Posted on 06/29/2005 4:57:05 AM PDT by franksolich
There are both good things and bad things about those links; on one hand, the discussion of what the Head Warden "Skinner" calls "the Andy situation" was a great deal less restrained, less inhibited, than it was anywhere else (remember, it was actually suppressed in DUmmieland).
On the other hand, the other conservative web-site was usually a few days behind the DUmmie FUnnies, in reporting on, and discussing, the issue.
http://scamdy.com/forum/html/viewtopic.php?t=127
The links to the DUmmie FUnnies and the DUmmie Alert!s, in REVERSE chronological order, have been on Scamdy for some time now, as an assistance to those not caught up yet.
http://scamdy.com/forum/html/viewtopic.php?t=123
Day 63, and it's likely to be a too-hot and too-sunny day here on the prairies; even the hardy bison are tending towards low spots so as to get cool.
What about the documents that BenBurch promised to reveal? What happened to them?
We don't know.
It's odd, because the DUmmie "flyarm" had them--right there in her own two hands--on May 2nd.
That would answer one of three simple questions, that document that the DUmmie "flyarm" had.
It's true the red round one was hospitalized the past several days, but why this should present any problems, no one knows. It was not the red round one with the diagnosis right there in his own hands; and as the DUmmie "flyarm" is healthy and ambulatory, one wonders why she doesn't FAX that diagnosis to the dirty one.
So that we can hurry up and move on to question number and then question number three, after which this is all over, no more questions, no more doubts.
HYPOCHONDRIA?
Or "hypocrisy"?
Remember, these are the people who want to make the rules for the rest of us to follow--although, oddly, they don't expect to have to follow their own rules.
It is actually amusing, watching the Andyites get all tangled up (and they are likely to get even more tangled up) in things of their own doing.
I really doubt it was conservatives or Republicans who pushed for consumer-protection laws, for regulation of fund-raisers and charity (although in my opinion, it would have been nice if they had), for governmental oversight of financial intercourse.
Well, they got what they wanted (which I do not, in my own personal opinion, consider a "bad" thing)--and so why should they squawk, when what they wanted, is applied to them too?
Very good. Yes indeed, DUmmie hypocrisy, big-time, from the champions of both verifiability and government health-care.
"Politicize My Plight!"
You know, this is really disturbing, and does not bode well for the future of democraticunderground.com
The red round one posted one time yesterday, and it appears the red round one is the one who determines who "belongs" in democraticunderground and who does not.
I thought it was the Head Warden "Skinner," the Assistant Head Warden "Elad," and the Turnkey "EarlG," who as owners of democraticunderground, determine who belongs on their turf, and who does not.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x381294
REMEMBER.
WilliamPitt Donating member (1000+ posts)
Tue May-17-05 01:02 PM
Original message
I'm pretty upset right now, and I need an explanation
Edited on Tue May-17-05 01:09 PM by WilliamPitt
As you all know, I was one of the people who took point on raising money for Andy. I wrote about it for truthout two or three times, and convinced the crew at Progressive Democrats of America as well that we needed to raise a call for help.
This is what I wrote for truthout on May 3rd:
"A few weeks ago, Andy was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, one of the more dangerous varieties of the disease. His doctors told him he needed a Whipple procedure to get at the tumor, and only a few hospitals in America can perform this complicated procedure with the required competence. To compound the problem, Andy shares the plight of millions of others in our disgusting for-profit health care system and does not have health insurance."
This is what I wrote on the PDA blog, in our call for help, on April 29th:
"Several weeks ago, Andy was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. He was recently told that he must undergo what is called a Whipple Procedure. This is a very serious surgery that few hospitals in America are skilled enough to perform well, and requires significant time for recovery. Fortunately, some friends managed to get Andy a slot at Johns Hopkins Medical Center, one of the premier hospitals for this type of procedure. He is slated for the procedure in the second week of May. Unfortunately, the hospital requires a $25,000 down-payment before they assent to doing the Whipple, and requires another $25,000 once the procedure is done. They are expecting the down-payment immediately."
The basis for this started way back in February. On the 29th, I posted this truthout blog entry, which I reposted here on the first and fifteenth of every month to help raise money:
"For the last several weeks, Andy has been suffering through a bout of Hepatitis. The word came down yesterday, however, that his situation is far more serious. 'I apparently have a tumor growing around the bile duct where it passes through my pancreas," he wrote. "The tissue sample was consistent with malignancy; it could be benign but I am planning for the worst.'"
Note that here it says 'tumor.' In subsequent weeks I was told that it was pancreatic cancer requiring a Whipple. Note also that the fundraising for Andy did not start a week or so ago, but started three months ago.
I woke up today to this DU thread, in which it was reported:
"fyi: it is a tumour on the duct, not the pancreas themselves. it looks to not have spread at all. it is not pancreatic cancer as others have posted, but if it was not caught early enough, it would have certainly spread there."
"...as others have posted..."
I am one of those "others" who posted it was pancreatic cancer, requiring a Whipple. I posted it here, on truthout, and on PDA. I did so because that is what I was told was the diagnosis, repeatedly, by both Andy and others.
Now that it turns out not to be the case, I have some questions:
1. If it was not the very serious pancreatic cancer, why did the surgery need to be done at Johns Hopkins?
2. If a Whipple was not required, why was $25,000 and then $50,000 needed for this surgery? Andy could have gotten this far-less-serious procedure done back in Seattle for a hell of a lot less money.
3. Why was I personally told this was pancreatic cancer? Why was I allowed to repeat this now-inaccurate diagnosis many times without anyone correcting me?
Understand: I believe Andy has a tumor of some kind, and this requires medical attention. I do not think this entire situation was fabricated from nothing.
But the 400 people who will come into this thread with "Andy doesn't need this stress" can hold your water. Andy is apparently a hell of a lot less ill than I and others were led to believe, and I need some answers. I put my reputation, the reputation of truthout, the reputation of PDA, and the reputations of all the people who work for those organizations on the line not once, not twice, but every day for weeks on this. I have a huge, huge responsibility here, and I am not going to just let that drop.
I have a personal reason for asking these questions over and above everything else. A great and good friend of PDA, activist Damu Smith, was recently diagnosed with advanced colon cancer. There is no ambiguity about this diagnosis. But because I was told Andy had pancreatic cancer requiring a $50,000 Whipple in the best hospital on the Eastern seaboard, I talked PDA into diverting time and resources towards Andy. This wound up diverting time and resources away from Damu.
I would like some answers. No wait and see. I have spent time with Andy, worked with him, thought I knew him well enough to vouch for him in a time of crisis. I am feeling personally betrayed right now, and furthermore I have put far more than my own feelings and standing on the line here.
If you think I'm a bastard for asking, I will live with that. But if this is not explained to a degree I find satisfactory, there is going to be hell to pay.
WilliamPitt
Tue May-17-05 03:29 PM
Original message
'Need an explanation' Thread II
This is thread one, which is getting pretty huge:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
First of all, I'm not going to apologize for asking these questions. Something is not right about all this. Let's be clear:
The very-publicly-proclaimed diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, which I was personally told of, was changed to a thread-buried diagnosis of pancreatitis. The first is deadly dangerous, the second is very much not.
An enormous amount of money was raised in rapid fashion based on the aforementioned first diagnosis. For those who say 'Big deal' about the money raised, understand that it isn't about the money itself, nor is it about 'my ego.'
The organizations I work for, plus a whole bunch of organizations I have never heard of, took 'pancreatic cancer' and raised it to the rooftops. I am getting frightened PMs and emails from representatives of these organizations.
It isn't about the money. It is about the ability of these organizations to fundraise for important causes we all believe in. If this situation is not on the level, the ability for those organizations to do their good work is now imperiled. That hurts each and every one of us.
I believe Andy is sick, and I believe he needs treatment. I believe the compassion showed by DUers and others in rallying to his aid was and remains one of the most remarkable things I have ever seen.
But, based on the aforementioned concerns, I need to know why we were allowed to yell 'pancreatic cancer' and 'Whipple' and 'impending death' from the rooftops for weeks. I need to know why $50,000 was raised for a procedure at Johns Hopkins, when it appears now the diagnosed ailment could have been treated on the cheap in Seattle.
I need to know why I've been allowed to believe Andy was dying, why I was not told that this wasn't the case. Hell, a part of me is massively relieved...but the rest of me is badly hurt and deeply confused. I have called Andy my friend. Friends usually tell friends when they are no longer dying. I never heard that, and had to read it buried in a thread. If you need a personal impetus for my posts, you can have that.
This could all be a vast miscommunication. If so, if all this is on the up-and-up and it is just a matter of a bunch of wires getting crossed, then I will take whatever rap is coming for stirring up a hornet's nest. But I am not going to apologize. Anyone who thinks this is just about me does not appreciate the scope of the issue here. Hundreds of people, a bunch of important organizations and dozens of important causes are on the hook with this.
To answer the question of why I didn't talk to Andy, all I can say is this. I did talk to Andy. Dozens of times. It was from him first that I got the pancreatic cancer/Whipple/Johns Hopkins thing. It was from him first that I got the death-is-impending messages. Dozens of times. It was talking to Andy that started this, and right now, I am not at all comfortable going to Andy for confirmation of anything.
The pancreatic cancer diagnosis, the death-is-impending statements, the need to have all that money and the need for Johns Hopkins were all very publicly proclaimed. The hysteria to get it done was propelled in no small part by threads and posts from Andy himself. Therefore, a demand for an accounting of the vast discrepancies must also be public.
I don't know what got into him, he was asking all the right questions.
Now, though, he's back to being Useful Pundidiot Pitt.
I believe it, as it was probably a prerequisite to get the Red Round One into JHH.
I also believe that is did not state pancreatic cancer but rather something on the order of a benign tumor that did require a modified whipple.
Oh, I know it appears that he is back on board with Team Andy.
And after a 5 day absence, he is back at DU again. Obviously the depression that set in after his DSM-IV stuff didn't quite materialize, has passed.
But still no Andy update from William Rivers Pitt (if that is his real name). I am thinking Billy may wish to forget that he ever met Andy.
"I also believe that is did not state pancreatic cancer but rather something on the order of a benign tumor that did require a modified whipple."
I do believe something is wrong with Andy but I have a hard time believing even a modified whipple because of all his antics right after surgery, only spending 1 day in ICU (still have some doubts of that with all his postings from ICU) and almost immediately started talking about the foods he was eating and they weren't liquid. I know a modified isn't as bad as a regular whipple but it is still a major surgery.
I think it's an ulcer.
Given the condition, the age, and the life-style of the red round one, that to me seems the most-likely diagnosis.
Time, fat, and frolicking have caught up with him.
Well, kster isn't banned. Yet.
Schoolyard bullies often form popularity cliques and snub, harass, or pummel newcomers and anyone who is "different," and usually the "Principal" knows nothing about it.
"Obviously the depression that set in after his DSM-IV stuff didn't quite materialize, has passed. "
LOL! I read this and kept racking my brain trying to figure out what drugs had to do with this but finally realized that you were talking about the Downing Street memo. Duh! I type DSM-IV codes so drugs automatically come to my mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.