kfrankie

Who is Julie Donaldson and what qualifies her to be the lead voice in the booth? I know she's the head of media there, but did she just hire herself? Is she going to be the Don Meredith or the Frank Gifford of the booth?

I thought the taking if drafts picks was a sanction used only when the offense affected the competitive balance of the game, like the things that Belichek routinely seems to "accidentally" do. Like the penalty must fit the crime. Along those lines, the NFL should have the 15 women (assuming they're not lying/exaggerating their claims) sit in Dan's office at Redskins park while eating shrimp ****tails and sipping on 25 year scotch, while Dan's in the kitchen down the hallway repeatedly being kicked in the nuts by Mark Mosley. Toe syle. They won't have any idea it's happening either.

I believe JKC divorced an ex-wife because she told him she was on birth control, but still got pregnant. He tried to pressure her into getting an abortion, but she backed out at the last minute so he divorced her. He had also pressured her into having 2 prior abortions before they were married.

Who is Elle Duncan, and when did she work for the team?

While the article was certainly underwhelming considering all of the hype (FBI involvement, Epstein, Jay Gruden and Cocaine, sexual assaults, banging for story leads, fixing games, etc.) there definitely appears to be some people over there who simply don't understand how to behave in an office setting, particularly what is and is not appropriate behavior toward women. No woman should feel like they don't want to go to work because some dude has tried to look up their skirt, or keeps making unwanted advances, or makes comments about their body, etc. Unfortunately, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that what is/was happening at Redskins park is happening at team offices throughout the league, and there's a lot a 50-something men are going to be sweating their asses off for the next several months.

I always thought it was a bit weird to see a man in his 50s wearing a t-shirt with its sleeves cut off on a weekly Redskins television report. He must have thought he looked good enough to do that, but I have no idea why.

If the Post has concerns on its own end about the quality of reporting in the article, it should have dealt with those concerns prior to allowing the "leaks." If Snyder and Co. want to stop the publication, they would have to have a draft of the article themselves. It would be difficult to file a claim for a restraining order if you do not know what you are seeking to enjoin, and more importantly what you are going to ask the court to enjoin. You cannot ask a court to prevent the publication of all articles having to do with the Redskins, or Snyder, or Larry Michael (or the Redskins, Snyder, Larry Michael, cocaine, and prostitutes). My question would be: Does Snyder have a draft of the article?

So Epstein was helping Dan launder money as an FBI informant while Jay snorted coke off if the ass of Kapri Bibbs while Shaeffer pimped out the cheerleaders to international drug kingpins, who used underage child labor to farm poppy plants? This is all really bad.

Rape? I think it's murder. Or maybe gang rape.

Guys-. Who cares what Joe Yasheroff thinks. He not nearly as connected Rob Hinkleman.

RV parks are basically half the campsites now in MD. Some campgrounds don't even have trees

The problem with camping in MD is that there not enough tent sites. Everything these days is geared toward RV camping which isn't really camping.

So started binge watching Ozark last week. Almost done with season 2. Pretty engaging stuff so far. Specifically i like the story line with the Snells. I think they're getting ready to rain hell down on someone with all the **** they've taken thus far. On thing that's getting pretty annoying is the constant cycle of (1) Marty does something with someone else's money he shouldn't do (2) Marty is given a deadline to fix it, (3) someone dies because of what Marty did with someone's money, (4) Cartel or Snells get pissed because person was on their side, (5) Cartel or Snells kidnap Marty or Wendy, or someone they care about (6) Marty denies knowing anything about it (7) Marty pulls a rabbit out of his ass and things are resolved. Then cycle restarts. Enough with the damn deadline kidnappings. Edit: forgot to include (8) gay FBI guy throws a temper tantrum, swears revenge.

Well, in Trump's defense Canada was still part of the British Empire in 1812, so it really didn't exist yet, and in 1812 the British did burn the whitehou.... ahh **** it he's a complete moron.

I made a similar post about 2 weeks ago in the "re-opening the economy thread," and thought some in this thread would these figures interesting. This data listed in the below chart was taken from the figures reported on the Maryland Department of heath webpage, which i then used to create the chart. Note that there are deaths that are classified as "confirmed" as a result of Covid-19 (column A), and deaths that are classified as "Likely" resulting from Covid-19 (column B). To be conservative, I've included both classifications in the total number of deaths. In addition, there are an additional 105 confirmed and likely Covid-19 deaths where age information has not been reported. In order to take these deaths into consideration, I determined the percentage of all deaths (column F) for each of the age demographics. This calculation was performed by taking the total # of deaths from each age demographic in column D, divided it by the total # of age reported deaths (1146 + 92 = 1238), which provided a decimal which is converted to a pro rata percentage. The resulting pro rata % is then displayed in column F, which is used as a multiplier against the 79 unclassified deaths to arrive at a figure (Column E), to be added to the total deaths figure for each age demographic (column G). This calcucation for the assignment of the unclassified deaths assumes that the rates will remain the same for each demographic, which is the only reasonable way to do this. So the death figures in Column G include (1) confirmed deaths, (2) likely deaths, and (3) each demographic's pro rata share of the 79 "unreported age" deaths. As you can see (and as we all know), the resulting death rates, which are in Column H, increase with age. The rates go up substantially for each age demographic. However, age is the only variable included in this chart. What these figures do not tell us is whether the deceased individuals from these demographics suffered from comorbidity, i.e. one of the additional underlying health conditions commonly associated with death from the virus such as existing respiratory disease, coronary artery disease, immune deficiencies, diabetes, etc. For example, of 19.14 deaths (column G) resulting from the 4550 reported cases in the age 30-39 demographic, it is unclear how many of the 19.14 individuals had an underlying disease that contributed to their death. But it is likely that a number of those 19.14 individuals did have an underlying condition. Think of it this way-- out of the 4550 reported cases, there are certainly several individuals that had an existing respiratory disease, diabetes, or some sort of disease affecting their immune system. It stands to reason that a higher percentage of those people would die upon contracting Covid-19, therefore its likely that 1 or more of the 19.14 had one of the comorbidities commonly associated with death from Covid-19. However, if you do not have an underlying health condition, the death rate figures in Column H are likely lower. So the rate in column H represents the ceiling for an infected individual without an underlying condition. Said otherwise, this chart represents the highest possible mortality rate for a person in a particular age demographic that is not suffering from an underlying health condition because it also includes all individuals that did have an underlying health condition. For those that do have an underlying health condition, the death rates will obviously be higher than the percentage rates contained in Column H. So the upshot from this is up to you. Also note that any "unreported" cases of infection, which are those individuals that had Covid-19 and were asymptomatic or believed they simply had the flu or a bad cold, would only drive the death rate % figures in Column H lower. In fact, some reports indicate that the number of actual infections could be 2x, 3x, 5x, or 10x the reported "confirmed positive" figures. On the flip side, there could be some deaths resulting from Covid-19 that were not reported as "confirmed" or "likely" (i.e. "improperly classified" as another ailment) for whatever reason. But on the whole, the sheer number of "unreported" infections would more than cancel out any increase in the percentage rate of death resulting from the number of "improperly classified" deaths. After all, if you die of Covid-19 its going to be pretty obvious that you had some sort of respiratory symptoms prior to death, and all hospitals are hypersensitive about identifying Covid-19 cases among existing patients right now, so any reasonable medical professional should make that connection.

I don't think contact tracing will be the answer here. If the virus does not subside considerably by June 1, I think we need to consider selective quarantining. The more I think about it, the most critical thing we need to do is protect those individuals that have underlying health conditions from those in the general public that do not have a underlying health condition. That means quarantining individuals that most at risk that fall generally into these categories: (1) Over the age of 70; (2) Moderate to severe ashma (3) CPOD (4) Moderate to severe coronary artery disease (5) Diabetes (6) Immune system illnesses (7) Several other conditions/diseases that I don't have the time to list I'm confident that otherwise healthy individuals under the age of 50 have very little chance of dying after contracting Covid-19. After all, there reports coming out now that around 25% of those infected never show symptoms. https://foxbaltimore.com/news/coronavirus/new-research-suggests-many-people-have-had-covid-19-but-showed-no-symptoms This figure does not include those individuals that have mild symptoms (I have "the sniffles"), or those that have moderate symptoms (i had "the flu" back in February, even though i got a flu shot). At any rate, the professionals just need to keep doing what they can. One thing I see missing from the data is the percentage of infected that do not die, but suffer some sort of permanent lung damage. We've seen the anecdotal evidence of this, but I don't believe there's been any sort of effort to collect data and determine the risk. We need to see something reliable on this before opening things up. It's one thing to die, and its quite another to have to live for the next 25 years with 50% of your lung capacity.

I can tell you from my experience with my employer (I still go into the office due to falling under an exemption), many employees feel a good degree of comfort knowing that the company has a safety net provided by the payroll loan that was provided by the government. As a result, layoffs have been minimal, with only a couple of non-essential employees released and now eligible for unemployment and COBRA benefits. And those employees will be welcomed back once things fully re-open. I know that the knee jerk reaction is, when corporations receive bailout money, to wonder why those funds are not instead paid directly to employees by way of some sort of trust, and not directly to the corporation, to prevent corporate fat cats from hoarding the dough for themselves. But if that occurred, many corporations would be unable to pay their overhead expenses due to decreased revenues, and would be forced to make more substantial layoffs. So generally speaking, the revenue coming in can be applied to overhead expenses and the costs of services rendered/products supplied by upstream vendors and then sold downstream, and then the bailout money is used to fund any shortage in payroll. Its good to keep the upstream supplier paid, so that they can stay afloat, and its good for the corporation received the bailout money. So this should really be viewed as corporate bailout money at all. Supporting the small business directly has allowed many Americans to remain employed despite decreased production, and many people will also have jobs to return to assuming the economy can reopen without the next 3 months.

Here is a chart I prepared from the figures provided by Maryland's Department of Health through 4/23/2020: https://coronavirus.maryland.gov/ Note that there are deaths that are classified as "confirmed" as a result of Covid-19 (column A), and deaths that are classified as "Likely" resulting from Covid-19 (column B). To be conservative, I've included both classifications in the total number of deaths. In addition, there are an additional 105 confirmed and likely Covid-19 deaths where age information has not been reported. In order to take these deaths into consideration, I determined the percentage of all deaths (column F) for each of the age demographics. This calculation was performed by taking the total # of deaths from each age demographic in column D, divided it by the total # of age reported deaths (580 + 63 = 643), which provided a decimal which is converted to a pro rata percentage. The resulting pro rata % then displayed in column F, which is used as a multiplier against the 105 unclassified deaths to arrive at a figure (Column E), to be added to the total deaths figure for each age demographic (column G). This calucation for the assignment of the unclassifed deaths assumes that the rates will remain the same for each demographic, which is the only reasonable way to do this. So the death figures in Column G include (1) confirmed deaths, (2) likely deaths, and (3) each demographic's pro rata share of the 105 "unreported age" deaths. As you can see (and as we all know), the resulting death rates, which are in Column H, increase with age. The rates go up substantially starting with the age 60-69 demographic.However, age is the only variable included in this chart. What these figures do not tell us is whether the deceased individuals from these demographics suffered from comorbidity, i.e. one of the additional underlying health conditions commonly associated with death from the virus such as existing respiratory disease, coronary artery disease, immune deficiencies, diabetes, etc. For example, of 15.1 deaths (column G) resulting from the 2604 reported cases in the age 30-39 demographic, it is unclear how many of the 15.1 individuals had an underlying disease that contributed to their death. But it is likely that a number of those 15.1 individuals did have an underlying condition. Think of it this way-- out of the 2604 reported cases, there are certainly several individuals that had an existing respiratory disease, diabetes, or some sort of disease affecting their immune system. It stands to reason that a higher percentage of those people would die upon contracting Covid-19, therefore its likely that 1 or more of the 15.1 had a comorbidity. However, if you do not have an underlying health condition, the death rate figures in Column H are likely much lower. Column H represents the ceiling. Said otherwise, this chart represents the highest possible mortality rate for a person in a particular age demographic that is not suffering from an underlying health condition. For those that do have an underlying health condition, the death rates will obviously be higher than the percentage rates contained in Column H. So the upshot from this is up to you, as far as whether the risk of infection, based on Maryland's reporting, exceeds the risk associated with staying sheltered in place. Also note that any "unreported" cases of infection, which are presumably those individuals that had Covid-19 and were asymptomatic or believed they simply had the flu or a bad cold, would only drive the death rate % figures in Column H lower. In fact, some reports indicated that the number of actual infections could be 2x, 3x, 5x, or 10x the reported figures. On the flip side, there could be some deaths resulting from Covid-19 that were not reported as "confirmed" or "likely" (i.e. "improperly classified" as another ailment) for whatever reason. But on the whole, the sheer number of likely "unreported" infections would more than cancel out any increase in the percentage rate of death resulting from "improperly classified" deaths. After all, if you die of Covid-19 its going to be pretty obvious that you had some sort of respiratory symptoms prior to death, so any reasonable medical professional should make that connection. But what the hell do I know.

I'd be willing to bet that 20-30% of the workforce in Maryland it's still going into their employment office because they fall under one of the exempted categories in the governor's order. I'd also be willing to bet that another 30 to 40% are working in some manner from home. It's the people who cannot work that are suffering the most, so it would be best for us to get our asses in gear, figure out who has contracted the disease, and put those people back to work. If it has to happen gradually then that's better than simply telling them to sit at home when their personal risk of infection is minimal and there are services in demand which are not currently available.

Right. But what about antibody testing? If you have the antibodies, that means you had the virus. I have not heard when this test will be widely available. But if you test positive, perhaps you can get some sort of certification that allows you to work and move around without restriction. If you believe reports, the number of people who have contracted the virus whether knowingly or unknowingly is perhaps 10 times higher than the number who have been tested for the virus and come back positive. So there's likely tens of thousands of people in the state of Maryland who are quarantining themselves unnecessarily because they've had the virus but don't realize it because they were asymptomatic. Those people should be encouraged to return to work immediately.

So we have a Covid-19 thread, which focuses on the virus itself and any efforts to test, develop vaccines, and track virus. We also have a quarantine thread, where people discuss how they are handling their personal situations and how their communities are dealing with the stay-at-home orders. However, duscussions regarding how we would re-open the economy in a responsible, feasible, and practical manner seem to be mixed into these threads, so here's one dedicated to this specific topic. Generally, to "re-open" the economy of any state, I believe the following broad requirements/policies should be in place. I'll use Maryland as a template. 1. We need detailed data on the characteristics of each of the 630 people who have died after contracting covid-19, particularly the age of each individual, whether the individual had a particular type of underlying health condition, and their sex, race, and other demographic information. 2. We also need to determine what percentage of the individuals who have contracted covid-19, but have not died, have suffered some sort of long-term or what you might call permanent damage to their lung tissue. The same demographic data should be taken for these individuals as well. 3. Once we have determined what the largest risk factors are (Obviously both age and underlying health condition which overlap substantially), we need to perform a different analysis to identify what the risk is of death or serious permanent disability for those who do not fall into the high risk groups identified in #1 and #2 above. I suspect that otherwise healthy individuals under the age of perhaps 60 years old will have a risk of death somewhere between .1 and .5%. It would also be useful, for example, to determine whether individuals between the age of 70 and 80 who have no specific underlying health risks are more prone to death or disability simply as a result of what you might call age-related weakness or infirmity. My guess is yes, but we need to know the extent these secondary factors play a role. 4. Those that have been identified as being high risk of suffering death or permanent disability should remain in quarantine. In addition, to the extent that those individuals were working prior to quarantine, they should be the ones receiving the most economic aid in exchange for being forced to remain sheltered in their residences. Employers should be encouraged to shift job tasks that can be performed remotely to those individuals. The quarantine of this group should be strictly enforced. 5. For the remaining individuals that do not fall into the high-risk groups, those individuals should be encouraged to go back out to their jobs and attempt to live a normal life. However, before doing so as many as possible (or all) should be tested for the covid-19 antibodies. Those who test positive for the antibodies should have no restrictions on their lifestyles, how and where they work, etc. Those that do not test positive for the antibodies should still be required to take standard precautions, for example wearing face masks social distancing, and other common sense measures that are in place now to reduce the chance that they contract the disease. 6. Individuals who are released into the workforce should be tested on a regular basis for antibodies. In addition to continuing testing for covid-19 symptomatic individuals, all these numbers should obviously be tracked. 7. Once the numbers demonstrate that the incidence of infection has decreased to a certain threshold (as determined by an established board of medical professionals) those who are required to remain in quarantine should also be released into the economy. It would certainly make sense to even have sub-classes of these individuals based on their underlying health risks. For instance, somebody who has asthma may fall into category #5 while someone who has emphysema or chronic heart disease would be a category #1. Category #5 would be released from quarantine first with the higher risk groups being released based on certain infection benchmarks that are achieved and publicly disclosed. 8. Once a high-risk individual is released back into the economy, they should have the right to go back to work with their former employer for the same salary and under the same conditions as prior to being forced into quarantine. If the employer cannot afford to rehire or retain the employee for a bona fide business reason, that person should get additional financial assistance until they can obtain alternative employment. I realize this will be much more complicated than it appears, as many employers will simply go out of business or will be struggling, so force "rehiring" is diificult. Perhaps the business gets assistance for a period of time after doing a rehire. 9. While in quarantine, all high-risk individuals should be given some sort of periodic test to determine whether they have covid-19, etc so we can continue to monitor their status and obtain as much information as possible regarding the nuances of the disease and what demographics it tends to harm the most. These are simply some broad suggestions to consider for the near future. The bottom line for me is that if I have a .1% chance of dying after contracting this disease I would rather go into the workforce, keep the economy going, keep my family supported, and prevent a devastating economic collapse which would harm everyone, rich, poor middle class. I view it as a duty as a healthy young person to do my part, I would hope that those who are forced into quarantine because of their own personal risk conditions would also view it as a duty to remain in quarantine. Those individuals should be compensated and work remotely to the extent possible, and given every opportunity to re-enter the workforce once we have substantially reduced incidence of the disease, we have a vaccine, or we have a viable treatment option for covid-19.

So I know this isn't a civil war thread, but explain to me how that would work logistically? Would like, half the army fight for the blue and half for the red? Would it go base by base, with the bases in red States fighting for red, blue bases for blue? Branch by branch? Civilians vs. Military? Would Hogan square off against Cuomo? Does anyone here realize how much our military has changed since 1860? I know it's a fantasy for some of you, but reality is that there will not be a civil war because it would be impossible to divide our armed forces. Practically speaking too, the idealigies are no longer aligned as strictly along geographical lines. For the radical guys in this thread, ask yourself this: Would you be willing to drive a tank down Peachtree Street in Atlanta, heart of the south? Gonna have to kill a lot of very successful black people if you do that. Now, a war with one of these bad foreign actors (nk, Iran), I can see that possibility. Seems like a good time to test the resolve of our nation.

From reading that article it's appears that the demand for testing based on the current criteria for receiving a test has diminished, which accounts for fewer tests being done. Sounds like capacity is closer to where it should be now (they say the backlog is clear and labs are now waiting to receive tests to analyze), so it's time to loosen the standards to allow more people to be tested. Things are moving in the right direction.

Then was it illegal for the dreaded GOP to acquit him? Or was it just immoral?