu. The shots do not protect you against all the OTHER strains, so even if you got a shot, you still could get the flu.

Demand certainly is high, but they've marketed the shots to healthy people. The question remains whether there will be sufficient quantity of the other vaccine product (is it FluMist?) to cover the groups that really should get shots. It'll be interesting to learn if, with 50% of the supply gone, the at-risk population is covered. I truly hope it is. But if that is true, we've really been sold fear.

[boutell.livejournal.com]

Fudgsicles. The campaign is not derailing. Any time Kerry or Edwards screws something up everybody -- not just his opponents, his supporters -- starts acting like he's doomed and then gets all surprised all over again when he gets the next thing right. Every time Bush does anything even slightly right it's a cause celebre'. What pisses me off about this is that it's a readily observed pattern even among Kerry supporters.

... Yes, I agree Kerry's answer about the flu shots was kinda lame, he clearly hadn't given it thought in advance and just plugged in some boilerplate and the flu vaccine probably isn't the Bush administration's fault -- if it is Kerry certainly didn't make that case effectively. As for the Mary Cheny brouhaha, that was definitely hardball on Edwards' part and it's highly debatable whether it was fair game... but it wasn't mean, you can certainly argue that it was just another case of the old feminist adage that the personal is political, and it wasn't a totally blatantly utterly false not true made up evil slander. Karl Rove and the Republicans have never shied away from such; ask John McCain. Yet the Republicans are trying, over a week after the fact, to trump up a sense of outrage over Edwards' remark and they are getting far too much sympathy for it.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Any time Kerry or Edwards screws something up everybody -- not just his opponents, his supporters -- starts acting like he's doomed

The polls are so close that it might as well be doom. Seriously, this is a time for Kerry to bear down and bury Bush, but he seems to be stuck in playing politics as usual. Maybe he can borrow Howard Dean's balls.

I thought the sense of outrage was over Kerry talking about Mary Cheney. The Edwards thing was tougher and yet attracted a lot less attention.

[schwa242.livejournal.com]

Any time Kerry or Edwards screws something up everybody -- not just his opponents, his supporters -- starts acting like he's doomed and then gets all surprised all over again when he gets the next thing right. Every time Bush does anything even slightly right it's a cause celebre'.

Before the second debate, a commentator on NPR talked about how Bush would do so much better in the public eye the second time around since he came off as stammering and confused during the first debate. Everyone would be kinder due to lowered expectations. When I was in school, this was called grading on the curve. Do we as a country have such low self-esteem that it seems appropriate to pick a president who fucks up when he talks to / with people so that we can feel better about ourselves as a whole?

-- Schwa ---

[glitter-ninja.livejournal.com]

Do we as a country have such low self-esteem that it seems appropriate to pick a president who fucks up when he talks to / with people so that we can feel better about ourselves as a whole?

I don't think so. I do think the country is likely to overlook a leader's faults because we don't want to look like we voted an idiot into office.

Plus, when faced with confusion and fear, most people will stick with what they know.

My town is completely covered in political signs. Mostly they're for local issues and candidates, but I have seen about two dozen Kerry/Edwards signs, and an equal number of bumperstickers. However, I've seen maybe 2-3 Bush signs and a handful of Bush/Cheney bumperstickers. The company I work for, which was overrun last election with Bush propaganda, has nothing this year. Similarly, I can't get any Republicans I know online to tell me why they're voting for Bush, beyond the fact that he's "their parties candidate".

But I'm certain Bush is going to win the vote in my town, in my state, and possibly the whole country.

My opinion is that people are too scared of the "what if's" of changing presidents right now. They don't want to look like the last 4 years were an accident that should have never happened. That, and party loyalty, overrides everything else.

[schwa242.livejournal.com]

I've seen a number of Bush / Cheney signs, and a number of Kerry / Edwards signs in Fort Collins. In fact, I'm conducting a little experiment at work because of these signs. So far, it seems that Republicans tip better. Also, young Kerry / Edwards supporters are more likely to have marijuana related posters on their walls, while Bush / Cheney supporters will more likely have beer (and specifically Budweiser... funny considering Pete Coors is running for Senate in our state) posters on their walls; usually just the logo, not the typical women in skimpy swimsuit posters more common of the apolitical college student.

-- Schwa ---

[glitter-ninja.livejournal.com]

More anecdotalicious info: I can now say that I saw no presidential candidate signs in Topeka (despite driving through half the damn city today) and none in mom's small town, and very few in my town of Manhattan.

It's sad when even the Kansans are disgruntled.