Wednesday, December 30, 2009
LD 50 is the level at which 50% of people will die. LD50 for EtOH (alcohol) is 400.
My personal record is transporting a patient with a BAC of 568. He walked to the stretcher. Some of the homeless in my area habitually have a BAC near 300, and will begin to have withdrawals of they drop below 150 or so.
In 2008, 60 percent of all fatal car crashes were caused by intoxicated drivers- 26,000 of them. 85,000 people die each year due to alcohol, whether that be DUI crashes, or health problems caused by extreme intoxication.
Tomorrow is New Year's Eve. I will be at work, and it is one of the busiest days of the year for EMS workers. Please get a designated driver. It is a rare New Year's eve when I don't work a fatal crash. I don't want to have to tell anyone that there was nothing else I could do to save their loved one.
I would also point out that either guns (excluding suicide) or marijuana kill far fewer people than alcohol.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
If you drink a bottle of lemon scented Mr Clean at 3 in the a.m. and then wake up your parents to tell them you did it, you really aren't trying to kill yourself, you are just being a drama Queen: but at least you have the best smelling vomit ever. Just sayin'.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Abdulmutallab's father, Umaru, is the former economics minister of Nigeria. He retired earlier this month as the chairman of the First Bank of Nigeria but is still on the boards of several of Nigeria's biggest firms, including Jaiz International, a holding company for the Islamic Bank
"You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you. If I went around proclaiming myself emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away."
"Now we see the violence inherent in the system. Come & see the violence inherent in the system. Help help I'm being repressed !"
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Yesterday was a quiet day at work for the most part. The only calls we ran were for drunk bums and a not serious suicide attempt. (Superficial wrist scratches)
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Am I talking about Reid and the Healthcare reform bill? No, I am talking about the Senate Majority leader in 1854, Stephen Douglas. His Republican challenger is none other that the first REpublican President, Abraham Lincoln. The unpopular law that was passed was the The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, which overturned the Missouri compromise, and set the stage for the civil war and essentially created the anti-slavery Republican party that was to oppose the pro-slavery Democratic party.
The parallels are obvious. Asking that one man spend a portion of his life carrying out labor to the benefit of another amounts to involuntary servitude, slavery, if you will. I sit here wondering if we have not set the stage for the Second American Civil War. If that is so, it is my fervent hope that the second one will be less bloody than the first, and (to borrow a phrase) that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Alas, I fear it already has.
Well, not to be outdone, we arrived at one of the nursing homes in our area for a reported "heart attack" (I won't even go into the nurse's inability to use big boy words) to find every nurse in the facility in this lady's room. The group included LPNs, CNAs, and even a couple of RNs, and all were trying to administer Albuterol to a woman who was sitting up in bed. The woman looked pretty sick- pale, cyanotic lips, etc.
As I got closer, I noticed to source of the problem. She was pulseless and apneic. I started chest compressions, and one of the nurses was heard calling the facility's Doctor, and could be heard complaining that we didn't know what we were doing, as they had just checked the patient, and she was fine. Nevermind that she was in Asystole. Even as I was doing chest compressions, one of the RNs was still trying to give the Albuterol. WTF?!?!?!?
By the time we got to the hospital, we had her intubated, had started an IO, and had given 3mg of Epi, and 2mg of Atropine. The hospital gave 2 more of Epi, and 1 of atropine, and lo and behold- we got a pulse and a BP of 80/60, but it was not to last. She passed away.
So, the lesson here for all of you incompetents- if the patient is not breathing, Albuterol will not help. Just sayin.
Note: Not all nurses are incompetent, just the ones in the nursing homes around here. We often joke that the nurses who scraped by with an 80.1% on the exam are the ones in the SNFs around here.
Note 2: SNF- now there is a joke in itself- SNF= "Skilled Nursing Facility" Haha.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Some complain that it infringes on a woman's reproductive rights. My view is that women use the pregnancy thing to get out of unpleasant military assignments, and then men must be reassigned to those now vacant positions.
When I was in the Navy, my sea/shore rotation was 60/24. That means that for every 60 months I was assigned to a sea going command, it would be followed by 24 months in a shore command. Since a person on shore duty is home nearly every night, shore duty is highly prized. Since there are far more sea duty posts than shore posts, sea duty is usually the first (and only) assignment for a new sailor.
During my 6 years in the Navy, I spent the first year in school, and then the next 5 assigned to a ship. That ship spent 3 and a half of those 5 years at sea, including 3 deployments overseas for 6, 7, and 9 months, respectively.
Women, on the other hand, frequently are assigned to shore duty as soon as they complete initial training. Those who are assigned to sea duty frequently turn up pregnant as soon as the unit is scheduled to deploy overseas. They are then immediately reassigned to shore duty.
Some other unfair facts: Women who are assigned to shore duty outside the continental US (including Hawaii) are counted as being on sea duty, even though they are home every night. A man in the exact same billet is counted as shore duty. So a woman could be assigned to Hawaii for 5 years, and be eligible for 2 years of shore duty in San Diego, while a man in the exact same job would do 5 years floating on a Destroyer, followed by 2 years at San Diego.
Getting pregnant in order to go home is no different than shooting off your toe to go home. And saying it's an "accident" is a load of crap. It's no mystery how pregnancy occurs. It's no magical "accident"
Women have claimed for years that they want the same chances as men to advance in the military, but frequently use their gender as an excuse to escape the real work. It is about time they were held to task.
Edited to add:
Some shore commands in the Norfolk, Va., area report that up to 34 percent of their billets are filled by pregnant sailors, and commanders are complaining about a “lack of proper manning to conduct their mission,” according to a Naval Inspector General report.
When sailors on sea duty become pregnant, they are transferred to shore-based commands that fit certain criteria, such as being close to a Navy medical center. The length of that assignment changed in June 2007, when the Navy extended the postpartum tour from four months after a child’s birth to 12 months. Combined with a nine-month pregnancy, that puts expectant mothers on limited duty for up to 21 months.
21 months? Picture this: you join the Navy, and finish two months of Boot Camp, and 4 months of A school. You get your orders, and get travel time and up to 30 days of leave, then report aboard your first ship: You have been in the Navy for 7 months, and have not contributed to the mission one bit. You get pregnant, and sit on shore duty for 21 months. You now have been in the Navy for 28 months- more than half of your enlistment is over, you have done NOTHING to earn the money you have been paid, and the taxpayer has paid for your medical care and training.
There are 54,000 women serving in the US Navy- and last year, 3,125 (5.8%) of them got pregnant. If that is an average year, then there are 9,375 women (17.4%) on shore duty due to pregnancy at any given time.
To top it off, the woman then gets another set of orders to go somewhere else, which entitles her to another 30 days of leave (because of her change in duty station). Since she is a single mother, she is now entitled to a hardship discharge. It is a waste of money, and turns the military into another government welfare/social program.
The proposed rule change? The military commander was forced to rescind the policy. We can't infringe on a woman's right to land on her back with her legs open, now can we? Even if everyone else gets to pay for it: The men of the military who must carry the extra load, the taxpayer who must foot the bill, and the country that is left with a weaker defense system.
Friday, December 18, 2009
He increased our national debt by $1,000,000,000,000.00 in only 6 months. It took GW Bush a year and a half to accomplish that feat.
He beat GW's record in that more soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan in 2009 than during 5 years of the Bush administration COMBINED (2001-2005).
and now, his latest record: the worst ratings of any president at the end of his first year: 49% approve and 46% disapprove of his job performance in the latest USA Today/Gallup Poll.
She is pale, her lips are blue, and her jugular veins are prominent. He legs are oozing fluid, and have large blisters on them. Cellulitis? Maybe. Her arms are swollen. Her complaint is shortness of breath, which she says she has had for about 4 days. She has a history of high blood pressure and hypothyroidism. She has been taking norvasc, lasix, lopressor, and synthroid for several years, and claims compliance. She has no known drug allergies.
Her vitals are as follows: HR78, SaO2 60% on room air, BP 81/50, EtCO2 is 80 with a normal appearance to the waveform. Lung sounds are clear, but diminished bilaterally. She is in a sinus rhythm, and her 12 lead is unremarkable.
My thoughts? The chief complaint in this case is supported by the cyanosis and the low O2 sats. The diminished lung sounds with the absence of wheezing, along with the JVD, the high CO2, and the hypotension lead me to believe that what we are dealing with is congestive heart failure. Since I have previously stated that CPAP is the flippity floppity floop, we went ahead and applied CPAP at 8cm and started an IV. While IV access was obtained, her O2 sats climbed to about 96%, and her EtCO2 fell to 60.
With the respiratory problem under our (temporary) control, it was time to turn our attention to the decompensating cardiogenic shock, so a Dopamine drip was hung. We hit our effect at about 800mcg/minute. I know that sounds like alot, but remember that the patient weighed in at 140kgs. Her BP climbed to 94/60, and I left it there.
When we got to the ER, the doctor on duty (same Doc from this post) wanted to know why we didn't give albuterol/atrovent by nebulizer. I pointed out that she was not wheezing, that albuterol is only to be used with caution in CHF patients, and that she was taking beta blockers. I told him that she seemed to improve with CPAP, so I saw no point in giving the albuterol. He proceeded to tell me how wrong I was, and said that diminished lung sounds were a form of wheezing. He took her off the CPAP, and ordered the nebulizer. I left.
There is an old saying that if everyone around you seems wrong, maybe it isn't them. I see so many cases of Doctors telling me things that contradict what I have been taught, and what I have been teaching to my own medic students, that I sometimes wonder if I am the one who is wrong. It has been known to happen. I had a junior medic with me on the call who now thinks I am an idiot, and a doctor who is trash talking me to the ER staff.
Maybe they are more current, maybe the people who taught me were wrong. What do you think?
Saturday, December 5, 2009
If the cop car is running, and the cop is lying on the ground, you are dealing with a toxic atmosphere.
If the cop car has stalled, and the cop is down, you are dealing with an oxygen depleted atmosphere.
If the cop and car are both on fire, you are dealing with a flammable atmosphere.
If both the cop car and the cop are melting, you have corrosives to deal with.
Hope this helps.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Last week, I was teaching a class on intubation to a group of aspiring paramedics. I was covering the class for another instructor who was out sick. When discussing the procedure, I used the following youtube video to teach the anatomy:
I pointed out that the landmark the students would be looking for was anatomically similar to the vagina (I actually said vagina, and did not use any vulgarities), and then went on to explain the procedure.
A female student, an 18 year old who finished high school 6 months ago, and who became an EMT less than a month ago, filed a complaint. When the director of the school spoke to me about it, she said the student had been in tears, and stated that no one had ever spoken to her like that before, and she felt violated.
The administrator knows me. We are friends, and I have been teaching for this school for going on 5 years. My wife and I have gone on vacation in the past with her and her husband. She is good people. To her credit, she knows nothing about medical procedures, so I showed her the video. All of our lectures are taped. She viewed the tape. She agreed that I had done nothing improper, but the girl is threatening legal action.
I was upset, and offered to resign, or take a leave of absence. She then told me that she has no desire to terminate me, and does not want to see me leave. She asked if I would promise to stop saying controversial things, but I pointed out that you cannot teach a medical class without mentioning parts of the anatomy, and that being adult education, the girl should get over it. What will happen when the class gets to the OB/GYN lectures? At any rate, I will not be teaching paramedic for awhile. It looks like I will be back to doing ConEd (for the same school) until this girl (and I mean girl, she certainly isn't a woman) either graduates or fails out.
Teenage girls seem to thrive on drama, and what is better than the drama of watching everyone jump at your command?
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
The guidance aims to “encourage all practitioners who visit families and carers with children and young people aged under 15 to provide home safety advice and, where necessary, conduct a home risk assessment”. It continues: “If possible, they should supply and install home safety equipment.” British officials claim that this will safeguard about 100,000 children that are admitted to hospital each year for home injuries and save £146m.
Since Britain is already the most security camera heavy country in the world, it makes me wonder how long it will be before big brother installs video cameras inside homes.
I take two lessons from this:
1 Government run healthcare will allow the government to intrude upon every aspect of your life, all in the name of spending money. That is the cost- loss of your freedom.
2 Once the right to keep and bear arms goes, as it did in Britain a few years back, the rest of your rights will begin to disappear as well.
Friday, November 6, 2009
His roommate tells us that he has used 3 breathing treatments in the last 2 hours, and has been getting worse. My partner asks the roommate if our patient has ever been intubated before. The patient uses what breath he has to say "No tube" and goes back to huffing his inhaler.
Since I am the engine paramedic, there are 5 of us there, including the rescue crew. Of the 5, four of us are medics, and I am the senior ranking of the four. I remark to my partner that we are probably gonna need some Mag Sulfate for this one. The problem is that our protocol specifically states that we need orders to give Mag for asthma.
We get him in the truck, and his vitals are: HR: 120, BP 189/154, RR 36, SaO2(room air) is 67%, EtCO2 is 80 (that is the highest I have ever seen on an actual patient). We place him on CPAP and give 125mg of Solumedrol. His EtCO2 is now 65 and his SaO2 is 84%.
I call dispatch and get them to page our medical director. I want him, because you never know what Doc is on duty in the ED, and they don't always want to give orders for meds. After a few minutes, the medical director still hasn't answered, so we call the receiving hospital for orders. Denied. Instead, he orders .25mg of sub-Q Epi. (I had considered that, but I thought the Mag would be a better choice, especially in light of his hypertension)
When we get there, our medical director is standing in the entry to the ED. Assuming that he was the ED doc, I walk up to him as the rest of the crew is unloading the patient, intending to give a report. Before I can say anything, ha says, why didn't you give Mag? I told him the protocol says I need orders. He tells me, "Funny, you ignore protocol all the time, why start now? Next time, if he needs it, give it. Just give me a call later and let me know, so I can cover for you." I love him. He is the best medical director ever.
The patient is fine. He was discharged 2 hours later.
Edited to add: 24 hours after he was discharged, another crew brought him in while he was in full respiratory arrest. He was intubated, and sent to ICU.
Monday, November 2, 2009
The contest is posing some delicate questions for a city that has long prided itself on its progressive racial attitudes - the "city too busy to hate."The funny thing is that the white candidate leads in the polls- even among black voters (who make up 59% of the electorate). Of course, the black politician's supporters had this to say:
This is a racist attitude that I find reprehensible. Can you imagine the outrage if a white candidate's supporters circulated a memo espousing a "white Mayor first" approach? Why can't we have a pro-citizen approach? A minimum government approach? Why does American politics equal screwing one group to the benefit of the other?
[A] memo, written by political science professors William Boone and Keith Jennings, warned that black Atlantans need to act quickly to thwart a Norwood victory and maintain black political control of the top job in the city.
"With the 'Black Mayor First' approach, there is an unstated assumption that having a black mayor in Atlanta is equal to having a black social, economic and political agenda, or at least someone in office who would be sensitive to that agenda if not a full promoter of that agenda," the memo said.The ad hoc group, called the Black Leadership Forum, suggested that blacks unite around Mrs. Borders, calling her the most electable black candidate.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Alan Grayson calls a whore a whore-- Beltway whores freak out & defend Enron lobbyist working at the Fed
The funny thing is- I want to see an audit of the Fed, and I happen to agree with Mr Grayson on that issue, however, I think that the current administration's tactic of shutting down all who disagree is a scary, scary thing. (and before anyone comments or sends me nasty emails, I didn't like it when the last president did the same thing, either, but this is a new administration. Time to live in the now.)
Of course, Mr Grayson has been on local TV claiming that since the Dems 'won' the last election, that they should be allowed to do whatever they wish, and everyone else should just 'shut up.' This comment kills me, because the Democrats sure didn't shut up when the Republicans won three elections in a row. I would also point out that we elected REPRESENTATIVES to REPRESENT us, and if we are to simply elect a political party to be our masters, then why not abolish congress, and elect a king every four years. Sure would save money. Or is it that congress is intended to be a debating society where matters are given all the weight and discussion required before a decision is made?
For those comments and others, Mr Grayson gets my douche of the week award. Douche. How is that for political discourse? Nyah!!! (Now that the bar is so low, I guess I can do it, too.)
Monday, October 26, 2009
One thing I cannot stand is to see the law enforced both ways, as is the case here. A man is being arrested for causing the death of an unborn fetus that is supposed to be his. The thing that angers me about this, is that he is being arrested for doing something that many fight to allow the mothers to do: kill an unborn child for their own convenience. Explain to me how it is any different when a father, as opposed to a mother, does so...
Thursday, October 15, 2009
A doctor that I know was working in the Emergency Room of a local hospital. One patient was a 23 year old female complaining of lower abdominal pain with vaginal bleeding. A uterine pregnancy test was negative. The doctor ordered a quantitative blood test to see if the young lady was pregnant. The test showed elevated levels of hCG, but the levels were not high enough to say for certain that the patient was pregnant. A lower abdominal ultrasound did not show any signs of pregnancy. The Doctor was concerned that her problem was an ectopic pregnancy. Calculating from her last period, it was determined that if she was pregnant, it was less than 5 weeks pregnant. After a consult with the on call OB/GYN, it was decided that the female would be sent home with orders to see the OB/GYN in his office in 2 days, so that she could be retested.
The patient never showed up for her follow up visit. Six weeks later, she passed out and was taken to the hospital with a ruptured fallopian tube, caused by an ectopic pregnancy. She filed suit, claiming that the ER doctor was at fault for not following up to ensure that the woman went to her appointment.
In Florida, if a Doctor loses more than three malpractice suits, he loses his license to practice medicine. This makes it highly unlikely that a Doctor will go to trial. This provision of law is a boon to the lawyers who practice in medical malpractice land. This case was no different. The doctor settled out of court for $125,000.
Expenses like these must be passed on to consumers. The costs of these lawsuits are passed on to the consumers in higher prices. Who passes them on? Doctors, pharmaceutical companies, medical equipment manufacturers, and anyone else who makes medical equipment, supplies, and devices. Funny how insurance companies and the government, who often decide what procedures and therapies you get, are exempt from lawsuits.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The monitor revealed a third degree AV block. I placed the pads on him and began pacing immediately. We tried to get an IV for some medication access, but his veins were flat. I was finally able to get an 18 in his right EJ, and we began giving fluids. He complained that the pacing was painful, and so I gave him 2mg of valium to take the edge off. His BP was now 100/62, and I thought we had done OK.
Then he went into respiratory arrest.
I tubed him, and his EtCO2 looked good, and over the next few minutes, his O2 sats went from the 70's into the upper 90s. His lungs sounded wet, but the clinical signs were there. CHF, maybe? We delivered him to the ED with vitals of: HR 80(paced), Resp 12(BVM via ETT), BP 110/70, SaO2 96, EtCO2 42.
The ER doc listened to the lungs, and consulted with the RT. They decided to extubate. I pointed them to the EtCO2, and the Doc said "That stuff isn't accurate. You are in the stomach." He then ordered the nurse to discontinue the pacing, and give 0.5mg epinephrine and 0.5mg atropine. I showed him the original strip and pointed out the original rhythm.
I went out to see the wife, and told her we were leaving. I wished her luck. As I was leaving, the doctor came out and informed her that her husband had passed away. He then told her, right in my presence, that if the paramedic had not placed the tube incorrectly, her husband may have lived. I felt about three inches tall.
A complaint was filed against me with the state department of health, both by the doctor and by the patient's family. The investigation eventually found my treatment to be correct.
That was over 5 years ago. I still have copies of the report, the strips, and the findings of the state locked away in my safe.(redacted, of course) Even today, I can look at the waveform and see that my tube was correct. Through all of that, I still sometimes wonder what would have happened if I had made a different decision that day. Maybe I should not have given the valium (did that cause the resp arrest?) Paced earlier? Gone to a different hospital?
I still see that doctor from time to time, wandering through the hospital. Funny thing is, he doesn't even recognize me or remember who I am.
Monday, October 12, 2009
The report says police officers 'may, very occasionally in extreme cases, decide to put themselves at risk in acts of true heroism'.
In these 'rare circumstances', the HSE adds, 'it would not be in the public interest to take action against the individual'.
So a cop, who can be prosecuted (in the name of safety) under the law for risking his or her own life can make a "personal choice" not to violate the law and attempt to stop a crime? So, faced with one of two choices:
1 Do nothing
2 Risk life to prevent a crime, thus leaving oneself open to possible criminal prosecution
Which do you think a cop would choose? Why does the UK even BOTHER to have police? All of this in the country where weapons are illegal, as is self defense, and crime is skyrocketing.
I can hear Churchill now:
We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, unless of course, fighting was unsafe. Each soldier and citizen may have to decide at some point not to risk his life, and we support that.
If, however, the soldier feels the risk is justified, then we would certainly look at the facts and decide whether or not to be lenient and not prosecute.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
In Afghanistan, 229 soldiers have died during the first 9 months of his Presidency, more than were killed in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and most of 2005 COMBINED. In fact, those 229 soldiers represent 27% of all soldiers killed in Afghanistan in the last 8 years. Where are the press reports about this? Why aren't we hearing what a big mistake this is? About how this is all the President's fault?
Sunday, August 9, 2009
"Your" is the possessive case of the word YOU: "Is that your car?"
"You're" is the contraction of the word "you are": "You're driving me to the store in your car."
Please do not confuse the two, it makes you look stupid.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
People who oppose gun laws here in the US point out that the Second Amendment is there to prevent the Government from becoming tyrannical, and safeguards liberty. Countries which ban their citizens from owning the means to resist government force always degrade into dictatorship and tyranny. The UK is no exception. As I have said in the past, the UK began allowing private contractors to enter private homes to enforce the repayment of debts, and this latest scheme is horrific, but par for the gun banning course.
The UK has begin placing closed circuit video cameras into private homes to ensure that the occupants are not breaking the law. So far 2,000 homes have had cameras put in place, with another 20,000 on the to do list. Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction. Children's Secretary Ed Balls said: “This is pretty tough and non-negotiable support for families to get to the root of the problem. There should be Family Intervention Projects in every local authority area because every area has families that need support.” (Now that takes Balls)
It looks like Orwel was accurate in the details, but was just off by a few years on the date.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
The question that comes to mind here is what other elective procedures will be covered? Vasectomies? Sex changes? Face lifts? Will we be buying women bigger tits? As much as I enjoy looking at women's tits, it is not my respnsibility to buy them for other people.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Officials in Heath installed2 cameras to watch for excessive speed on Route 79, an area that has seen one crash in the last two years that was caused by excessive speed. Those two cameras alone accounted for 5,000 traffic citations in just 4 weeks.
Ten more cameras were installed to watch intersections in town and look for red light runners, accounting for 5,000 more tickets in the last month. At those intersections, light runners were responsible for 16 traffic accidents over a two year period.
In all, the traffic tickets will cost the drivers in the area more than $1,000,000 in fines, of which the city will keep $830,000. In one month. Extrapolate that out to a two year period, and taxpayers will pay over $24 million in traffic fines, which even if the fines eliminate all speed and light runner accidents, will only eliminate 17 traffic accidents over that same two year period.
The fact that the city budget will reap $20 million dollars over that same 20 year period, in a city with an annual operating budget of less than $7 million per year, and you can quickly see that this is about money, not safety.
Of course, they said that in December, after the bailout, with this expert calling for a March bottom.
WSJ called it months ago. The British Chamber of Commerce called it in July. In fact, we have been told we were nearing the bottom nearly every week since this all began.
Have we hit the bottom? Who knows? After all, the GDP still dropped by 1%. Dropping is still dropping, and it seems to me that you cannot be at the bottom when you are still dropping. For quite awhile when all of this started, we were told that we weren't in an official recession until the economy contracted for two consecutive quarters, even though we all knew the economy was in the toilet.
Sooner or later, the economy will rebound, and the talking heads will all try to point out to us that they were the ones who called it, and politicians will all credit themselves with ending it, when in reality the economy just ran its own course.
The rest is spin.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Paramedic George ran to a cardiologist's office, where a male patient was complaining of palpitations. The first arriving crew had a paramedic on board, who placed the patient on a monitor and noted that the patient was in SVT with a rate of 180. He started an IV and turned the patient over to George. George stated that he did not treat the patient for SVT because "the hospital was just a few blocks away."
Just a week later, George was ordered by medical control to give a patient 5mg of versed followed by 5mg more as needed to facilitate intubation after the patient had shot himself in the face with a 9mm handgun. He asked an EMT to draw up the medication. The EMT drew up the wrong medication (he mistakenly drew up diazepam instead of midazolam) and medic George said although he knew the drug was incorrect, he assumed that the order had been changed without his knowledge, and pushed it anyhow. When he did so, he noted that his IV had infiltrated, so he pushed THE SAME WRONG DRUG A SECOND TIME, thus giving the patient 20mg of valium instead of 10mg of versed. George and the medic assisting him were unable to secure an airway, and the patient died.
There was Paramedic Bill, who transported a code to the hospital with only CPR in progress (no line, no tube, no monitor, no drugs) because the "hospital was only 5 minutes away, and ACLS takes too long, we could be there by then."
Then there is the prize: Paramedic Christie (who unbelievably has a second job as an ER nurse- an RN) transported an off duty coworker, who is another paramedic. The coworker was complaining of shortness of breath and was in SVT at a rate of 165. No 12 lead, no line. When the medic working with her (a new medic) wanted to give the adenosine and run a 12 lead, Christie ordered him not to. At the hospital, they gave the patient 6mg of adenosine and she immediately converted.
Two weeks later, my mother got a scary call at home- she had gotten a head CT earlier in the day for a minor eye problem, and they called her back at 9pm to tell her that the CT had found a large aneurysm in her brain (the Circle of Willis). My mother's physician needed her to go to the big hospital some 30 miles from here, as they were the only area hospital equipped and staffed for that sort of surgery, even though there were 4 hospitals that were closer. He told me that the eye problem had just saved her life, and that I should have her transported by ambulance immediately. My mother called me and asked me to come get her. So what did I do? I brought my mother into the station and explained the situation to them.
Before even assessing my mother (who was still in the car- it was raining) Paramedic Christie said "I am not driving there this time of night. I will take her to the closest hospital, and that is it." We argued. She refused. I did everything that I could to get my mother the patient care she deserved, but I was told by the supervisor that since I was off duty, I could not interfere. We called higher supervisors, the medic still refused to take my mother where she needed to go, stating to the supervisor that my mother was too unstable to make the 30 minute trip- Even though at no time did this "medic" assess or even speak to my mother- her patient. I finally told my mother to sign a refusal, and that I would take her in my car.
The other paramedic (we will call him Bruce) in the station (who was assigned to a different truck) finally at this point offered to switch places with Christie, and he took my mother to the hospital. He attempted an IV, but missed. I offered to start one, but Bruce threw me out of the truck, pointing out that I was off duty. How long did all of this take? My mother sat in the back of that ambulance for 52 minutes. no assessment was done by the attending medic. No IV attempt until 45 minutes after patient contact, and that IV was missed. Through all of this, they said she was too unstable to go on a 30 minute ride to the appropriate hospital, but she apparently was stable enough to sit in the driveway of the station for an hour.
During my next shift, I was telling my partner about what happened, when Bruce overheard. That began a yelling match, in which he told me to shut up and stop bad mouthing his partner, or he would have me reported for violating policy (as no employee is permitted to talk badly of another, per our rules) He then called me a fat useless bigmouth, and told me to stay away from him, or he would kick my ass. Then he said that I should mind my own business, stop badmouthing his partner, and go eat some more twinkies.
This is not the sort of professionalism that I would expect from any medical provider towards anyone, much less a medic treating a coworker's family. I have reported the incident to higher authority to see what will come of this, and I am waiting.
My mother's aneurysm has turned out to be inoperable, and we have more doctors to talk to in the coming days.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
The letter, from Commissioner Kevin L. Ward, points out that Trooper Martin was "twice advised that a patient was on board the ambulance and that the ambulance was headed to the hospital." Nevertheless, "in spite of the knowledge of the patient and the length of time of the stop, you made no inquiry of the patient or any other person regarding the status or welfare of the patient on board the ambulance."
Ward advises Martin that it would have been more appropriate to have allowed the ambulance to continue to the hospital and conclude the traffic stop there.
Ward also points out, diplomatically, that Martin seemed to be spoiling for a fight.
"On at least one occasion, you withdrew from the altercation, only to place yourself in a position for a subsequent altercation with Mr. White.
Finally, your manner when approaching Mr. Franks, the driver of the ambulance, was unnecessary and unprofessional. Your demeanor and language at the scene was also unprofessional."
Ward then cites the OHP Operations Manual to characterize Martin's behavior as "conduct unbecoming an officer" and quotes statutes allowing for Martin to be "discharged, suspended without pay for not to exceed sixty (60) calendar days or demoted..."
Ward then states, "your conduct and disregard for the welfare of the patient justify severe discipline." And that "severe discipline" turns out to be ... five days suspension without pay and an anger assessment?
ANGER ASSESSMENT? A 5 day suspension? Anger assessment is a bullshit class that allows a supervisor to look like he is doing something when he wants to placate the public. I have seen medics get a heavier suspension for much less.
Remember that Martin has already been fired from two other police jobs for using excessive force. What this trooper did was nothing short of Aggravated battery. Had the medic defended himself against this unlawful use of force, he would be looking at a lengthy prison stay. If the video had not been made public by the bystanders, White would be in jail right now.
What happens when the next victim of your rage doesn't have video rolling? All I can say is that I am giving serious thought into installing video in my personal automobile that transmits the feed to a remote server (so tapes don't get "confiscated"), and if i should ever find myself in Oklahoma, I will be sure to do so. Perhaps the residents in your response area need to invest in some armor piercing ammo- that may be the only way to stop you once you embark on your next steroid fueled, department approved temper tantrum.
Perhaps White can sue you and your department. Good luck to him. I hope he takes your house.
But, hey- cops are so well trained that they are the only ones who can be trusted with guns, according to many.
Edited to add: If you want even more of the facts here, read the lawsuit that White filed against Martin.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
That is right- it took this nation over 200 years to borrow a trillion dollars. Obama did it in only 6 months. To put that in perspective: Obama has spent nearly $12 million every minute that he has been president. For you visual people, here is a picture of $1 trillion worth of $100 bills (note the little guy in the lower left corner)
One trillion dollars (in $100 bills) if laid flat on the ground would be enough to pave a road 172 feet wide that stretches from the Earth to the moon.
The stimulus that Obama pushed for and then signed into law was enough money to pay off half of EVERY MORTGAGE in the country. A trillion dollars is enough to mail a check for over $3300 to every man, woman, and child in this country.
That is on top of our national debt, which now looks like this:
That is a stack of money 224 feet wide, 432 feet deep, and over 80 feet high.
Not counting the weight of pallets, a stack of $100 the size of our National debt would weigh over 116,000 tons. That is more than a Nimitz Class Aircraft Carrier fully loaded with supplies, personnel, and aircraft.
Pictures courtesy of http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
They stand on the corner and beg, urinating in public, breaking into vacant buildings, and commit crimes. They scare paying customers away from businesses, as well as sucking up resources in the city in their constant search for more drugs, alcohol, and free handouts. There are several homeless in my area that are known on sight by local hospitals, EMTs, and police. Several of them are transported to hospitals in the area more than 150 times a year, so they can go to the ER and get a free meal/more drugs/a place to sleep.
Contrary to what the press would like you to believe, most of the homeless are there because of drug or alcohol addiction- they are not just unlucky people who were laid off. They stand on the corner and beg until they get enough for some booze, and they are "off work" for the rest of the day.
I ask the folks at the National Law Center on Homelessness a question: If you care so much about the homeless, how many of them are staying in the spare bedroom at your house? How many of the homeless are sleeping in a tent city in YOUR yard? Or could it be that you only support the homeless with words, and when they are sleeping in someone else's backyard?
Thursday, July 9, 2009
The only question here is whether or not a crowd of 50 teens are powerful enough to cause serious injury to a 39 year old male. (OK, a 40-something in my case) It would appear that it does, being that the victim in this case spent several days in the ICU as a result of the attack. As we all should be aware, head injuries can easily be fatal. Even though, in this case the injuries did not kill the victim, the only reason they did not is because they got tired of beating him and left.
The Brady Campaign opposes Florida's law. It seems that after Florida's law was enacted, the Brady Campaign placed billboards all over the state, and handed out flyers at the airport.
The Brady Campaign would rather see rampaging groups of teens roaming the countryside and beating up law abiding citizens, than see those same citizens defend themselves. According to them, a person is morally superior if he runs away, thus allowing a band of savages to beat his wife and children, rather than committing the unpardonable sin of defending himself.
Well, let me tell you: I ain't goin' out like that. You are perfectly safe from me and my weapons, unless you and 49 of your friends attack me in my neighbor's yard, or the gas station. Likewise, avoid trying to rob me, or beat me with a tire iron. For if you bring violence, I will respond with lethal force, because I am not going to lie there and hope my life will be spared because you become bored with beating me.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
This is odd, coming from the richest man in the world. The Vatican is filled with priceless works of art, and the church owns billions of dollars in gold alone. Charity starts at home, buddy.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
They say that this was a simple school fight, for which the penalty is supposed to be three days suspension. I would hardly call a beating delivered by six men against one that put a man in the hospital with hemorrhaging in the eye to be a simple fight.
It turns out that the victim in the case never said a single racial word. The race incidents didn't happen. The defendants have now admitted it.
I am sick of 'the race card' being constantly thrown down. It seems that when something happens to a black person, the first thing you hear is "RACE! IT IS BECAUSE I AM BLACK!"
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
You hear it all the time: people bleating on about how other countries get "free" healthcare, and how the systems in Canada and the UK are so much better than here in the United States.
Canada, where the country's Supreme Court ruledthat the quality of medical care provided by the state system in Quebec was so terrible that the law against private health insurance had to go. Private clinics are opening around the country to provide care to people who'd rather pay for medicine twice than accept the government's "free" healthcare.
In the United Kingdom, where about 11.5% of Britons carry private insurance in addition to the taxes they pay for the National Health Service, government-provided dentistry is such a shambles that people have declined the service and dentists now make more from private-pay patients than from the government system.
Instead of being able to get healthcare at my own expense, suited to my needs, I will get a plan that is selected for me by a bureaucrat who only cares about keeping his job. This will have all the efficiency of the post office, the customer service of the DMV, at the cost of the welfare system.
No thanks. Keep the change.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Marco Rubio, a candidate for Senate from my own state of residence, is attempting to get elected for the Senate seat being vacated by Mel Martinez. He had this to say on Twitter:
I have a feeling the situation in Iran would be a little different if they had a 2nd amendment like ours. #sayfie #tcot #nra
I think that this is true. An armed people is much more difficult to oppress. True to form was the Huffington Post reply:
But when I consider the sorts of things the Iranians could stand to borrow from America, a poorly worded amendment dealing with gun ownership rights and militias is way down the list. I think that maybe Iran could stand to have some separation of powers, a line between church and state, a free press, freedom to worship, the right to assemble, the right to speak freely, a freedom from unlawful searches, due process of law, womens' suffrage, and a government that doesn't terrorize its citizens with armed thugs or threaten its neighbors through terrorist proxies.I have a question for you: Just how do you think that those rights are safeguarded? How does a disarmed populace fight off a totalitarian, theocratic dictatorship? After all, Iran has already proven that they do not have free elections, they have already shown that they are willing to kill their own citizens, censor their press, persecute on religious grounds, and generally commit all of the atrocities that you speak of. So with all of this in mind, just how do you suppose that an unarmed populace will win these freedoms?
The more disparity there is between the force that the citizens of a government can bring to bear, and the force that a government can bring to bear on its people, the bloodier that fight for freedom will be.
In the US Constitution, all of the Amendments of the Bill of Rights are important. The Second plays an important part in securing the others, for a government that is outnumbered 100 to 1 by a well armed populace will think twice before gunning down young women in the streets.
So many lefties are so fond of saying that "if the protesters had guns, then the situation would be a bloodbath." I would point out that there are some words that come to my mind when only the oppressors have weapons: massacre, genocide, purge.
People who believe that everything in life can be solved without violence are living in a fantasy world where no one is ever greedy or power hungry. Let us hope that we in the United States never have to learn any different.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
As a general rule, the fire and EMS service follows a quasi-military rank structure, with each person in the department knowing the chain of command, and their place in it.
Ambulances (no matter what they are called) typically have two people assigned, many times an EMT (who is the driver) and a paramedic. The paramedic is in charge.
Engine and Ladder trucks typically have a Company Officer and Driver, along with one or more firefighters. (The driver is not a rank everywhere) The officer is in charge of the unit, and the engineer is basically his platoon sergeant.
An ambulance and an engine or ladder are frequently bundled together. In such a case, the officer on the engine outranks the paramedic. In some cases, the driver of the engine does as well.
Other positions include district supervisors called battalion Chiefs, who supervise 5 to 8 engine/ladder crews, and Division Chiefs, who supervise 5-8 battalions. The idea is to keep the number of supervised personnel to a manageable level, and 5-8 is it. This is called the 'span of control.'
Orders given are to be obeyed. The senior officer calls the shots. This must be so, because when snap decisions need to be made on an emergency scene, ruling by committee doesn't work.
During the first 39 seconds of the video, you see the trooper overtake the ambulance. It looked to me like the ambulance pulled to the side of the road as soon as they were clear of the vehicle that was pulled over to the shoulder. You decide.
The trooper, after arriving at the scene of the call, did not even get out of his vehicle before chasing down the ambulance and pulling it over. This is where things get ugly. His first words to the driver were, "You don't need to be givin me no hand gestures, I ain't gonna put up with that shit, you understand me?"
Then at 5:24, he says "He is going to jail. You don't talk to a state trooper like that!" Ten, at 6:10 the Trooper's microphone is mysteriously shut off. Compare that segment of the video to this one
you can see that the point where Trooper Martin's microphone is shut off is just before the Trooper began choking the medic. I wonder what was being covered up here? I wonder why the other dash cam video from the other vehicle is missing. The second trooper claims he shut it off, because he felt it wouldn't be needed.
That says it all. There is nothing on the dash cam that shows the paramedic attacking the trooper. The medic never tried to put the trooper in a headlock, as Trooper Martin claimed in his report. In other words, the Trooper lied in an official report. Isn't that perjury?
The trooper was wrong, just as I suspected. Assaulting a person under color of authority. Unlawfully threatening deadly force (aggravated assault). Perjury.
No charges filed. Free pass for the cop. This cop does not need to be on our streets with his obvious attitude and behavioral problems.
Trooper Martin you are a douchebag criminal with a badge. OHP, and all other cops who cover for this sort of behavior: This is why so many people distrust and dislike the police. Stop covering for these criminals who are giving you a bad name, and throw them from your ranks. That would go a long way to rebuilding your image.
Edited to add: The "emergency" the cop was responding to? Apparently, it was to pick up his wife, who was waiting for a ride. If you listen to the dash cam tape at 1:32, you hear the car door open and close, and a woman says "Hey babe."
Friday, June 12, 2009
More information has come to light. The DA has determined that there were crimes committed, but decided that charges would not serve the public interest. In other words, the police are not being held accountable for violating the law, and violating the civil rights of the motorists they pul over.
District Attorney Max Cook (District 24) sent the letter to Colonel Van M. Guillotte on the same day he publicized his decision not to file charges in the May 24 incident captured on video.
In the letter DA Cook wrote, "It is my opinion Trooper Martin's handling of this situation was inappropriate from the outset." Cook added, "... I expect law enforcement officers to treat all citizens with respect. I do not think this can be said about Trooper Martin's actions on May 24, 2009".
The letter was first made public by the Okemah News Leader.
The OHP now says it has closed the investigation into the confrontation between Trooper Daniel Martin and a Creek Nation ambulance crew. A day earlier a spokesman finally confirmed that Martin has been on administrative leave. OHP still refuses to release the dash-cam video from Trooper Martin's vehicle.
I wonder why that is? Could it be that the trooper is made to look more guilty on the dash cam video? Also of interest is the fact that Trooper Iker, the other Trooper present during the incident, claims that he sht off his dash cam during the incident, because he didn't think it would be needed. In yet another surprise admission, the Trooper admits that the woman who was in the patrol car with him during the incident was his wife. Must be nice to mix business with pleasure.
This trooper is a hothead, and is not fit to wear a badge or carry a gun. This cannot be an isolated incident. I wonder if this is the standard that the OHP aspires to. I also find it predictable that when a cop is accused of breaking the law, the dash cam video is always lost, missing, damaged, or the police just refuse to release it. The OHP is whitewashing the incident, and is also claiming that the Trooper did not violate policy, either through the use of force or by allowing hi wife to ride along with him.
I hope the Paramedic lawyers up and sues these Troopers and the OHP for violating his civil rights. In my opinion, this was aggravated battery- this was a person who (even according to the DA) committed a crime. The fact that he did this while armed makes this aggravated battery. Just because he is a cop does not excuse this in my mind, it in fact makes this worse.
Edited to add: Read the DA's letter to the OHP here. Hat Tip to STATter911 blog
Again and again, we see these active shooter scenarios repeated throughout the country. Nearly impossible to predict, once the shooting begins, the only way it will end is for someone to confront the shooter and meet deadly force with their own deadly force. The only difference is whether the gun used to stop the rampage is already there, or will be brought to the scene in the holster of a police officer 15 to 30 minutes later.
It started out as a normal day. Dozens of visitors, including school groups, were passing through the museum as the beginning of the summer tourist season began in earnest. Then, police said, a red Hyundai driven by von Brunn double parked on 14th Street outside the museum's entrance. When he got to the museum's door, Stephen T. Johns, who had been posted at the museum for six years, opened the door, police say.
Von Brunn then lifted his rifle and shot Johns in the chest at close range, officials said. Two officers immediately returned fire, hitting Brunn in the face, and he fell backward out the door, police said.
All of the officers were employees of Wackenhut Services, a large private security firm that provides protection for several government buildings, including the Federal Aviation Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. At the museum, the guards look just like police officers, with crisp uniforms, .38-caliber revolvers on their hips and silver badges with an image of a lion on a scale on their chests.
A defender with a firearm at the scene of one of these massacres in the making can reduce the death toll and save lives. This is just another example of that. Since not every place has armed security, since we cannot all afford armed private bodyguards, and since we cannot predict when or where we will become the target of some whack-job's homicidal rage, our best defense is to become proficient in using a firearm for self defense, and carry a firearm daily. The life you save may be your own, as well as the lives of those around you.
To you anti-gunners who complain that you don't want someone with a gun around your kids, remember this: Even if firearms were made illegal thi afternoon, criminals would have them anyway. I feel better knowing that I can defend the lives of my children, and I will not hesitate to protect yours, either.
I have significantly more training than the security officers in the link above, I have been through an FBI background check, and statistics show that I am less likely to commit a crime with a firearm than your average police officer.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Not only that, but he plans on taxing the two highest tax brackets to pay for it. The two highest tax brackets include people who make more than $171,550. So much for the campaign promise that no one who made less than $250,000 would see a dime in new taxes.
Another facet of this plan includes a law that would require employers to provide healthcare coverage for all of their employees. How may jobs do you think that is going to cost? You cannot stimulate the economy and create jobs by making those employees more expensive. The employers will simply respond by laying off more employees, and either going out of business or moving their business overseas.
This would place the Federal government directly in charge of another 17% of our economy. The Obama administration already has control of the banks, the auto industry, and now they want healthcare. What next?
Thursday, May 28, 2009
One of the patient's family members filmed the whole thing. The EMT and medic gave written statements, which the EMS agency put on the web. Independent witnesses also gave statements, which are available here.
According to the EMT, one trooper said he was going to resort to deadly force because he was 'flipped off.' The trooper, in his statements, claimed that one of the crewmembers attacked the Trooper Martin, but that it was not caught on tape.
where is the dash cam video?
if the OHP has evidence that the EMS crew attacked Trooper Martin, why haven't charges been filed?
does the OHP expect me to believe that the ambulance crew attacked a trooper with a patient and a patient's family member on board, 4 car loads of family following, 2 independent witnesses, along with a video of the incident, and NOT one of those witnesses saw the EMS crew strike the trooper?
I would probably be in jail. Cop or not, grab my throat, and it is on.
Monday, May 25, 2009
On September 11, 2001, 343 firefighters perished while running to the sound of the guns. The Shortly thereafter, 40 passengers and crew of flight 93 lost their lives defending against what is believed to have been an attack against the White House. Their actions on that infamous day saved countless lives.
This Memorial Day, I remember them, as well as all the young men and women who have given their lives in defense of our nation.
I also fervently hope that the difficulties that lie in the future of our great nation will take as few lives as possible.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
The plan is for persons to be detained indefinitely for crimes they have not committed. Held without trial. Without evidence. See the video from MSNBC:
Couple that with the Administration's statements that opposition to illegal immigration, being a veteran, opposing restrictions on the Second Amendment (which, by the way we are allowed to do under the FIRST Amendment), and opposing the Obama Administration makes you a potential terrorist, means that anyone that anyone of us can be "disappeared" by a government. If this does not scare you, I do not know what will.
Remember, I warned you that Obama would use the powers you gave to W, and that you would not like it. I told you conservatives that this wa a bad idea. It isn't as fun to say "I told you so" as I thought it would be.
Friday, May 22, 2009
The thing is the Corporations are doing the same thing.
1 A Union is a bunch of workers who band together to negotiate better prices for their product (their labor) than they could get as individuals.
2 A Corporation is a bunch of investors who band together to negotiate better deals that they could as individual investors.
No real difference.
The problem I have here is when Corporations are given the same rights as real people in regards to property and even better deals than people in regards to taxes and regulations. Then when the Corporation breaks the law, the only thing the individual investors lose is a little money. (Which the Government then gives you in the form of a "bailout")
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Or it is that the MSM just doesn't make as big a deal of Obama's?
Read how Obama celebrated Cinco de Quatro, er Quatro de Mayo, yeah that's it.
If a new militia movement coalesces, its members will have no shortage of sophisticated assault weapons to choose from. At the gun show in Reno, I witnessed the sale of rocket-propelled-grenade launchers and bazooka guns;
Yet the video you published on Youtube doesn't show a single Bazooka or RPG. Where is the proof? If you witnessed that, why didn't you inform the police or BATFE agents that are present at every gun show? Selling these items without the proper permits is illegal. Unless, of course, it never happened.
He goes on:
Nearby, I interviewed another dealer retailing a brand of.50-caliber assault rifle that was banned in California because it could supposedly down an airplane. He told me by slightly altering the bullets his gun fired, and by converting the gun from semi-automatic to bolt-action, he was able to sell it in California once again.In other words, the man complied with the law and produced a legal product. If you outlaw all .50 caliber firearms, anyone producing a .49 caliber or .51 caliber rifle would be legal, wouldn't they?
You also completely ignore the fact that a bolt action rifle is not going to shoot down an airplane. Heck, a person wanting to down aircraft might as well fire geese at the plane.
More lies, in the form of the "Mexican gun" myth:
Weapons like these are useful to Mexican narco-cartels, too. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' Phoenix field division claimed that “many gun shows attracted large numbers of gang members from Mexico and California. They often bought large quantities of assault weapons and smuggled them into Mexico or transported them to California.”
(Hey BATFE- where are all of the arrests of these 'gang members' who are smuggling $1,000 semi auto rifles into a country where fully automatic weapons can be bought for half that much?)
Lets reinforce the racism angle, as well:
Though big guns were the main attraction, a handful of retailers in Reno appealed to some visitors’ apparent enthusiasm for Nazi memorabilia. Swastika-emblazoned flags, photographs of Hitler and his henchmen, and anything related to the Third Reich were available at several booths. There was obviously no way to gauge the percentage of show attendees who adhered to the racist fringe, but the prominence of so much Nazi regalia suggested they maintained a significant presence.You , Mr Blumenthal, are a liar.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
What I find interesting about the picture is that she is the virtual twin of a woman I once knew. I heard once that everyone has a doppleganger. Heather Reyes, if you ever see this, here is your twin:
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Then why isn't it just a joke when someone else jokes that, "Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."
CBS Sports distanced itself from Feherty's writing, saying it was "an unacceptable attempt at humor and is not in any way condoned, endorsed or approved" by the network. The PGA Tour also criticized him for an attempt at humor that "went over the line."
Why is that so serious, and requires an apology? Why isn't NBC attempting to distance itself from Sykes? Or is it only humor to wish death on people from the right?
Saturday, May 9, 2009
It goes like this: a credit card company sees an account that has a large balance, and they find a reason (having nothing to do with the performance of the account or the debtor's payment history) to raise your rate to the penalty rate. That penalty rate is retroactive- that is, the rate applies to purchases already made, and the only way to avoid this rate is to pay off the balance. A person with a large balance cannot do this, so the card company makes some fat cash. Example:
Lets say you owe $10,000 on a CC and the interest is 12%. Your payment is $200, with $100 of that as interest. Then, you get in a billing dispute with your cell phone carrier over an early termination fee, and you refuse to pay it. The cell carrier sends you to collections. You credit card company sees this on your credit report, and you are increased to the default rate of 29%.
That means that your interest is now about $240 each month, and your payment is now $340 per month. You manage it for 3 months before being late. You are charged a $50 late fee. You manage to pay late for 4 more months, before catching up. You pay on time for 4 months, then fall behind over the next six, paying when you can, before defaulting.
In that time, you pay $6120 to the bank. Your new balance is $9,600, and over the 18 months you were being charged the higher interest rate, you paid $5,720 in fees and interest and $400 towards your balance. The bank sells your account to a junk debt buyer for 10% of the balance after you have been delinquent for six months, and writes off the remaining 90% of the balance (they still charge interest and fees while you are in default)- $10,038.
So to sum it up: You pay the bank $6,120, the junk debt buyer pays $1,003, and the federal government gives the bank a $2,500 reduction in taxes because the bank shows a paper loss of $10,038 even though they were paid $9,620. You still owe the $10,000 original loan, and then some. All of this over a year and a half. Every month they can get you to pay beyond that year and a half nets the bank another $380 or so in profit, and does not really reduce your balance. The longer they can keep you out of bankruptcy, the more they make. That is why the banks all fund the "non-profit" credit counseling organizations- to keep you out of bankruptcy for as long as possible.
People should honor their contractual obligations, but contracts are binding on both parties, not just to the benefit of one. Interest changes that apply to balances already charged, as well as "universal default" should not be allowed. After all, would you stand for your bank changing the interest on your car to 30% because of a problem that is totally unrelated to the loan?