Show StoriesRSS

select from

E.g., 10/22/2014
E.g., 10/22/2014
Best US Ebola care remains limited in scale

Best US Ebola care remains limited in scale

10/16/14 10:59PM

Rachel Maddow tallies the number of beds available at elite U.S. medical facilities best prepared to treat Ebola patients (nine total, five remaining) and wonders what it will take to expand that level of care across the U.S. in the event of an outbreak. watch

US ramping-up readiness of elite Ebola care

US ramping-up readiness of elite Ebola care

10/16/14 10:57PM

Dr. Brad Britigan, dean of the containment unit at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, talks with Rachel Maddow about how quickly U.S. specialized care capacity can be ramped up to accommodate a potential Ebola outbreak. watch

Grenade accident rescue marked by bravery

Grenade accident rescue marked by bravery

10/16/14 10:49PM

Rachel Maddow tells the harrowing story of the rescue efforts that went into removing what was believed to be a live grenade from a man's leg, involving paramedics, military members, and a doctor who put themselves at great personal risk. watch

Ahead on the 10/16/14 Maddow show

10/16/14 07:46PM

Tonight's guests:

  • Colleen McCain Nelson, Wall Street Journal White House correspondent
  • Dr. Brad Britigan, head of the containment unit at the University of Nebraska Medical Center
  • Marc Caputo, Miami Herald political reporter

After the jump, executive producer Cory Gnazzo gives a look ahead:

read more

Thursday's Mini-Report, 10.16.14

10/16/14 05:30PM

Today's edition of quick hits:
 
* Dallas: "An official at the Dallas hospital where two nurses contracted Ebola told Congress on Thursday that emergency staff were not trained this summer on how to handle the virus, despite warnings from health officials about the outbreak in West Africa."
 
* National Guard: "President Obama on Thursday authorized the Pentagon to call up members of the National Guard to active duty to help combat the spread of Ebola in West Africa."
 
* Naming names: "Allies like Australia and Canada can also expect escalating U.S. pressure. And officials say China ought to contribute [to the Ebola response] in a way that befits a rising world power. The 'top disappointments are France and Italy -- (they) top the list of 'talk most, do least,'' a senior administration official told Yahoo News."
 
* A disappointing reaction: "Schools in Texas and Ohio were closed on Thursday after officials learned that students and an adult had either been on the flight with the nurse, Amber Joy Vinson, or had contact with her while she was visiting the Akron area."
 
* Ferguson: "A stream of eyewitnesses has been testifying in secret before a grand jury considering whether to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of teenager Michael Brown near the Canfield Green apartments in Ferguson."
 
* Seems reasonable: "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is calling for appropriators to 'return to Washington immediately' to provide additional funding for the Ebola response."
 
* On a related note: "Federal health officials are giving a small biotech company nearly $6 million to speed up development of another vaccine against Ebola, the third in a pipeline of vaccines to fight the virus."
State Sen. Joni Ernst waves to supporters at a primary election night rally in Des Moines, Iowa, June 3, 2014.

Ernst attempts a flip-flop-flip on personhood

10/16/14 04:59PM

In 2014, many conservative Republicans are perfectly comfortable opposing reproductive rights in general, but as we discussed last week, "personhood" has become something of a third rail. Given recent developments, it's understandable -- personhood measures wouldn't just ban all abortions, they'd also block common forms of birth control.
 
And Republicans clearly realize that opposing birth control in the 21st century, when the party is already struggling with the gender gap, isn't a credible option.
 
With that in mind, longtime personhood champions, including Colorado's Cory Gardner, Kentucky's Rand Paul, and North Carolina's Thom Tillis, have all begun to hedge on the radical proposal. Laura Bassett reports, however, that one personhood supporter is choosing a different course.
Iowa Republican Senate candidate Joni Ernst said she would support a federal bill that gives legal personhood rights to fetuses from the moment of fertilization, effectively wiping out legal abortion in the United States.
 
Ernst voted for a fetal personhood amendment in the Iowa State legislature in 2013, and she told the Sioux City Journal editorial board on Wednesday that she also would support a federal personhood measure if she were elected to the U.S. Senate.
 
"I will continue to stand by that. I am a pro-life candidate, and this has been shaped by my religious beliefs through the years," she said. "So I support that."
If the Huffington Post piece is correct, it's certainly a provocative move for the right-wing Senate candidate. Ernst is in one of the nation's most competitive and closely watched U.S. Senate campaigns, and for her to endorse federal legislation that would ban access to common forms of birth control, as well as eliminating all abortion rights, is an usual tactic three weeks before the election.
 
Indeed, it also raises curious questions about Ernst's ideology. The Iowa Republican believes a federal minimum wage law is "ridiculous," but a federal personhood law is the sort of thing she can support.
 
But there's another lingering concern that's worth keeping in mind: does Ernst fully understand the policy she's endorsed?
Students wearing personal protective equipment participate in a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention training session facility for healthcare workers treating Ebola virus victims in Anniston, Ala., on Oct. 15, 2014.

At the intersection of Ebola and truthiness

10/16/14 03:54PM

It wasn't long ago -- in fact, it was last month -- that congressional Republicans invested considerable energy in condemning President Obama's efforts to combat ISIS. GOP lawmakers were generally vague about what it was they didn't like, and they made no real effort to do any actual work on the subject.
 
Substantive policy concerns, however, weren't the point. Republicans saw value in Americans being terrified, so they exploited public anxiety to advance their political ambitions however possible.
 
If this sounds familiar, it's because the same dynamic is unfolding again. The GOP is somehow trying to blame President Obama for the Ebola virus, in the hopes that the public (i.e., likely 2014 voters) are so overwhelmed by fear that rational thought will no longer matter. The future of this public-health threat will remain entirely unaffected by the number of Republicans in Congress, but a panicked population isn't supposed to think these things through. The message is intended to be more primal: if you're afraid, rally behind those telling you to be scared.
 
But while GOP lawmakers balked at any kind of ISIS-related legislation, Republicans are apparently interested in one specific policy: imposing a travel ban on West African nations. Rep. Dennis Ross (R-Fla.) will reportedly "introduce legislation to ban travel between the U.S. and West African countries" in order to prevent Ebola "from further infiltrating our homeland."
 
It's safe to assume the bill will enjoy overwhelming support, and will probably even pick up Democratic backers, but if there is some kind of credible legislative debate, I hope this National Review article, written by a medical doctor, is considered in detail.
[F]irst and foremost, although we are members of the world health community, we must worry about our own public psyche here in the United States. If our leaders can't give us a sense that we are protected, we must achieve it by imposing a ban. [...]
 
I'm not convinced medically -- I don't believe that a travel ban against the Ebola-afflicted countries in West Africa will be particularly effective, it may even be counterproductive, and it certainly isn't coming from the strongest side of what being an American means. But as fear of Ebola and fear of our leaders' ineptitude grows, I think we must have a ban to patch our battered national psyche.
It's amazing to Stephen Colbert's "truthiness" thesis come to life: it doesn't matter what is true; what matters is what feels true. A travel ban won't succeed in its intended goal, and such a response "may even be counterproductive," but we should do it anyway. Why? Because it'll help our "psyche," even it doesn't help our public-health crisis.
 
We elect policymakers to enact policies in precisely the opposite way, but it appears "truthiness" is ruling the day.
A hazmat worker looks up while finishing up cleaning outside an apartment building of a hospital worker, Oct. 12, 2014, in Dallas, Texas. (Photo by LM Otero/AP)

A deadly virus is not an 'October Surprise'

10/16/14 12:56PM

Occasionally, political figures try to redefine a word or phrase that already has a very specific meaning. Senate Republicans, for example, last year tried to argue that "court packing" refers to confirming judicial nominees that the GOP doesn't like. It was gibberish -- court packing already refers to a specific practice, and this wasn't it.
 
Similarly, "October Surprise" refers to a specific campaign tactic, though some of the Beltway media is trying to change that, too. Here's Chris Cillizza yesterday:
Wednesday's news that not only had a second health-care worker in Dallas been infected with the Ebola virus but that she had also traveled on a commercial airliner the night before showing up at the hospital with a low-grade fever takes the story -- and its potential political impact -- to an entirely new level. [...]
 
Add it all up and you are left with this conclusion: Ebola is the October surprise of the 2014 midterms.
This came on the heels of a related piece from The Hill (via Dylan Scott).
Ebola has become the October surprise of this year's midterm elections, with Democrats and Republicans doing battle over everything from restrictions on travel to the disposal of a victim's remains.
Actually, an October surprise is defined as "any political event orchestrated (or apparently orchestrated) in the month before an election, in the hopes of affecting the outcome." The idea is, politicians and their team come up with some blockbuster story, they hold it until the last minute, and then they make a big political splash, just as the election reaches the finish line.
 
According to the Wikipedia entry on this, the phrase originated 40 years ago, when Nixon's team, just 12 days before the 1972 elections, announced the apparent end of the war in Vietnam. The entry added, "Since that election, the term 'October surprise' has been used preemptively during campaign season by partisans of one side to discredit late-campaign news by the other side."
 
With this in mind, under no circumstances is the Ebola virus an October surprise. That said, this line of thought raises a larger concern about the politicization of ... everything.

Thursday's Campaign Round-Up, 10.16.14

10/16/14 12:00PM

Today's installment of campaign-related news items that won't necessarily generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:
 
* In Iowa's U.S. Senate race, the latest USA Today/Suffolk poll shows Joni Ernst (R) with a four-point lead over Bruce Braley (R), 47% to 43%. Most recent polling shows the race a little closer than this.
 
* In Colorado's U.S. Senate race, a new Quinnipiac poll shows Rep. Cory Gardner (R) leading Sen. Mark Udall (D) by six, 47% to 41%. Most recent polling shows this race closer, too.
 
* In Wisconsin's gubernatorial race, the new Marquette University Law School poll shows a tie contest, with Gov. Scott Walker (R) and Mary Burke (D) each at 47% support. In the last survey from the same pollster, Walker was up by five points.
 
* Speaking of tied gubernatorial races, a new Tampa Bay Times poll shows the race in Florida also tied, with Gov. Rick Scott (R) and former Gov. Charlie Crist (D) each getting 40%.
 
* In Maine, a Critical Insights poll shows Gov. Paul LePage (R) leading Rep. Mike Michaud (D), 39% to 36%. Eliot Cutler (I) is third with 21%. Since July, there have been 16 publicly available statewide polls in Maine, and only two have shown Cutler topping 20% support -- both were conducted by Critical Insights, and both showed the independent in third place with just 21%.
 
* Did the DSCC walk away from Kentucky's U.S. Senate because Alison Lundergan Grimes has plenty of cash? It's possible -- Mitch McConnell's (R) challenger raised $4.9 million in the third quarter, making Grimes one of the year's most prolific fundraisers among challengers.
This undated photo provided by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals shows Judge Edith Jones.

Federal judge faces no punishment following racially charged remarks

10/16/14 11:23AM

Last year, Judge Edith H. Jones of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals spoke to a conservative legal group and made a series of controversial remarks about race. There is no official transcript or recording, but affidavits from attendees pointed to deeply problematic language, especially from a sitting federal judge.
 
According to an ethics complaint, Jones, a Reagan appointee, told the audience that "racial groups like African-Americans and Hispanics are predisposed to crime." A veteran attorney who was in the room said Jones "noted there was no arguing that 'blacks' and 'Hispanics' far outnumber 'Anglos' on death row and repeated that 'sadly' people from these racial groups do get involved in more violent crime." She was also accused of having said defenses often used in capital cases, including mental retardation and systemic racism, are "red herrings."
 
An investigation ensued, but the Associated Press reported yesterday that a panel of judges dismissed the misconduct complaint.
"It appears likely that Judge Jones did suggest that, statistically, African-Americans and/or Hispanics are 'disproportionately' involved in certain crimes and 'disproportionately' present in federal prisons," said the panel.
 
"But we must consider Judge Jones' comments in the context of her express clarifications during the question-and-answer period that she did not mean that certain groups are 'prone to commit' such crimes," the panel of judges said.
 
"In that context, whether or not her statistical statements are accurate, or accurate only with caveats, they do not by themselves indicate racial bias or an inability to be impartial," said the panel. "They resemble other albeit substantially more qualified, statements prominent in contemporary debate regarding the fairness of the justice system."
One wonders if Americans from minority communities, whose legal fate rests in Jones' hands, would have comparable confidence in the conservative judge's impartiality.

Pages