Althouse: "Elizabeth Mort never imagined that the last thing she ate before giving birth to her daughter - a poppy seed bagel - would lead to the loss of her newborn..."

July 2, 2013

"Elizabeth Mort never imagined that the last thing she ate before giving birth to her daughter - a poppy seed bagel - would lead to the loss of her newborn..."

"... but that is exactly what happened after the Jameson Health System failed to account for the possibility that her positive urine drug screen was due to her ingestion of poppy seeds...."

156 comments:

Craig Howard said...: Seinfeld's Elaine lost out on a trip abroad for having eaten poppy seeds and failing her drug test. It was a funny, funny episode.

This is just chilling.; 7/2/13, 6:23 PM
Rob said...: Her daughter was a poppy seed bagel?; 7/2/13, 6:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Amazing that the few poppy seeds on one bagel could make a drug screen come up positive. What would've happened if she had eaten poppy seed cake? Especially the German Mohnkuchen, which has a massive amount of poppy seeds in the filling.; 7/2/13, 6:25 PM
Irene said...: Inga, I had the same thought.; 7/2/13, 6:30 PM
test said...: Why are hospitals drug screening without probable cause?; 7/2/13, 6:31 PM
rhhardin said...: Your canine teeth are specifically designed for crushing poppy seeds.; 7/2/13, 6:32 PM
edutcher said...: Good for her, but the State now feels it owns all children.

this never ends well.; 7/2/13, 6:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Yummmm, Irene I love those walnut and poppy seed rolls, I make them for Christmas every year.; 7/2/13, 6:36 PM
Icepick said...: Why are hospitals drug screening without probable cause?

Why is the government tracking your every movement and financial transaction without probable cause? Come on, Marshal, get with the program! There are no citizens anymore, only subjects to be crushed.; 7/2/13, 6:37 PM
Irene said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/2/13, 6:38 PM
Irene said...: We make them every year for Christmas, too. I dislike the poppy seed rolls; I prefer the ones filled with nuts. The texture of the poppy seed filling is unappealing to me.; 7/2/13, 6:38 PM
Revenant said...: This is a good illustration of something I've often said -- that nobody who supports the "war on drugs" can call himself a "small government conservative".; 7/2/13, 6:40 PM
Revenant said...: Why are hospitals drug screening without probable cause?

The hospital requires all expectant mothers to voluntarily submit to a drug test in order to identify infants at risk for drug withdrawl.; 7/2/13, 6:45 PM
MadisonMan said...: @Rob: LOL. My thought exactly.

I wonder who pays for the fine, except for everyone with increased health care costs.

Ideally, it comes out of the Hospital Administrator's salary, but I doubt that happened.; 7/2/13, 6:49 PM
MadisonMan said...: requires all expectant mothers to voluntarily

I appreciate your word choice.; 7/2/13, 6:50 PM
Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...: i"We hope that this case will encourage hospitals that routinely test pregnant women for drug use to reconsider that practice due to the harm that can result from false positives," said ACLU lawyer Sara Rose.

We hope this case encourages citizens to take back some of the powers they have loaned to Government.; 7/2/13, 6:57 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: The War on Drugs, with no unintended consequences, now showing everywhere thanks to authoritarian politicians.; 7/2/13, 7:09 PM
harrogate said...: All hail the "War on Drugs," in all its banal idiocy.; 7/2/13, 7:11 PM
n.n said...: Now the ACLU is concerned about "false positives". I am skeptical of their motives. They are not known to using a scalpel other than in cases which require "privacy".; 7/2/13, 7:15 PM
n.n said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/2/13, 7:17 PM
n.n said...: It's very simple. End the presumed guilty activism, and hold individuals accountable for the intended or "unintended" consequences of their actions.; 7/2/13, 7:18 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: What amazes me is how hard it is to get rid of these laws once they are on the books. The Rockefeller Drug Laws were unchanged until 2009 and remain draconian, in the home of Woodstock.; 7/2/13, 7:20 PM
Synova said...: Sometimes the ACLU does something right.

I wonder though (considering the experts around these parts) isn't a maternal urine test to look for drug use an illegal search and seizure? (And why just test women in the hospital to give birth? Why not test anyone who comes in for anything and then see if they have children who need to be rescued?)

I can choose not to take a job that requires them, generally, so if I'm tested it's with my consent. I had to do the Operation Golden Flow stuff in the Air Force without the option of quitting instead, but I had ultimately volunteered for that, too.; 7/2/13, 7:27 PM
Synova said...: "Why are hospitals drug screening without probable cause?"

Yeah, what Marshal said.

Why is child protection having to pay for being *wrong* in their conclusion instead of everyone being in trouble for violating Constitutional rights?; 7/2/13, 7:30 PM
Synova said...: And if it's not over-reach by the Hospital because they do have a medical need to know if medical services will be needed... it's certainly gross over-reach by child protection which has never had to have and never will (the way things go) any need whatsoever to show *cause*.

All other areas of our legal system require proof of some sort and a claim that has basis and is at least tentatively approved by a judge and then won in court. Unless it involves kidnapping children from their parents... which we somehow view differently, though I can't see how it's different at all in any way from kidnapping to the parents or children involved.; 7/2/13, 7:37 PM
Anonymous said...: "The War on Drugs, with no unintended consequences, now showing everywhere thanks to authoritarian politicians."

7/2/13, 7:09 PM

Ah yes, those untended consequences.....Where were the authoritarians when the War on Drugs was started?; 7/2/13, 7:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Trying to blow up abortion clinics maybe.; 7/2/13, 7:43 PM
Synova said...: They didn't arrest the mother because she tested positive... no one bothered to say she did anything illegal that they cared about at all...

Because COPS would have to follow sane rules (even if laws aren't sane) and have actual proof.

I don't think this is about War on Drugs... it's about Child Protection operating outside of the Constitution as their regular role.; 7/2/13, 7:44 PM
Synova said...: Not that I'm *for* the War on Drugs... I just think that this isn't that.; 7/2/13, 7:45 PM
n.n said...: The drug test is administered in the interest of protecting the sovereign rights of the evolving human life. The state has a constitutional mandate to provide equal protection to its citizens, especially to individuals incapable of expressing their will or defending their lives.; 7/2/13, 7:55 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Ah yes, those untended consequences.....Where were the authoritarians when the War on Drugs was started?

7/2/13, 7:40 PM

Inga: "Inga said...
Trying to blow up abortion clinics maybe"

7/2/13, 7:43 PM

Remember conservatives, profiling is wrong wrong wrong.

Fens Law.; 7/2/13, 7:59 PM
Douglas B. Levene said...: tar, feathers; 7/2/13, 8:00 PM
rcommal said...: Perhaps being "tagged" is a double-plus un-good thing, if and when the reference is incomplete and yet, nonetheless, is taken way too seriously and causes immediate overreaching action.

It's hard to imagine in what arena poor tagging could more literally and immediately dangerous than in terms of doctoring and insurances. Yeah, the whole IRS thing having to do with groups is really, really bad. That's right up there, true. But that ain't actually among the very worst of bullshit tagging; I only wish it was.; 7/2/13, 8:02 PM
Drago said...: Synova: "Not that I'm *for* the War on Drugs... I just think that this isn't that"

Of course this isn't that.

But the lefties saw an opening and wanted to twist this into something else.

The Hospital (and all health are providers) have to be aware of the chemical state of their patients in order to treat them properly as well as stave off lawsuits.

And we all know which party is supported by the lawsuit-happy trial lawyers.; 7/2/13, 8:02 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Synova said...
Not that I'm *for* the War on Drugs... I just think that this isn't that.

I get your point but think it is part of the same mentality.

One thing that has always impressed me is the rigid authoritarianism of anti-drug zealots. Numerous times I have been talking to apparently normal people and the conversation verges onto the topic of drugs and they suddenly become much stiffer and more judgemental.

Politicians pander to this instinct shamelessly.; 7/2/13, 8:03 PM
Drago said...: BTW, this type of scenario is why we used to laugh at the serving of poppy seed bagels and muffins on military installations.

Squadrons used to include warnings about them in our health briefings.

And I loved those poppy-seed muffins too.; 7/2/13, 8:04 PM
Drago said...: ARM: "I get your point but think it is part of the same mentality."

But it's not, so do you want to try again?

ARM: "One thing that has always impressed me is the rigid authoritarianism of anti-drug zealots."

LOL

We all understand how anti-authoritarian the left is.....

LOL; 7/2/13, 8:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Drug screening on new mothers done far more often on poor mothers, rarely done in affluent areas; 7/2/13, 8:10 PM
rcommal said...: Strictly Impersonal Algorithm v. Personally Responsible Judgment.

Now, there's a case I'd like to see explored.; 7/2/13, 8:11 PM
Synova said...: Ace has a link up to a story about a couple of parents who's children were taken away and the parents were *arrested*.

For good reason.

My point is not that some parents shouldn't have children taken away, but that if they've done something bad enough they should be arrested.

How is it that someone has her new born baby removed from her (for five days and good luck nursing!) without being *charged* for committing a crime?; 7/2/13, 8:13 PM
test said...: Shorter Inga:

Authoritarianism is ok as long as all economic classes are proportionally effected.

World to End: Women, Minorities Hardest Hit; 7/2/13, 8:16 PM
Anonymous said...: No Marshal, YOU are the authoritarian, not I.; 7/2/13, 8:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Marshal sees nothing wrong with discrimination.; 7/2/13, 8:20 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drug screening on new mothers done far more often on poor mothers, rarely done in affluent areas"

7/2/13, 8:10 PM

Oh my God!!

IS there nothing these New York City right wing fascists won't do to keep the little people down?

New York city must be teeming with anti-drug right wing authoritarians!!!; 7/2/13, 8:20 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "No Marshal, YOU are the authoritarian, not I."

LOL

No Inga, your pals on the left in New York are the authoritarians.

Once again, when the face of "authoritarianism" as she would describe it rears it's ugly head due to actions of the left, Inga is ever quick to point her accusing finger at the first conservative she sees!!; 7/2/13, 8:21 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Marshal sees nothing wrong with discrimination"

We have all been told that disagreeing with liberals is racism.

Since I'm not a racist, I guess I have to go along with the policies of these New York liberals.; 7/2/13, 8:23 PM
test said...: Inga said...
No Marshal, YOU are the authoritarian, not I.

If this were true you'd be able to cite some evidence. But of course this is just your lashing out without thinking.; 7/2/13, 8:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Marshal, I could say the same thing about your assertion @ 8:16. You DON'T get to throw shit, without having some thrown back at you.; 7/2/13, 8:34 PM
Jason said...: By the way... the governor who did this? Democrat.

Just sayin'; 7/2/13, 8:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Since I haven't stated what my stance on drug testing on newely delivered mothers is, you assumed I was for it as long as ALL mothers were tested. You routinely make assumptions, it's getting old Marshal.; 7/2/13, 8:38 PM
Drago said...: Well, here's a way for Inga to clear up the confusion she caused:

Inga, do you oppose the liberal mandated policy of required testing for drugs for all expectant mothers at specific hospitals in NYC or do you simply oppose the non-testing of expectant mothers in more affluent locales within NYC?

That's what Marshall was noticing and commenting on.

Instead of saying the policy is wrong and ought to be repealed..period.

One of your first complaints was about the lack of "fairness".

That is quintessential liberal thinking.; 7/2/13, 8:40 PM
Tom said...: Man, I've administered a lot of drug test in an extremely safety sensitive field. The poppy sead muffin theory is very overblown. We've seen energy drinks trip instant cup tests for both opiates and meth - a non-negative test. But those results are never confirmed in the lab. I highly doubt a poppy sead muffins produced a confirmed positive. Possibly a non-negative but a confirmed positive is tough to believe.; 7/2/13, 8:41 PM
Strelnikov said...: Elaine could have told her.; 7/2/13, 8:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago, here's my opportunity to tell you, why do you think you get to comment on women's issues? Because you have a mother, a wife? You routinely tell me I don't have a right to comment on military issues, because I'm no a veteran, so shut up on women's issues and I'll shut up on military issues.; 7/2/13, 8:43 PM
Drago said...: BTW, it's irrelevant what we think.

The current legal realities will necessitate the continued testing of higher at risk groups (lower income expectant mothers) to simply avoid the inevitable lawsuits from the dems key trial lawyer constituency.

The hospitals in more affluent areas will not be testing expectant mothers since more affluent mothers can always choose to go to hospitals that don't do automatic testing, and the hospitals know that.; 7/2/13, 8:43 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "You routinely tell me I don't have a right to comment on military issues,..."

Full stop.

Lie.

An obvious and pathetic lie.

But then, are there any other types?

Go ahead and post where I said any such thing.

LOL

We'll be waiting a long time for that...; 7/2/13, 8:44 PM
Drago said...: Since Inga claims I "routinely" do that, she ought to have zillions of examples.; 7/2/13, 8:45 PM
Drago said...: The later it gets the more incoherent Inga becomes.

Could be a drinking issue.

Or, perhaps, given her incredible visceral reaction to this "hospitals routinely drug test expectant mothers", I wonder if there is something else at play here....; 7/2/13, 8:47 PM
Synova said...: Tom... I think that the story is that they never bothered to test to confirm the positive result. They just got that first positive or not-negative or whatever and ran with it.; 7/2/13, 8:47 PM
Anonymous said...: "But of course, you have a daughter in the military, or so you claim, thus you are clearly qualified to discuss the "rightsizing" of the military.

LOL"

7/2/13, 12:13 PM

And YOU Drago are not qualified to speak on women's issues.

LOL; 7/2/13, 8:48 PM
Drago said...: Synova: "Tom... I think that the story is that they never bothered to test to confirm the positive result. They just got that first positive or not-negative or whatever and ran with it"

I think that's true given what we told some years back about false positives arising from poppy seed consumption.

If there is a medically trained individual who is familiar with the testing mechanisms and procedures, perhaps they can clue us in.

I would have thought the test capabilities and sensitivities would have been significantly improved upon by now.; 7/2/13, 8:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago, falls back into attack mode when he's been bested, yawn.

Oh well back to the topic.; 7/2/13, 8:50 PM
chickelit said...: Inga-Gotta-Divide-Us; 7/2/13, 8:50 PM
Synova said...: I suppose it doesn't say what sort of tests were done but makes this statement...

"Jameson Hospital failed to inform Ms Mort that she had failed the test, then reported it to Lawrence County children and youth services without a secondary test."

... lead me to think that the secondary test was the one that would have been reliable.; 7/2/13, 8:51 PM
Drago said...: LOL

Uh, Inga, perhaps in your current drug-addled or alcohol-addled state you have already forgotten what you asserted.

You asserted I said you didn't have "the right" to discuss military issues.

We're still waiting for that link.

LOL; 7/2/13, 8:51 PM
test said...: Inga said...
Marshal, I could say the same thing about your assertion @ 8:16. You DON'T get to throw shit, without having some thrown back at you.

The evidence for that was your comment which does not object to the authoritarian nature of the act but solely on the disproportionate effect by class.

So you can say the same thing, but you'd still be wrong. At least you've admitted accuracy is not a factor in your accusations. Honesty is a big step for you.; 7/2/13, 8:54 PM
Drago said...: When you think you've bested someone because you can't remember what you've asserted, well, that's really just sad in a way.; 7/2/13, 8:54 PM
Drago said...: Inga is now furiously looking for a smoking gun post wherein I say what she claims I said.

Except....there isn't one.

What to do? What to do?

My money is Inga doubling down and trying to move even more quickly past her syntactical and logical fail.; 7/2/13, 8:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago back to playing games, yawn. Drago back to trying to cast aspertions of alcohol and drug use of a commenter who has bested him, that's low, shows a sickening lack of character, Drago, but it's not surprising, for a loser.; 7/2/13, 8:56 PM
Drago said...: Looks like I would have won my "doubling down" bet!!

Now how did I know Inga would do precisely what she did do...and predicted it before she did it?

LOL; 7/2/13, 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago, you are playing semantical games, please don't act stupid, or is it an act?; 7/2/13, 8:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Now quit derailing this thread, Drago.; 7/2/13, 8:59 PM
Drago said...: All of this back and forth from Inga simply because she is incapable of recognizing that her initial reaction to this story of "authoritarianism" was to advocate for the extension of the supposed authoritarianism as opposed to simply ending it.

Behold, the liberal "mind", such as it is.; 7/2/13, 8:59 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Now quit derailing this thread, Drago."

Yes, mustn't ask Inga to back up her mistaken assertions.

That would be.....unfair.

LOL; 7/2/13, 9:00 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drago, you are playing semantical games.."

LOL

Words have meaning.

I would have thought someone of your advanced age would be aware of that.; 7/2/13, 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...: YES Drago, your words have meaning and I threw them back in your face. Now kiss my ass.; 7/2/13, 9:02 PM
jr565 said...: Inga wrote:
"Where were the authoritarians. Trying to blow up abortion clinics maybe."

Considering the number of abortion clinics blown up, there must not have been a lot of authoritarians around.; 7/2/13, 9:03 PM
Drago said...: BTW, still waiting on that link where I "routinely tell me I don't have a right to comment on military issues..."

Of course, you could simply say: "Yes, I misspoke. I did not mean to say "right to comment" I meant to say "qualified to comment""

Then we could just move on.

It's all there in black and white in these threads.

But you won't, 'cuz racism or something.; 7/2/13, 9:04 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "YES Drago, your words have meaning and I threw them back in your face. Now kiss my ass."

LOL

No Inga.

You threw words I never used at me.

When I happened to notice that, it upset you.

Ask yourself why that is.; 7/2/13, 9:05 PM
Gospace said...: "Tom said...
Man, I've administered a lot of drug test in an extremely safety sensitive field. The poppy sead (sic) muffin theory is very overblown."

Um- no. It's well known poppy seed ingestion can create false positives. Well, actually, they're not false- just low threshold tests becasue poppy seeds CONTAIN opiates. When I was stations at Great Mistakes most of a busload of recruits tested positve. Turns out the bus had stopped at a fast food place that served poppy seed buns with it's yummy sandwiches. If you frequent fast food places, I think there is only one that does that...; 7/2/13, 9:05 PM
Drago said...: Harolds comments mirror what I remember being told by Naval doctors.; 7/2/13, 9:07 PM
Drago said...: I should be clearer: Harolds comments mirror what Flight surgeons told me.

Yes, they are doctors...mostly.

I need to be careful with that.; 7/2/13, 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: "But of course, you have a daughter in the military, or so you claim, thus you are clearly qualified to discuss the "rightsizing" of the military.

LOL"

7/2/13, 12:13 PM
YOU threw words at ME that I didn't use Drago.

Where did I say that I was qualified to speak on military matters because I have a daughter in the military? Where did I say those words Drago? You hypocrite.; 7/2/13, 9:10 PM
chickelit said...: Here are some recipes for poppy seed tea which appears to be legal in the US: link. I recall a story from a few years ago about some bagel bakers who got in some trouble over it.; 7/2/13, 9:11 PM
Anonymous said...: I get to speak about military matters because we have free speech in this country you dope, Drago. THAT IS WHY.; 7/2/13, 9:11 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Where did I say that I was qualified to speak on military matters because I have a daughter in the military?"

LOL

I never said that YOU said you were qualified!

LOL

Are you really this dense?

I was simply pointing out that you were clearly not qualified to discuss military matters, especially given how you kept confusing the terms "downsizing" and "rightsizing".

Again, I am only a hypocrite if I put words in your mouth.

I didn't.

LOL

All of this sturm and drang simply because you can't admit you put words in my mouth.

This has got to be a put-up job. There is no way you are this dumb.; 7/2/13, 9:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago, you are stupid. Absolutely stupid, now STFU.; 7/2/13, 9:14 PM
Drago said...: LOL

Inga: "I get to speak about military matters because we have free speech in this country you dope, Drago. THAT IS WHY."

I never asked you why you get to speak about something!

LOL

So now, you are answering make believe questions that were never asked.

LOL

Again, all because you can't admit you put words in my mouth.

Amazing display.; 7/2/13, 9:14 PM
Drago said...: Inga at 9:11pm: "I get to speak about military matters because we have free speech in this country you dope, Drago. THAT IS WHY.

Inga at 9:14pm: ".. now STFU."

LOL

You. Can't. Make. This. Stuff. Up.; 7/2/13, 9:15 PM
Revenant said...: Where were the authoritarians when the War on Drugs was started?

Sitting in Congress and the White House, starting it.; 7/2/13, 9:18 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/2/13, 9:19 PM
Anonymous said...: But of course, you have a daughter in the military, or so you claim, thus you are clearly qualified to discuss the "rightsizing" of the military.

LOL

7/2/13, 12:13 PM

Drago you claim that I HAVE CLAIMED that I am qualified to speak on right sizing in the military BECAUSE I have a daughter in the military. I made no such claim.; 7/2/13, 9:23 PM
David said...: Marshal said...
Why are hospitals drug screening without probable cause?

Good question.; 7/2/13, 9:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Now STFU.; 7/2/13, 9:24 PM
Drago said...: Drago: "Inga,
But of course, you have a daughter in the military, or so you claim....."

Inga on 7/2/13, 9:19pm: "WHERE did I make this "claim" you fucking idiot?

From the January 24, 2013 thread titled: "GOP Senator Pushes Gun-Running Conspiracy Theory During Benghazi Hearing."

Inga said...
"*Whores* ... what the flip is wrong with you? You make verbal attack on peoples' kids...don't you get it that the kids are not the people you oppose, or even know in an Internet way. Mother/Father versus kids = different. Damn it.

Neither Garage nor Inga deserve what you are doing, regardless of their opinions...most that I regularly disagree with....and damn sure their kids don't. For the record, in Inga's daughter's case, no one serving with US Marines in a combat zone as a medic, and earning the Fleet Marine Force Warfare Specialist badge, deserves your vitriol...she, the daughter, never said word one to you, for starters.

And yes, for the doubters, Inga's daughter is real and a Navy corpsman attached to the USMC. She doesn't post here but she has tracks in many other Internet places relating to her profession."

1/24/13, 12:57 PM

THANK YOU, thankyou, thankyou Aridog! Obviously you were able to corroborate what I have said here about my daughter. But I doubt the attacks by Edutcher, President Mom Jeans and Whores will end.

1/24/13, 3:11 PM; 7/2/13, 9:26 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drago you claim that I HAVE CLAIMED that I am qualified to speak on right sizing in the military BECAUSE I have a daughter in the military. I made no such claim."

Nope.

You are clearly, undeniably, irrefutably unqualified to speak about military "right-sizing" because you repeatedly confused it with something very different: "downsizing".

LOL

BTW, that's a lot of "STFU" from a "free speech" advocate!

LOL

But, then again, you're a lefty, so we already know that you don't really believe in that "free speech" thing.

Fen's Law.; 7/2/13, 9:28 PM
Anonymous said...: What the HELL are you talking about NOW Drago? Man you are desperate, aren't you? I deleted that comment, you USE it anyway.... To make some point? What a weirdo you are.; 7/2/13, 9:29 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drago you claim that I HAVE CLAIMED that I am qualified to speak on right sizing in the military BECAUSE I have a daughter in the military. I made no such claim."

LOL

I made no such claim about you claiming any such qualification.

You can't help yourself.; 7/2/13, 9:30 PM
David said...: The post in which Drago and Inga take another big step towards make up sex.; 7/2/13, 9:30 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Inga said...
What the HELL are you talking about NOW Drago? Man you are desperate, aren't you? I deleted that comment, you USE it anyway.... To make some point? What a weirdo you are."

If you deleted it, why is it still there?

Do you often claim to have deleted things that are still there?

Do you really think you've deleted it, or is it just one of your "visions"?...; 7/2/13, 9:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago,
I'm telling you to STFU, because you are derailing the thread. You keep posting bullshit comments that you hope I won't refute. Now STFU.; 7/2/13, 9:31 PM
Drago said...: David: "David said...
The post in which Drago and Inga take another big step towards make up sex"

That reminds me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygTV45X1yGI

Stylistics: Break up to make up

Classic.; 7/2/13, 9:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Drago, I deleted the comment at 9:19, it's NOT there. Are you seeing things? High, drunk? Hmmmm. LOL.; 7/2/13, 9:34 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drago,I'm telling you to STFU, because you are derailing the thread. You keep posting bullshit comments that you hope I won't refute. Now STFU"

When you make multiple and repeated false assertions regarding what someone else writes, you should not be surprised if they say: Hey, you're wrong.

LOL

This is not complicated.

You can screech "STFU" a dozen times (typical leftist), but you will be called out when you put words in other peoples mouths.

Every time.

Because you should be.; 7/2/13, 9:35 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drago,I'm telling you to STFU, because you are derailing the thread. You keep posting bullshit comments that you hope I won't refute. Now STFU"

When you make multiple and repeated false assertions regarding what someone else writes, you should not be surprised if they say: Hey, you're wrong.

LOL

This is not complicated.

You can screech "STFU" a dozen times (typical leftist), but you will be called out when you put words in other peoples mouths.

Every time.

Because you should be.; 7/2/13, 9:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Gawd, how ridiculous, how about I ask you nicely Drago? Why don't you stop your blabbering and let this thread get back on topic?

Or I could just continue to tell you to STFU.; 7/2/13, 9:37 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Drago, I deleted the comment at 9:19, it's NOT there. Are you seeing things? High, drunk? Hmmmm. LOL."

Where you wrote that you had deleted a comment was right after I posted the exchange from last January, which is why, linquistically, your deletion statement applied to that one, not the one from this thread.

Obviously.

I can't help it if your language skills are not up to snuff.

LOL; 7/2/13, 9:38 PM
Anonymous said...: YOU put words in MY mouth Drago, why can you not admit this? Pathetic.

Now STFU.; 7/2/13, 9:39 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Or I could just continue to tell you to STFU"

You could.

Or you could just post something on topic.

You. Could. Just. Post. Something. On. Topic.

I do not have mind control over you....but I just might have ......(wait for it)....."Brain control" over you!!; 7/2/13, 9:39 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "YOU put words in MY mouth Drago, why can you not admit this? Pathetic.

Now STFU."

LOL

This should be easy to prove.

Yet you can't.

Wanna bet why?; 7/2/13, 9:40 PM
Anonymous said...: "Or you could just post something on topic.

You. Could. Just. Post. Something. On. Topic."

7/2/13, 9:39 PM

You first.; 7/2/13, 9:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Oy.; 7/2/13, 9:41 PM
Drago said...: Oy vey!; 7/2/13, 9:43 PM
Drago said...: Quite frankly, I'm not sure what remains to be said here.

I'm like Peter Falk at the "firing squad" scene when he's asked: "Whats the plan" and he says "There is no plan. I'm wide open here."

LOL; 7/2/13, 9:45 PM
Drago said...: Oh, the movie was the original "In-Laws" with Alan Arkin.

Hilarious.; 7/2/13, 9:46 PM
rcommal said...: Once again, it's back to mere dialogue here, as the cheapened notion of dialogue plays out itself: It's not even ping-pong, but rather pong--two-dimensional, at best, even when more than one engages.; 7/2/13, 9:48 PM
rcommal said...: Pftuie.; 7/2/13, 9:52 PM
rcommal said...: I see you and I see through you.; 7/2/13, 9:58 PM
rcommal said...: *shrug*; 7/2/13, 9:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Maternity Wards in Low Income Cities are Discriminating Drug Testing On Minority Moms

Not just in New York City, it seems.; 7/2/13, 9:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Rcommal, who are you speaking to? Me? Am I supposed to care what your opinion of me is? Or perhaps you meant my buddy, Drago?; 7/2/13, 10:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Since there weren't a whole lot of abortion clinics to bomb in 1914, the authoritarians decided to wait around a couple of years and pass an income tax instead.; 7/2/13, 10:02 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Not just in New York City, it seems."

No, not just in NYC.

But every bit as liberal I would venture to guess.

So, once again, it begs the question: why are all these liberals behaving as authoritarians?; 7/2/13, 10:06 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Revenant said...
"Where were the authoritarians when the War on Drugs was started?"

Sitting in Congress and the White House, starting it.

Don't forget the state houses and governorships.; 7/2/13, 10:06 PM
Fletch99 said...: Inga-

Where were the authoritarians when the War on Drugs was started?

They were "progressives".

Google "Harrison Act"- and note who signed it. Note that Woodrow Wilson was also a "racist" AND a "fascist" (jailed "socialist" Eugene Debs for opposing WWI).

Trying to blow up abortion clinics maybe.

Not. Margaret Sanger loved aborting (black) babies.; 7/2/13, 10:07 PM
Anonymous said...: June, 1971, President Nixon declared War on Drugs.; 7/2/13, 10:11 PM
Anonymous said...: So the Harrison Act, Prohibition, and the Marijuana Tax Act were merely part of the Kinetic Military Action on Drugs?; 7/2/13, 10:17 PM
Sorun said...: News articles like this need to have a responsible official identified. Perhaps even a photo with the caption, "Stupid Bitch in Charge."; 7/2/13, 10:18 PM
President-Mom-Jeans said...: He he he, looks like the bug eyed bitch is hitting the bottle pretty hard tonight.

Is that double digit "STFU" whines from the flappy old cow? Wonderful.

Have another drink Inga.; 7/2/13, 10:25 PM
rcommal said...: Am I supposed to care what your opinion of me is?

Absolutely not. Full stop. Nothing has changed.; 7/2/13, 10:32 PM
Revenant said...: June, 1971, President Nixon declared War on Drugs.

He gave it a name, sure. However, the federal attempt to wipe out drug use started in the progressive era under Woodrow Wilson and has gotten steadily worse. Pretty much every President since has done something to escalate the campaign against drug use (Kennedy and Johnson were exceptions).

A helpful timeline.; 7/2/13, 10:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Rcommal,
Well that's nice, I think. I really don't know what the hell you are gong on about though, but carry on my dear.; 7/2/13, 10:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Revenant, that's quite a time span, a few Republican presidents in that bunch, huh?; 7/2/13, 10:39 PM
rcommal said...: The thing is, Inga, is that you do know:

***Gong.***

Darling.; 7/2/13, 10:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Jesus. Is there a full moon tonight?; 7/2/13, 10:43 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: From wikipedia regarding the Rockefeller drug laws:

"The Rockefeller Drug Laws are the statutes dealing with the sale and possession of "narcotic" drugs in the New York State Penal Law. The laws are named after Nelson Rockefeller, who was the state's governor at the time the laws were adopted. Rockefeller, a staunch supporter of the bill containing the laws had Presidential ambitions and so wanted to raise his national posture by being "tough on crime." If this strategy worked, he would no longer be seen as too liberal to be elected."

Although aspects of the drug war have certainly had bipartisan support, in the last 50 years most of the innovations in craven stupidity have come from Republicans.; 7/2/13, 10:48 PM
rcommal said...: You are the Chuck Barris of the Althouse blog, Inga. And that's OK.; 7/2/13, 10:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Oy, WTH? Whatever.

Why does it seem that conservatives are desperately trying to derail this thread?; 7/2/13, 10:57 PM
rcommal said...: 4U, Miss I, in homage.; 7/2/13, 11:03 PM
chickelit said...: Shorter ARM: narcotics are great! They enhance my orgasms! Everyone should try them, including pregnant mothers-to-be! How dare anyone say no!; 7/2/13, 11:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Thank you Miss Comma. I'm sure it makes sense in your head and that's OK.; 7/2/13, 11:05 PM
chickelit said...: "Shorter ARM" was an unintended pun.; 7/2/13, 11:06 PM
chickelit said...: I value rcommal's opinions of Althouse commenters. I don't always agree with her but she at least makes me think instead of knee-jerk respond.; 7/2/13, 11:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Sorry Chickie, but Mss Comma seems a bit "off" to me and I don't appreciate her nonsense.; 7/2/13, 11:13 PM
Fletch99 said...: ARM-

Rockefeller, a staunch supporter of the bill containing the laws had Presidential ambitions and so wanted to raise his national posture by being "tough on crime." If this strategy worked, he would no longer be seen as too liberal to be elected.".

Repubs appeasing Democratic controlled legislatures to maintain power- Repubs fault. (See also Nixon's EPA, Bush's No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, Reagan's "amnesty", "Romneycare" et al).

Dems appeasing Repub legislatures to maintain power- Repubs fault! (see DOMA)

Democrats only wish they were as effective as Leftist Repubs.; 7/2/13, 11:28 PM
rcommal said...: One of the great things about that Chuck Barris/Gong Show link, with its various music beds, is that--at last! all these years later!--I have now figured out what has been nagging at me, music speaking, all these years.

That "bink, bink; bink bink" part sometimes featured in the music-bed transitions, fleetingly? "Bink, bink; bink bink." Well, I now know what the reference was that was nagging me then:

This, music-reference speaking.; 7/2/13, 11:34 PM
Fletch99 said...: Inga- Not just in New York City, it seems.

7/2/13, 9:59 PM

Please find me a "quote" in that story that isn't from NYC...; 7/2/13, 11:42 PM
rcommal said...: Sorry Chickie, but Mss Comma seems a bit "off" to me and I don't appreciate her nonsense.

Oh, honey, of course I am "off," and more than a bit. That's always been the case, dear. Are you actually harboring the delusion that you're proffering some thing about me that's new, darling?

Good luck with that, sweetie.; 7/2/13, 11:48 PM
Anonymous said...: 18 states drug test pregnant women

Fletch you are correct, that article only speaks of NYC. See this link, it has a link to a MASSIVE site concerning drug testing of pregnant women.; 7/2/13, 11:57 PM
Gospace said...: A reasonable man said:
"Although aspects of the drug war have certainly had bipartisan support, in the last 50 years most of the innovations in craven stupidity have come from Republicans."

Like, for example, Obamacare. SSM. (Oops- most people here mistakenly think that's a good idea.) Racial quotas, albeit by any name EXCEPT racial quotas. We could play this game back and forth.; 7/3/13, 12:13 AM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/3/13, 12:38 AM
Saint Croix said...: The hospital requires all expectant mothers to voluntarily submit

Wow, what a creepy sentence. I think what freaks me out the most about this is how "the hospital" becomes "the state" and we don't even notice.

Obamacare will help with that, I'm sure!; 7/3/13, 6:40 AM
Civilis said...: While it certainly is a contributing factor, I think the War on Drugs is a minor issue here.

The real factors is the 'won't someone think of the children' effect that has pushed child safety as an all-consuming passion to which no objection will be considered. This shows up in the requirements to test for drugs well beyond where it would be necessary, and in requiring that suspected child abuse (for an overly-broad definiton of child abuse) be reported to the state.

It's another case of unintended consequences of well intentioned laws. No one objects to the government prosecuting child abuse, or people with authority being required to report serious child abuse. But whith the overly-broad definitions of abuse these regulations turn into real nightmares.; 7/3/13, 7:48 AM
raf said...: I don't understand why all of you don't see that the simple solution to this problem is to ban poppy seeds.; 7/3/13, 12:09 PM
Revenant said...: Revenant, that's quite a time span, a few Republican presidents in that bunch, huh?

Well yes, Inga, we have had Republican Presidents during the last hundred years. I didn't really think that needed to be said, since everyone here is old enough to remember at least one. :); 7/3/13, 4:04 PM
Revenant said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/3/13, 4:08 PM