Mr. Michael Grady's Blog

By David Nicklaus ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH Tuesday, Nov. 04 2008 You'd think the big shots on Wall Street would be sensible, and sensitive,
enough to forgo big bonuses while taxpayers are bailing out their banks.

But, of course, you'd think wrong.

Merrill Lynch, which essentially was forced to merge with Bank of America, has
set aside $6.7 billion to pay bonuses.

Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, each of which accepted $10 billion from the
U.S. Treasury, have allocated similar amounts.

The bonuses haven't yet been paid, and the companies still may slash them.

Meanwhile, the mere fact that they're still being considered is drawing
criticism from influential members of Congress.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., has called for a moratorium on bank bonuses, and
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., is threatening to subpoena Wall Street payroll
records.

Andrew Cuomo, the New York attorney general, is launching his own investigation
of bonus practices.

All of that would be unnecessary if Wall Street's bosses didn't have such a
political tin ear. A bonus, after all, is not an entitlement. It's supposed to
be a reward for a good year, and 2008 is Wall Street's worst year in at least
three decades.

The firms say they're concerned about losing talent, but defections wouldn't be
an issue if everybody in the industry declared this a no-bonus year.

You could be forgiven for thinking that bonuses would be illegal once the big
banks accepted government aid.

During the debate over the $700 billion bailout package, Frank and others
insisted on banning excessive pay. As it turns out, "excessive" is a hard word
to define.

The legislation, for instance, says compensation plans must not encourage
excessive risk-taking. Each bank's board, though, gets to decide whether it is
in compliance.

Other parts of the legislation are equally toothless. A ban on golden
parachutes, for example, applies only to severance packages that are more than
three times an executive's annual salary and bonus. That limit already is part
of the tax code, so most companies took it into effect when writing their
severance packages.

National City Bank, for example, is being taken over by PNC Financial with the
help of $7.7 billion from the Treasury. Indirectly, that taxpayer money may
help fund an estimated $41 million in exit packages for National City's three
top executives.

Several local bankers told me that the bailout law's pay limits probably won't
discourage them from seeking Treasury money, if they decide they can put the
funds to good use. However, the political uproar over bonuses has some bankers
concerned.

Edward Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association, has asked
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to clarify the purpose of the bailout and any
restrictions that go along with it.

"Restrictions on compensation would be impossible to administer across banks of
all sizes and types and would cost the participating banks good employees in a
competitive employment market," he wrote last week in a letter to Paulson.

Strict limits on pay or dividends, or requirements to make certain types of
loans, would have "a devastating impact" on banks, Yingling said. Those, of
course, are exactly the types of measures that Frank, Waxman and other
politicians are proposing.

As written, the bailout plan stands a chance of preserving banks and getting
credit flowing throughout our economy.

A more punitive plan wouldn't work nearly as well. However, if Wall Street's
tycoons don't show a little penitence and humility at year-end bonus time, a
more punitive plan is what they're likely to get.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/emaf.nsf/Popup?ReadFo
rm&db=stltoday%5Cbusiness%5Ccolumnists.nsf&docid=B5F75A
62CBA92ACA862574F7000D52D8

By NEIL A. LEWIS and DAVID STOUT Published: October 28, 2008

WASHINGTON — Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska was under intense pressure on Tuesday to end his decades-long political career and step aside because of a jury’s finding that he violated federal ethics laws by failing to report tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and services he had received from friends.

His fellow Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona called for him to resign his seat, saying, “I hope that my colleagues in the Senate will be spurred by these events to redouble their efforts to end this kind of corruption once and for all.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/us/politics/29ste
vens.html?hp

 

10.24.2008 9:50 am Palin reported to give deposition here, before dropping puck By Jo Mannies

• Email this
• Share this
• Print this

Digg Yahoo! Del.icio.us Facebook Reddit Drudge Google Fark Stumble It!

News accounts, including on CNN, report that Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin will be doing more than dropping the puck during her visit to St. Louis later today.

Various sources (including some partisan ones) say that the Alaska governor also will be deposed by lawyers in connection with the “Troopergate” controversy, which centers on allegations that she and her husband had tried to use her clout to get her ex-brother-in-law fired as an Alaska state trooper.

St. Louis sources say the deposition will taken in Palin’s hotel room here. (For security and news reasons, we are NOT disclosing where she is staying.)

The regional spokesman for the McCain-Palin campaign declined comment yesterday on the matter.

According to MSNBC’s First Read, Palin is to be deposed “by the independent investigator working for the Alaska personnel board. The interview will be under oath.”

Todd Palin is to be deposed separately.

Her personal attorney, Thomas Van Flein, was traveling on the campaign plane Thursday, according to news reports.

UPDATE — At the moment, Palin is in Springfield preparing for what is expected to be a huge rally of supporters. Here’s from the Associated Press:

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (AP) — Dozens of people bundle up to wait almost nine hours to get a good spot to see GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin at a campaign rally in Springfield.
 
The Alaska governor is scheduled to begin her speech at noon Friday at a rally in the parking lot of Bass Pro Outdoor World. Some spectators braved a stiff wind and chilly air to arrive by 3:30 a.m., long before gates opened at 9 a.m.
 
The event was initially scheduled for an arena at Missouri State University. But after all 4,000 tickets were snapped up within 90 minutes Wednesday, the Republican Party moved the event to Bass Pro’s massive parking area to accommodate a larger crowd.
 
Speeches in advance of Palin’s address are set to begin at 11 a.m.

http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/political-fix/politic
al-fix/2008/10/palin-reported-to-give-deposition-here-b
efore-dropping-puck/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect

The Bhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effectradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect,[1][2] is a proposed explanation for observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other.[3][4][5] Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor's race despite being ahead in some voter polls, the Bradley effect refers to an alleged tendency on the part of some voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a black candidate, and yet, on election day, vote for his/her white opponent.

The theory of the Bradley effect is that the inaccurate polls have been skewed by the phenomenon of social desirability bias.[6][7] Specifically, some white voters give inaccurate polling responses for fear that, by stating their true preference, they will open themselves to criticism of racial motivation. The reluctance to give accurate polling answers has sometimes extended to post-election exit polls as well. The race of the pollster conducting the interview may factor in to voters' answers.

Some analysts have dismissed the theory of the Bradley effect as "baseless",[8] while others argue that it may have existed in past elections, but not in more recent ones. One analysis of 133 senate and gubernatorial elections between 1989 and 2006 suggests that "before 1996, the median gap for black candidates was 3.1 percentage points, while for subsequent years it was -0.3 percentage points."[9]

Similar effects have been posited in other contexts, notably the Shy Tory Factor and spiral of silence.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/13/obama.bradle
y.effect/index.html

(CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama has a sizable lead over Sen. John McCain, polls show, but those numbers could be deceiving if the "Bradley effect" comes into play.

Polls show that Sen. Barack Obama has a sizable lead over Sen. John McCain.

The Bradley effect is named after former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who ran for California governor in 1982.

Exit polls showed Bradley leading by a wide margin, and the Democrat thought it would be an early election night.

But Bradley and the polls were wrong. He lost to Republican George Deukmejian.

The theory was that polling was wrong because some voters, who did not want to appear bigoted, said they voted for Bradley even though they did not.

"People will usually tell you how they voted after the election, but we found in the Bradley campaign ... that people were actually not telling us who they voted for," said Charles Henry, who researched Bradley's election.

The Bradley effect is also called the "Wilder effect," after Douglas Wilder, Virginia's former governor. He won by just one-tenth of a percent, but as he pointed out to CNN, "people forget -- in the exit polls, I was still double-digits ahead."

Imagine, if you would, our nation without any taxes whatsoever! No income taxes, no Social Security taxes, no Medicare Taxes, no Estate taxes, no Sales taxes, no Personal Property taxes, no Real Estate taxes, no Excise taxes, no Capital Gains taxes, NO TAXES whatsoever!

 

Now, imagine, I you would, the cuts in Public Services because of the lack of taxes. There would be no POLICE, FIRE or EMS Services. There would be no street cleanings. No libraries, no Public Schools, no bridge maintenance, no road construction, no military protection, no public parks, no museums, no nothing!

 

Taxes may be something we despise and grumble about when we pay it, but it is a NECESSARY EVIL for our nation!

The news that retired Gen. Colin Powell will appear this Sunday on "Meet the Press" has set off a frenzy of speculation that former secretary of State could throw his endorsement to Barack Obama.

Powell has made little secret of his admiration for the Illinois senator in the past but has always stopped short of outright endorsing him.

Will that change on Sunday? And, if it does, how much is Powell's endorsement really worth?

Seen through the prism of our handy-dandy endorsement hierarchy, Powell's endorsement of Obama would qualify as the highest powered of all endorsements: a symbolic one.

Here's several reasons why a Powell endorsement could matter:

1. Turnabout is Fair Play. Powell is best known for his most recent job in government -- as the secretary of State for President George W. Bush. The idea that a high-ranking cabinet official in a Republican administration would come out for the Democrat is simply too juicy a story for the media to ignore. That it would be someone as high profile as Powell would only add to the titillation.

2. The Most Popular Man in America? Powell, unlike almost no other official with ties to the Bush Administration, has retained remarkable popularity ratings. In an August Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, more than three-quarters (76 percent) of voters viewed Powell favorably while just 13 percent saw him in an unfavorable light. A large part of Powell's appeal is his perceived bipartisanship -- a direct result of his decision to repeatedly turn down overtures to run for president in his own right. For a certain (not insubstantial) portion of the electorate, when Powell speaks, they listen. The Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll reinforces that fact; more than one in three voters said a Powell endorsement of Obama would make them more likely to vote for the Democrat. (Hat tip to Jon "The Numbers Man" Cohen for the polling data.)

3. Iraq, All Wrong. Powell, thanks to his immense popularity, was the Bush Administration's choice to make the case in front of the United Nations for the invasion of Iraq. Powell has since called that incident a "blot" on his record, and made clear his disappointment with the prosecution of the war. An endorsement of Obama, who built his candidacy on his early opposition to the conflict, would mark a clean break with the Bush Administration on the war and would add significant heft to Obama's argument that he alone possesses the judgment to lead the U.S. in a dangerous world.

4. The Final Straw. With polling -- both in the key battleground states and nationally -- showing that voters trust Obama more than John McCain to handle the current economic morass, one of McCain's last hopes is that the the election turns back somehow to a foreign policy focus. If Powell does endorse Obama, it would shore up the Illinois senator even if that eventuality occurred; it would be hard for McCain to slam Obama's approach on the war if the Democrat had a Powell endorsement sitting in his back pocket.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/10/why_th
e_powell_endorsement_cou.html?hpid=topnews

By Binyamin Appelbaum and David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, October 17, 2008; 2:58 PM

 

Banking regulators are working today to resolve accounting roadblocks that would hold up the government's plan to revive financial markets by investing $250 billion in the nation's banks.

The problem is this: Under existing rules, banks cannot count the Treasury Department's investment as part of their core capital, the foundation of money that supports a bank's operations. The very goal of the plan was to buttress those foundations, which have been eroded by recent losses, undermining the stability of the banks.

The Treasury's initial investment in nine of the largest banks cannot go forward until the accounting issues are resolved, people familiar with the matter said. Regulators are now working to figure out how to change existing rules to accommodate the program, the latest in a string of ad hoc measures to address the financial crisis.

Yesterday, the Federal Reserve issued a rule, effective today, that suspends its long-standing objections to counting such an investment toward core capital. But other regulators have yet to act.

A Treasury spokeswoman declined to comment on what she described as a regulatory matter. The Treasury has not yet made the investments but said it could do so within days.

Treasury announced Tuesday it would invest $125 billion in the nine banks and an additional $125 billion in the rest of the banking industry. In exchange, the banks would give the government an unusual kind of stock called perpetual preferred shares. Holders of these shares are excluded from shareholder votes on company business, but they receive annual interest payments and their shares have priority in the event of a bankruptcy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/articl
e/2008/10/17/AR2008101701505_pf.html

Levi Stubbs, 72; Lead Singer of Four Tops

By Adam Bernstein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 17, 2008; 3:52 PM

 

Levi Stubbs, 72, the rough-but-soulful lead singer of the Four Tops, which became one of the harmonically dazzling Motown vocal groups of the 1960s with songs such as "Bernadette," "I Can't Help Myself" (Sugar Pie Honey Bunch) and "Baby I Need Your Loving," died today at his home in Detroit. He had complications from a stroke in 2000.

Few singing groups maintained the quality, popularity and constancy in personnel of the Four Tops, which formed in 1953. They signed with Motown Records a decade later, sold tens of millions of records and generated 19 Top 40 singles from 1964 through the early 1980s.

The original members -- thebaritone Mr. Stubbs, first tenor Abdul "Duke" Fakir, second tenor Lawrence Payton and baritone Renaldo "Obie" Benson -- continued to perform together until Payton's death in 1997. Afterward, they sang as "The Tops."

As one of the most formidable groups after the Temptations, another Motown hit machine, the Four Tops were responsible for setting "a high standard for contemporary soul in the mid-Sixties," according to their 1990 induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum.

The citation singled out Mr. Stubbs for his "bold, dramatic readings" of some of the finest compositions by the Motown songwriting-production team of Brian Holland, Lamont Dozier and Eddie Holland.

Popular favorites such as "It's the Same Old Song," "Reach Out, I'll Be There," and "Standing in the Shadows of Love" propelled the band into the front rank of American music for years. Afterward, they scored chart-topping hits with "Ain't No Woman (Like the One I Got)" and "When She Was My Girl.".

Critics noted their talent and appeal were undiminished over the years. They made hundreds of concert dates annually, often with the Temptations. A New Yorker reporter attending a Four Tops performance in 1993 wrote its performance was "less of an oldies show than a master class in the golden age of Motor City soul."

Levi Stubbles II was born June 6, 1936, in Detroit, and he was one of eight children born to a foundry worker and a housewife.

In the early 1950s, Levi Stubbs and other local high school students formed their group at a birthday party. Their path into the music business was smoothed by Mr. Stubbs's cousin, singer Jackie Wilson. In addition, one of Mr. Stubbs's brothers, Joe, sang with the Contours and the Falcons.

In selecting a name, the new band shunned the bird-group trend -- Falcons, Orioles, Flamingos -- because, he told The Washington Post, "That sounds great at 14, 15, 16 years old, but at 35, somebody calls you the Cuckoos, it just doesn't work."

As the Four Tops, the group sang in nightclubs, cut several flop records and toured with a revue without any particular notice until Motown founder Berry Gordy Jr. signed them to his subsidiary label Workshop in 1963 for a $400 advance.

By this point, the group's signature harmonies and synchronized dance steps were polished, but the missing ingredient was music and arrangements.

The Holland-Dozier-Holland team, which admired the Four Tops's club act, correctly thought their "Baby I Need Your Loving," would provide the breakthrough. Recording in 1964, the song reached No. 11 on the pop charts.

The Four Tops achieved its first No. 1 hit the next year with "I Can't Help Myself," after which Gordy sent them on a European concert tour. The Holland-Dozier-Holland left Motown in 1967 after clashing with Gordy over royalties, but the Four Tops continued to record popular cover versions of other songs, including folk musician Tim Hardin's "If I Were a Carpenter."

The Four Tops collaborated on albums with the Supremes and continued its affiliation with Motown until Gordy moved the company to Los Angeles in 1972. The group solidified its post-Motown fame with "Ain't No Woman (Like the One I've Got)," a No. 4 hit in 1973.

Unlike other Motown artists, Mr. Stubbs never spoke bitterly about the company in later years. "Motown just had so many big-time artists there it was virtually impossible to have them all serviced," he told The Post in 1987. "As far as I'm concerned, Motown was the greatest thing that happened to 99 percent of the people that were ever involved with it, simply because it was an outlet that you never would have possibly had otherwise."

Mr. Stubbs last performed in 2000, and Benson died in 2005. Fakir, the only surviving original member, continues to lead a version of the Tops and includes Payton's son Roquel, former Temptations member Theo Peoples, and Ronnie McNeir.

In 1960, Mr. Stubbs married dancer Clineice Townsend, who survives along with five children; three sisters; 11 grandchildren; and 10 great-grandchildren.

Apart from the Four Tops, Mr. Stubbs played the man-eating plant Audrey II in the 1986 version of "Little Shop of Horrors" and sang "Feed Me (Git It)," "Suppertime" and "Mean Green Mother From Outer Space."

He told People magazine that director Frank Oz gave him the best insight into the role. "He said the plant starts out sorta sweet and kind, then gets sly and devious and mean," Mr. Stubbs said. "I thought about it, some. In the music business you have quite a few people like that, so I put those people in my mind."

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/articl
e/2008/10/17/AR2008101702011_pf.html

HIV and Its Transmission View PDF | En español July 1999

Research has revealed a great deal of valuable medical, scientific, and public health information about the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). The ways in which HIV can be transmitted have been clearly identified. Unfortunately, false information or statements that are not supported by scientific findings continue to be shared widely through the Internet or popular press. Therefore, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has prepared this fact sheet to correct a few misperceptions about HIV.

How HIV is Transmitted

HIV is spread by sexual contact with an infected person, by sharing needles and/or syringes (primarily for drug injection) with someone who is infected, or, less commonly (and now very rarely in countries where blood is screened for HIV antibodies), through transfusions of infected blood or blood clotting factors. Babies born to HIV-infected women may become infected before or during birth or through breast-feeding after birth.

In the health care setting, workers have been infected with HIV after being stuck with needles containing HIV-infected blood or, less frequently, after infected blood gets into a worker’s open cut or a mucous membrane (for example, the eyes or inside of the nose). There has been only one instance of patients being infected by a health care worker in the United States; this involved HIV transmission from one infected dentist to six patients. Investigations have been completed involving more than 22,000 patients of 63 HIV-infected physicians, surgeons, and dentists, and no other cases of this type of transmission have been identified in the United States.

Some people fear that HIV might be transmitted in other ways; however, no scientific evidence to support any of these fears has been found. If HIV were being transmitted through other routes (such as through air, water, or insects), the pattern of reported AIDS cases would be much different from what has been observed. For example, if mosquitoes could transmit HIV infection, many more young children and preadolescents would have been diagnosed with AIDS.

All reported cases suggesting new or potentially unknown routes of transmission are thoroughly investigated by state and local health departments with the assistance, guidance, and laboratory support from CDC. No additional routes of transmission have been recorded, despite a national sentinel system designed to detect just such an occurrence.

The following paragraphs specifically address some of the common misperceptions about HIV transmission.

HIV in the Environment

Scientists and medical authorities agree that HIV does not survive well in the environment, making the possibility of environmental transmission remote. HIV is found in varying concentrations or amounts in blood, semen, vaginal fluid, breast milk, saliva, and tears. (See page 3, Saliva, Tears, and Sweat.) To obtain data on the survival of HIV, laboratory studies have required the use of artificially high concentrations of laboratory-grown virus. Although these unnatural concentrations of HIV can be kept alive for days or even weeks under precisely controlled and limited laboratory conditions, CDC studies have shown that drying of even these high concentrations of HIV reduces the amount of infectious virus by 90 to 99 percent within several hours. Since the HIV concentrations used in laboratory studies are much higher than those actually found in blood or other specimens, drying of HIV-infected human blood or other body fluids reduces the theoretical risk of environmental transmission to that which has been observed--essentially zero. Incorrect interpretation of conclusions drawn from laboratory studies have unnecessarily alarmed some people.

Results from laboratory studies should not be used to assess specific personal risk of infection because (1) the amount of virus studied is not found in human specimens or elsewhere in nature, and (2) no one has been identified as infected with HIV due to contact with an environmental surface. Additionally, HIV is unable to reproduce outside its living host (unlike many bacteria or fungi, which may do so under suitable conditions), except under laboratory conditions, therefore, it does not spread or maintain infectiousness outside its host.

Households

Although HIV has been transmitted between family members in a household setting, this type of transmission is very rare. These transmissions are believed to have resulted from contact between skin or mucous membranes and infected blood. To prevent even such rare occurrences, precautions, as described in previously published guidelines, should be taken in all settings "including the home" to prevent exposures to the blood of persons who are HIV infected, at risk for HIV infection, or whose infection and risk status are unknown. For example,

• Gloves should be worn during contact with blood or other body fluids that could possibly contain visible blood, such as urine, feces, or vomit.
• Cuts, sores, or breaks on both the care giver’s and patient’s exposed skin should be covered with bandages.
• Hands and other parts of the body should be washed immediately after contact with blood or other body fluids, and surfaces soiled with blood should be disinfected appropriately.
• Practices that increase the likelihood of blood contact, such as sharing of razors and toothbrushes, should be avoided.
• Needles and other sharp instruments should be used only when medically necessary and handled according to recommendations for health-care settings. (Do not put caps back on needles by hand or remove needles from syringes. Dispose of needles in puncture-proof containers out of the reach of children and visitors.)

 

Businesses and Other Settings

There is no known risk of HIV transmission to co-workers, clients, or consumers from contact in industries such as food-service establishments (see information on survival of HIV in the environment). Food-service workers known to be infected with HIV need not be restricted from work unless they have other infections or illnesses (such as diarrhea or hepatitis A) for which any food-service worker, regardless of HIV infection status, should be restricted. CDC recommends that all food-service workers follow recommended standards and practices of good personal hygiene and food sanitation.

In 1985, CDC issued routine precautions that all personal-service workers (such as hairdressers, barbers, cosmetologists, and massage therapists) should follow, even though there is no evidence of transmission from a personal-service worker to a client or vice versa. Instruments that are intended to penetrate the skin (such as tattooing and acupuncture needles, ear piercing devices) should be used once and disposed of or thoroughly cleaned and sterilized. Instruments not intended to penetrate the skin but which may become contaminated with blood (for example, razors) should be used for only one client and disposed of or thoroughly cleaned and disinfected after each use. Personal-service workers can use the same cleaning procedures that are recommended for health care institutions.

CDC knows of no instances of HIV transmission through tattooing or body piercing, although hepatitis B virus has been transmitted during some of these practices. One case of HIV transmission from acupuncture has been documented. Body piercing (other than ear piercing) is relatively new in the United States, and the medical complications for body piercing appear to be greater than for tattoos. Healing of piercings generally will take weeks, and sometimes even months, and the pierced tissue could conceivably be abraded (torn or cut) or inflamed even after healing. Therefore, a theoretical HIV transmission risk does exist if the unhealed or abraded tissues come into contact with an infected person’s blood or other infectious body fluid. Additionally, HIV could be transmitted if instruments contaminated with blood are not sterilized or disinfected between clients.

Kissing

Casual contact through closed-mouth or "social" kissing is not a risk for transmission of HIV. Because of the potential for contact with blood during "French" or open-mouth kissing, CDC recommends against engaging in this activity with a person known to be infected. However, the risk of acquiring HIV during open-mouth kissing is believed to be very low. CDC has investigated only one case of HIV infection that may be attributed to contact with blood during open-mouth kissing.

Biting

In 1997, CDC published findings from a state health department investigation of an incident that suggested blood-to-blood transmission of HIV by a human bite. There have been other reports in the medical literature in which HIV appeared to have been transmitted by a bite. Severe trauma with extensive tissue tearing and damage and presence of blood were reported in each of these instances. Biting is not a common way of transmitting HIV. In fact, there are numerous reports of bites that did not result in HIV infection.

Saliva, Tears, and Sweat

HIV has been found in saliva and tears in very low quantities from some AIDS patients. It is important to understand that finding a small amount of HIV in a body fluid does not necessarily mean that HIV can be transmitted by that body fluid. HIV has not been recovered from the sweat of HIV-infected persons. Contact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV.

Insects

From the onset of the HIV epidemic, there has been concern about transmission of the virus by biting and bloodsucking insects. However, studies conducted by researchers at CDC and elsewhere have shown no evidence of HIV transmission through insects--even in areas where there are many cases of AIDS and large populations of insects such as mosquitoes. Lack of such outbreaks, despite intense efforts to detect them, supports the conclusion that HIV is not transmitted by insects.

The results of experiments and observations of insect biting behavior indicate that when an insect bites a person, it does not inject its own or a previously bitten person’s or animal’s blood into the next person bitten. Rather, it injects saliva, which acts as a lubricant or anticoagulant so the insect can feed efficiently. Such diseases as yellow fever and malaria are transmitted through the saliva of specific species of mosquitoes. However, HIV lives for only a short time inside an insect and, unlike organisms that are transmitted via insect bites, HIV does not reproduce (and does not survive) in insects. Thus, even if the virus enters a mosquito or another sucking or biting insect, the insect does not become infected and cannot transmit HIV to the next human it feeds on or bites. HIV is not found in insect feces.

There is also no reason to fear that a biting or bloodsucking insect, such as a mosquito, could transmit HIV from one person to another through HIV-infected blood left on its mouth parts. Two factors serve to explain why this is so--first, infected people do not have constant, high levels of HIV in their bloodstreams and, second, insect mouth parts do not retain large amounts of blood on their surfaces. Further, scientists who study insects have determined that biting insects normally do not travel from one person to the next immediately after ingesting blood. Rather, they fly to a resting place to digest this blood meal.

Effectiveness of Condoms

Condoms are classified as medical devices and are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Condom manufacturers in the United States test each latex condom for defects, including holes, before it is packaged. The proper and consistent use of latex or polyurethane (a type of plastic) condoms when engaging in sexual intercourse--vaginal, anal, or oral--can greatly reduce a person’s risk of acquiring or transmitting sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV infection.

There are many different types and brands of condoms available--however, only latex or polyurethane condoms provide a highly effective mechanical barrier to HIV. In laboratories, viruses occasionally have been shown to pass through natural membrane ("skin" or lambskin) condoms, which may contain natural pores and are therefore not recommended for disease prevention (they are documented to be effective for contraception). Women may wish to consider using the female condom when a male condom cannot be used.

For condoms to provide maximum protection, they must be used consistently (every time) and correctly. Several studies of correct and consistent condom use clearly show that latex condom breakage rates in this country are less than 2 percent. Even when condoms do break, one study showed that more than half of such breaks occurred prior to ejaculation.

When condoms are used reliably, they have been shown to prevent pregnancy up to 98 percent of the time among couples using them as their only method of contraception. Similarly, numerous studies among sexually active people have demonstrated that a properly used latex condom provides a high degree of protection against a variety of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV infection.

For more detailed information about condoms, see the CDC publication "Male Latex Condoms and Sexually Transmitted Diseases."

CDC’s Response

CDC is committed to providing the scientific community and the public with accurate and objective information about HIV infection and AIDS. It is vital that clear information on HIV infection and AIDS be readily available to help prevent further transmission of the virus and to allay fears and prejudices caused by misinformation.

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/transmissi
on.htm

What are your expectations for the last debate between Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama?

What do you hope to see here?

What would change your vote and why?

Are these debates helpful or harmful to the cause?

October 11, 2008 Speaker at McCain rally says non-Christians want an Obama win Posted: 09:30 PM ET
From CNN Political Producer Tasha Diakides
A pastor at a McCain rally said non-Christians are hoping for an Obama win.

DAVENPORT, Iowa (CNN) – A minister delivering the invocation at John McCain’s rally in Davenport, Iowa Saturday told the crowd non-Christian religions around the world were praying for Barack Obama to win the U.S. presidential election.

“There are millions of people around this world praying to their god—whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah—that his opponent wins, for a variety of reasons. And Lord, I pray that you will guard your own reputation, because they’re going to think that their God is bigger than you, if that happens,” said Arnold Conrad, the former pastor of Grace Evangelical Free Church in Davenport.

The remark was made before McCain arrived at the rally but the Republican nominee's campaign quickly put out a statement distancing itself from the remarks.

“While we understand the important role that faith plays in informing the votes of Iowans, questions about the religious background of the candidates only serve to distract from the real questions in this race about Barack Obama's judgment, policies and readiness to lead as commander in chief,” said McCain campaign spokesperson Wendy Riemann.

This incident comes a day after a Minnesota voter asked Senator McCain if Barack Obama was an Arab at a town hall in Lakeville, Minnesota and just three days after Lehigh GOP County Chairman Bill Platt made a speech at a McCain rally in Pennsylvania where he refered to the Democrat nominee for president as Barack Hussein Obama.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/11/spe
aker-at-mccain-rally-says-non-christians-want-an-obama-
win/

Today's bounce of nearly 1000 points is due to what:

a. the Market's reaction to the US bailout and other nations' bailout plans.

b. the "sell-off" is complete, now people are going bargain shopping.

Op-Ed Columnist Fire the Campaign
By WILLIAM KRISTOL Published: October 12, 2008

It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign.

Skip to next paragraph

William Kristol

Go to Columnist Page » Related Times Topics: Presidential Election of 2008 Readers' Comments "McCain's problem isn't image, it's substance. His lack of leadership ability, his compete lack of backbone..."Jeffrey Ellis, Los Angeles

• Read Full Comment »

He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed.

He may be anyway. Bush is unpopular. The media is hostile. The financial meltdown has made things tougher. Maybe the situation is hopeless — and if it is, then nothing McCain or his campaign does matters.

But I’m not convinced by such claims of inevitability. McCain isn’t Bush. The media isn’t all-powerful. And the economic crisis still presents an opportunity to show leadership.

The 2008 campaign is now about something very big — both our future prosperity and our national security. Yet the McCain campaign has become smaller.

What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over. Shut down the rapid responses, end the frantic e-mails, bench the spinning surrogates, stop putting up new TV and Internet ads every minute. In fact, pull all the ads — they’re doing no good anyway. Use that money for televised town halls and half-hour addresses in prime time.

And let McCain go back to what he’s been good at in the past — running as a cheerful, open and accessible candidate. Palin should follow suit. The two of them are attractive and competent politicians. They’re happy warriors and good campaigners. Set them free.

Provide total media accessibility on their campaign planes and buses. Kick most of the aides off and send them out to swing states to work for the state coordinators on getting voters to the polls. Keep just a minimal staff to help organize the press conferences McCain and Palin should have at every stop and the TV interviews they should do at every location. Do town halls, do the Sunday TV shows, do talk radio — and invite Obama and Biden to join them in some of these venues, on the ground that more joint appearances might restore civility and substance to the contest.

The hope for McCain and Palin is that they still have pretty good favorable ratings from the voters. The American people have by no means turned decisively against them.

The bad news, of course, is that right now Obama’s approval/disapproval rating is better than McCain’s. Indeed, Obama’s is a bit higher than it was a month ago. That suggests the failure of the McCain campaign’s attacks on Obama.

So drop them.

Not because they’re illegitimate. I think many of them are reasonable. Obama’s relationship to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is, I believe, a legitimate issue. But McCain ruled it out of bounds, and he’s sticking to that. And for whatever reason — the public mood, campaign ineptness, McCain’s alternation between hesitancy and harshness, which reflects the fact that he’s uncomfortable in the attack role — the other attacks on Obama just aren’t working. There’s no reason to think they’re suddenly going to.

There are still enough doubts about Obama to allow McCain to win. But McCain needs to make his case, and do so as a serious but cheerful candidate for times that need a serious but upbeat leader.

McCain should stop unveiling gimmicky proposals every couple of days that pretend to deal with the financial crisis. He should tell the truth — we’re in uncharted waters, no one is certain what to do, and no one knows what the situation will be on Jan. 20, 2009. But what we do know is that we could use someone as president who’s shown in his career the kind of sound judgment and strong leadership we’ll need to make it through the crisis.

McCain can make the substantive case for his broadly centrist conservatism. He can explain that our enemies won’t take a vacation because the markets are down, and that it’s not unimportant that he’s ready to be commander in chief. He can remind voters that even in a recession, the president appoints federal judges — and that his judges won’t legislate from the bench.

And he can point out that there’s going to be a Democratic Congress. He can suggest that surely we’d prefer a president who would check that Congress where necessary and work with it where possible, instead of having an inexperienced Democratic president joined at the hip with an all-too-experienced Democratic Congress, leading us, unfettered and unchecked, back to 1970s-style liberalism.

At Wednesday night’s debate at Hofstra, McCain might want to volunteer a mild mea culpa about the extent to which the presidential race has degenerated into a shouting match. And then he can pledge to the voters that the last three weeks will feature a contest worthy of this moment in our history.

He’d enjoy it. And he might even win it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/opinion/13kristol
.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

The Rams finally won one (hopefully this will not be the only win this year!!!). The Tigers lost their first of this season (hopefully their only loss!).

The Economy is looking up!

The end of the election is nearing!

All is well in our world, right???

 

Eight StL firefighters hurt in crash Two St. Louis City Fire Engines collided at the intersection of Taylor Avenue and Martin Luther King while responding to a one-alarm fire a block away. All eight firefighters aboard the trucks were transported to the hospital. (Elie Gardner/P-D) ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 10/10/2008
ST. LOUIS -- Eight St. Louis firefighters were injured in the collision of two fire engines at Martin Luther King Drive and Taylor Avenue early this afternoon. 

All were taken to hospitals for examination. None were critically injured, said Fire Chief Dennis Jenkerson, who was at the crash.

The two fire engines were headed to a fire about 12:45 p.m. about a block from where the crash happened.

The engines were from Engine Co. 10 and another company.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/
stlouiscitycounty/story/02245D0AE36EA1C8862574DE00654F1
9?OpenDocument