Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Hillary's mystery illness: Today's news for September 7, 2016

Now that you've had your morning dose of funny, time for the news!

Washington Post:

In case you missed it, Hillary Clinton had another coughing fit at a rally (watch the video here). Now the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza wants us to stop covering it?
...Led by Drudge, there have been questions circulating in the conservative media — and among Trump surrogates like Rudy Giuliani — that "something" is wrong with Clinton for months.  Much of that speculation ties back to an episode in late 2012 in which Clinton caught a stomach virus, fell, suffered a concussion and was then hospitalized due to a blood clot. A certain sector of conservatives were convinced that more was going on with her health than ever became public and that this was yet another example of the Clintons hiding things from the public.

"Diagnoses" have run everywhere from a severe thyroid problem to traumatic brain injury to dysphasia...
Here's the thing: This is a totally ridiculous issue — for lots of reasons — and one that if Trump or his Republican surrogates continue to focus on is a surefire loser in the fall.
Cillizza goes on to refer to a letter from Clinton's doctor which explains everything. Ironically, Cillizza takes Clinton's doctor at his word, then later complains about what Trump's doctor said, in a rather juvenile "I know you are, but what am I?" way.

Unfortunately, Cillizza's your bias is showing. Just like with Obamacare, you don't get to choose your doctor.

But Cillizza is at least honest about one thing:
Clinton's botched handling of her private email server, the questions raised by the Clinton Foundation's foreign donors — these are ripe issues for Trump to make a case against Clinton. Every second he or his surrogates spend talking about Clinton's health is a lost moment for his campaign. And with 63 days left until the election, he simply can't afford that.
I might agree with Cillizza, except for this:

Gateway Pundit:
In recent bizarre events on the campaign trail a strange man was noticed at Hillary Clinton’s side. 
Via Mike Cernovich:

The man is dressed like a secret service agent but his actions prove otherwise.
In a recent campaign stop in a Union Hall in front of a sparse crowd, at about the time when some liberal protesters began to protest, Hillary Clinton suddenly froze. She looked dazed and lost.  Seeing this, a group of men rushed to assist the candidate on the stage.  One man however gently pats the candidate’s back and then says, “Keep Talking.”
An expert on Secret Service tactics told TGP Secret Service agents would not touch a candidate in the manner that this individual did and especially Hillary Clinton.  It has been widely reported on Hillary’s disdain for the agents who work to protect her. The man who touches Hillary may be a member of Hillary’s close staff – but he is NOT a Secret Service agent. 
Mike Cernovich pointed out earlier that Hillary’s handler carries what looks like a Diazepam pen. 
A Diazapam pen? Here is what WebMD says about Diazapam (better known as Valium):
Diazepam is used to treat anxiety, alcohol withdrawal, and seizures. It is also used to relieve muscle spasms and to provide sedation before medical procedures. This medication works by calming the brain and nerves.
Side effects? Bold parts added by me:
Drowsiness, dizziness, tiredness, blurred vision, or unsteadiness may occur.  
...Tell your doctor right away if you have any serious side effects, including: mental/mood changes (such as memory problems, agitation, hallucinations, confusion, restlessness, depression), trouble speaking, trouble walking, muscle weakness, shaking (tremors), trouble urinating, yellowing eyes/skin, signs of infection (such as sore throat that doesn't go away, fever, chills). 
Get medical help right away if you have any very serious side effects, including: slow/shallow breathing. 
A very serious allergic reaction to this drug is rare. However, get medical help right away if you notice any symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, including: rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face/tongue/throat), severe dizziness, trouble breathing.
Admittedly, not every patient suffers side effects, although her use of Diazapam could be causing some of her alleged symptoms. It should also be noted that nowhere in her doctor's letter does her doctor mention Diazapam or Valium.

But this leads to the question of why is Hillary taking Diazapam? There are three possible reasons:
1. "treat anxiety": I can see this. Running for president is fairly grueling. However, my guess is she is on this to keep her temper in check, and to make her look a bit more presidential. In sports terms, she is using it as a "performance enhancer".
2.  "alcohol withdrawal": Even her doctor mentions she "drinks alcohol occasionally", with "occasionally" potentially meaning anywhere from once/week to once/hour. Could Hillary be an alcoholic? Google "Hillary Clinton alcohol", and then look at all the pictures of her drinking. While some are photoshopped, not all of them have the Associated Press watermark like the one in the bottom left corner of the picture below:
Hillary drunk?
3. "seizures": In her doctor's letter, Hillary suffered a concussion after a fall in 2012. It was discovered she had a clot from the concussion, and had treatment for it. Could she be suffering occasional seizures as a result of that fall?
Since Hillary could take Diazapam orally for anxiety treatment or alcohol withdrawal, that leaves only seizures as a valid reason to have someone around her with Diazapam pen.

With all that said, it should be remembered that none of this is proven beyond a doubt. The problem here is the Clintons routinely play things close to the vest, which makes them look suspicious even when there is nothing there. For example, when Hillary spends so much time denying her email scandal which has been proven to be criminal, why should we believe her about her health? Sometimes the intense smoke from all her scandals tends to overlap.

In lighter news...

CNN Money:
It's no surprise that inequality in the U.S. is on the rise. But what you might not know is that math is partly to blame. 
In a new book, "Weapons of Math Destruction," Cathy O'Neil details all the ways that math is essentially being used for evil (my word, not hers). 
From targeted advertising and insurance to education and policing, O'Neil looks at how algorithms and big data are targeting the poor, reinforcing racism and amplifying inequality. 
These "WMDs," as she calls them, have three key features: They are opaque, scalable and unfair. 
Denied a job because of a personality test? Too bad -- the algorithm said you wouldn't be a good fit. Charged a higher rate for a loan? Well, people in your zip code tend to be riskier borrowers. Received a harsher prison sentence? Here's the thing: Your friends and family have criminal records too, so you're likely to be a repeat offender. (Spoiler: The people on the receiving end of these messages don't actually get an explanation.) 
The models O'Neil writes about all use proxies for what they're actually trying to measure. The police analyze zip codes to deploy officers, employers use credit scores to gauge responsibility, payday lenders assess grammar to determine credit worthiness. But zip codes are also a stand-in for race, credit scores for wealth, and poor grammar for immigrants. 
What is it about Leftists wanting to blame inanimate objects (like guns) or things (like math) for human failings?

Anyway, while Cathy O'Neil's point is valid about math being used as an extension for human failings such as racism, it is the human(s) behind it which are the problem, not the math.

When it comes to the free market, "one size fits all" pricing could be required in some industries, but that won't work across the board. For example, as we learned from the housing crisis, some people are incapable of paying a mortgage. Some of those people were black. Does that mean banks should still give mortgages to black people and ignore their credit score? Only if you want to crash the housing market again.

The problem with the "math is racist" argument is that even some white people fail these various math tests. This may come as a shock, but there are white people with bad credit scores out there. Unless the math excludes ONLY racial minorities, then there is no case here. If it only over-represents, then it is a problem which the racial minorities need to fix.

Like the old computer saying goes, "garbage in, garbage out". If skin color isn't a factor in the algorithm, then it is up to the people affected to figure out why they are being mathematically excluded. Sometimes, a bad credit risk is just a bad credit risk.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)