According to the Associated Press as cited in the Post article, "Cuba has made recent advancements in biotechnology and exports its treatments to 40 countries around the world, raking in an estimated $100 million a year. ... In 2004, the U.S. government granted an exception to its economic embargo against Cuba and allowed a California drug company to test three cancer vaccines developed in Havana."
this is interesting, then i think you should count jefferson within those you have no respect for.
"god forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. the people cannot be all, and always, well informed. the part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. if they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...and what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms. the remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. what signify a few lives lost in a century or two? the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. it is its natural manure."
if jefferson said this today he would be in guantanamo bay.
actually, lots of people on the conservative side are saying this right now. and there are many on the liberal side who are trying to take away their right to speak.
there is so much misinformation and downright lies in the "media" right now and people are not researching for themselves and they are believing the lies.
i think there is a rebellion in america right now - a rebellion against the tyranny of the left.
Wasn't it the French that let over 10,000 older people die from heat stroke because they were on vacation that month??? Yep, I want to be just like them.
How much history about the French does everyone have? After they killed everyone who they saw as the aristocracy or those they believed had money during their revolution, they then went on to kill anyone not labeled a "good citizen" and all it would take is an accusation by your neighbor and that was it, off with your head.
Kinda' like the track were on here, you are say you are good citizens and you care but those rascally republicans, they aren't good citizens and they don't care. So they killed a lot of people, are we going there? If you just listen to the hostility in Michael Moore's voice, I think he may be in favor of it. He has so far stooped to lying in his "documentaries" but it's OK, because it's for a greater good. And thus comes, 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions.'
Ah, but the French, lets get back to them, because they are just a great role model for the world. Fast forward just a little bit to that whole WW II thing and how wonderful the French were, or rather weren't. They actually supported Hitler and were all for killing the Jews and sending them off to concentration camps. That was up until Hitler invaded France then they started to like us and decided that maybe Hitler was really a bad guy.
Anyone care to keep going with the French example? OK, remember just a very short while ago, when they had riots going on for months? Remember why? It wouldn't be because they segregate the society, is it? You know, those "Muslims" can't let "them" be part of the 'real French' culture. And these are the people we want to be like? And, these are the people we are worried won't like us? Really? Honest?
As a Republican, and I even work in the inner city. But of course, you must know how superior I feel, after all that's how us Republicans are, aren't we? I use to be an "open minded Democrat" like you guys, but then I realized I still had to hate, I had to hate all those who called themselves Conservative, and if they went to Church, every week no less, well then they truly deserved my disdain.
As an evil republican I now am actually happy, and very comfortable with to each his own and allow all people find their own happiness and their own beat to their own drum. Unlike the stereotypes that people feel very comfortable labeling us with, you are wrong. Watch the next liberal speaker give a talk, they won't be interrupted, no one will throw a pie in their face, no one will scream them down so they can't talk and no one will try to assault them in the middle of their speech. However, all of these things have happened to conservative speakers, and all in the name of the "open minded left." It has been the local RNC chapters that have been vandalized and local RNC workers who have been assaulted. During the last Presidential election all we heard about was how unfair the election was. Yet it was supposedly unfair and rigged in predominately Democratic districts. But what I heard very little about was the thirty vans whose tires were slashed on the day of the election. They were set to "get out the vote" all set to pick up people and help them get to their voting place, but they were supported by the RNC, so we didn't hear anything. I am not cold and evil and I do care. I have given excellent care to all mu patients and have never known who their payer was, I never cared. I never worked at a hospital where a patient was escorted to the door during their illness because they didn't have insurance or couldn't pay. In fact, all the places I have worked have had social workers on to help people access all available services. I have had patients that have had nothing, who lived on the street, because in our wonderful liberal thinking we don't institutionalize people anymore, so now we have the homeless, and have hooked them up with religious services, homeless shelters.
So, contrary to popular opinion here, as a self righteous, I am better than everyone else, and of course I'm right and the whole world is wrong, conservative - but it really sounds more like the other side, we do care. We just don't think a bureaucracy is the way to care about people and the more you build that bureaucratic wall the more distance will exist between people until we are no longer aware that there are people in need.
Hey spyderperson
One why do we get a lecture on French History and duplicity, nothing new there at all. And how do you make similar comparisons between Democrats and Republicans with the french as an example escapes me.
So do I understand you as being "Self Righteous, Conservative" You seem awfully defensive about something, did we say something to make you mad. I hope not.
I dont understand your comments about bureaucracy, what point are you trying to make here. You have me confused
this is interesting, then i think you should count jefferson within those you have no respect for.
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
if jefferson said this today he would be in guantanamo bay.
Actually, lots of people on the conservative side ARE saying this right now. And there are many on the liberal side who are trying to take away their right to speak.
There is so much misinformation and downright lies in the "media" right now and people are not researching for themselves and they are believing the lies.
I think there is a rebellion in America right now - a rebellion against the tyranny of the LEFT.
steph
I had to do a double take and reread that it was actually you of all people that have been captive of the myth the left is trying to take away anyones rights.
Actually the 50/50 split is moving more to the left because of the failures of the right, namely Mr. Bush, as evidenced by the recent elections. I disagree that the right is rebelling against the left when many are actually joining the left in some common causes, particularly the end of the War in Iraq. Healthcare is always an issue that comes up and dies.
I will conceed there is a lot of misinformation out there, and I know you're not a MM fan, but it comes from all sides, and the internet certainly isn't helping.
Faulty Premise #1: The "scarce" amount of spectrum space requires oversight by federal regulators.
Reality: Although the spectrum is limited, the number of broadcasters in America has continuously increased.
Supporters of the fairness doctrine argue that because the airwaves are a scarce resource, they should be policed by federal bureaucrats to ensure that all viewpoints are heard. Yet, just because the spectrum within which broadcast frequencies are found has boundaries, it does not mean that there is a practical shortage of views being heard over the airwaves. When the fairness doctrine was first conceived, only 2,881 radio and 98 television stations existed. By 1960, there were 4,309 radio and 569 television stations. By 1989, these numbers grew to over 10,000 radio stations and close to 1,400 television stations. Likewise, the number of radios in use jumped from 85.2 million in 1950 to 527.4 million by 1988, and televisions in use went from 4 million to 175.5 million during that period. ("The Fairness Doctrine," National Association of Broadcasters, Backgrounder (1989).)
Even if it may once have been possible to monopolize the airwaves, and to deny access to certain viewpoints, that is impossible today. A wide variety of opinions is available to the public through radios, cable channels, and even computers. With America on the verge of information superhighways and 500-channel televisions, there is little prospect of speech being stifled.
Faulty Premise #1: The "scarce" amount of spectrum space requires oversight by federal regulators.
Reality: Although the spectrum is limited, the number of broadcasters in America has continuously increased.
Supporters of the fairness doctrine argue that because the airwaves are a scarce resource, they should be policed by federal bureaucrats to ensure that all viewpoints are heard. Yet, just because the spectrum within which broadcast frequencies are found has boundaries, it does not mean that there is a practical shortage of views being heard over the airwaves. When the fairness doctrine was first conceived, only 2,881 radio and 98 television stations existed. By 1960, there were 4,309 radio and 569 television stations. By 1989, these numbers grew to over 10,000 radio stations and close to 1,400 television stations. Likewise, the number of radios in use jumped from 85.2 million in 1950 to 527.4 million by 1988, and televisions in use went from 4 million to 175.5 million during that period. ("The Fairness Doctrine," National Association of Broadcasters, Backgrounder (1989).)
Even if it may once have been possible to monopolize the airwaves, and to deny access to certain viewpoints, that is impossible today. A wide variety of opinions is available to the public through radios, cable channels, and even computers. With America on the verge of information superhighways and 500-channel televisions, there is little prospect of speech being stifled.
******************************
Just two examples . .. .
steph
Thank you Steph for answering. I truly had no idea what you were thinking of.
Did McCain/Feingold take away your ability to participate in the election process?
Or any other citizend right to freedom of speech?
I guess you could say that billionairres cannot "donate" as much as they would like to candidates. There are always two sides?
Do you think there are restrictions on conservatives in the media?
From your quote, "...With America on the verge of information superhighways and 500-channel televisions, there is little prospect of speech being stifled..."
Faulty Premise #1: The "scarce" amount of spectrum space requires oversight by federal regulators.
Reality: Although the spectrum is limited, the number of broadcasters in America has continuously increased.
Supporters of the fairness doctrine argue that because the airwaves are a scarce resource, they should be policed by federal bureaucrats to ensure that all viewpoints are heard. Yet, just because the spectrum within which broadcast frequencies are found has boundaries, it does not mean that there is a practical shortage of views being heard over the airwaves. When the fairness doctrine was first conceived, only 2,881 radio and 98 television stations existed. By 1960, there were 4,309 radio and 569 television stations. By 1989, these numbers grew to over 10,000 radio stations and close to 1,400 television stations. Likewise, the number of radios in use jumped from 85.2 million in 1950 to 527.4 million by 1988, and televisions in use went from 4 million to 175.5 million during that period. ("The Fairness Doctrine," National Association of Broadcasters, Backgrounder (1989).)
Even if it may once have been possible to monopolize the airwaves, and to deny access to certain viewpoints, that is impossible today. A wide variety of opinions is available to the public through radios, cable channels, and even computers. With America on the verge of information superhighways and 500-channel televisions, there is little prospect of speech being stifled.
******************************
Just two examples . .. .
steph
So if you can find someone to broadcast your opinion there might just be someone to listen to you.
Scarey thought if someone should decided to broadcast me.
All this back and forth banter is making my head spin!
I think what it comes down to here is this:
The US government is messed up. Very messed up. I wouldn't trust them to manage a new universal health plan. I certainly don't trust them to spend my tax dollars wisely now. That goes for Republican or Democrat alike. Most of our leaders, including presidents, congress, even small town mayors, are so power hungry and money hungry! They have lost sight of what is important in this country. And we, the citizens, just bend over and take it up the rear. We feel helpless, hopeless, jaded. And we are so stupefied that we can't even dig through the pile of dung to determine what's real and what's a load of BS. It's frightening and disheartening. The USA used to be an example, a world leader; but here we are looking to other countries, grasping at pies in the sky, wondering when something has got to give. It just feels like a collapse is coming on. We are all looking to the next election for a savior, and none of the hopefuls come close to being trustworthy or capable. All I hear from them is lies and more lies. When can we have a leader we can trust? The position of President of the USA attracts the strangest applicants. Who in their right mind would take on such a role these days?
I'm looking for a leader who is honest -- someone I can trust. I am looking for a leader who is not itching to go to war. I am looking for a leader who has fiscal responsibility and will be more constructive with my tax dollars. I am looking for a leader who can help make America strong again; who does not punish the poor and hungry and reward the extremely wealthy. I don't see how this is an issue of right-wing or left-wing. Those groups of politicians are all the same to me: Corrupt, lying, deceitful, will-say-anything-to-get-elected, bumbling talking heads.
Is there anyone who does not agree to the idea that the USA needs some sort of health care reform? I am not suggesting gov't controlled universal health care or some model after any other country. I am merely stating that we have problems within our own system. Big problems. And it needs fixing. Health care should be a right for all citizens, not a privilege for those who have the resources.
The USA is supposed to be an innovative, resourceful "group of folks" (to use Bush's term). We ought to be able to come up with something new and exciting, that keeps patient well-being at the forefront of planning and implementation. How is that a bad thing!?!?!?
I love what you're saying and completely agree. Generally, I love a great political debate just for the fun of it. Some here are taking it very seriously and believe that somewhere our government is actually capable of taking care of people in some form of benevolence. If you ever go to D.C. it's actually pretty amazing, right after Harry Reid and Trent Lott get finished telling the "American People" that they know what we want and that the other one is out to subvert 'truth justice and the American way', the go out to dinner as best of friends. What do we do, we go after each other, all things that happen in all levels of government, come down to compromise.
There will be no one we can "trust" because as they run for whatever office it is they want, they will tell us that they are the one, and only one who can be trusted to do what they say. But they can't because nothing can get done unless all sides are willing to compromise in one form or another.
I love being an American, and my husband, who is German, born and raised there, moved here when he was about 35, loves being am American, too. He is one of the lucky ones, his mother was an American citizen when she went to Germany and was married to his father, so he is a dual national. When we get together with the people he knows and works with, many of whom are from other countries, they all seem to agree, America is the best.
So, no matter how much we disagree about things or argue about this or that. No matter how different we seem from one another, the term American is truly an amazing term. We don't "look" a certain way or "act" a certain way because we are, in almost every way, a truly international nation. And how cool is that!!!
So, no matter what ultimately happens with our health care system, and no matter what we say and write to one another, I just want to Thanks. Thanks for sharing thoughts and ideas, thanks for sharing the passion of your thoughts and ideas, thanks for sharing parts of yourself that I would not have been exposed to expect through this forum.
In Canada, the government doesn't manage the clinical aspects of healthcare, that is done by providers (professionals). The government has more of a "cashier" role, taking in money, and paying it out, with safeguards to prevent misuse. Healthcare administrators in conultation with providers, decide issues and placement of new medical equipment. One thing missing from facilities: hospitals, doctors offices, etc., is the chi-chi decorators' touch. Money goes into things that benefit patients. If hospitals' volunteer auxilliaries raise funds for it, or donations of art that is appropriate are received, the ambiance improves....... Food is basic, not gourmet and supervision to assure that the correct diet is given the correct patient is considerably better, that in the USA.
There is pride and care, with a feeling that the responsibility for a good outcome, is everyones. The "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" ethic, still exists there.
Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN
11,305 Posts
actually, lots of people on the conservative side are saying this right now. and there are many on the liberal side who are trying to take away their right to speak.
there is so much misinformation and downright lies in the "media" right now and people are not researching for themselves and they are believing the lies.
i think there is a rebellion in america right now - a rebellion against the tyranny of the left.
steph