Aa
Who in the election will fight for our cause?
I didn't know how to title this post...
Without getting into a big political debate, can someone tell me, which candidates, on each side, will best be helping the Hep C research funding? It doesn't matter to me, whether you are saying Democrat/Republican/Indep., or whatever, I'm just curious if anybody knows from past history, researching this, or anything like that??? I'm not saying which party I'm affliated with, that doesn't matter in the general election anyway because you can vote across party lines in that election if you so choose. Anyway, I'm really curious about this. I'm also wondering if there's some website that might tell me where the various candidates stand in their past support of HIV, since I figure that if they have a good history with supporting HIV/AIDS research that they might care about HCV. Anyway, any info would be appreciated. I hope that this will not end up being a debate because that's not what I'm looking for.
Happy Holidays everyone.
Susan
Without getting into a big political debate, can someone tell me, which candidates, on each side, will best be helping the Hep C research funding? It doesn't matter to me, whether you are saying Democrat/Republican/Indep., or whatever, I'm just curious if anybody knows from past history, researching this, or anything like that??? I'm not saying which party I'm affliated with, that doesn't matter in the general election anyway because you can vote across party lines in that election if you so choose. Anyway, I'm really curious about this. I'm also wondering if there's some website that might tell me where the various candidates stand in their past support of HIV, since I figure that if they have a good history with supporting HIV/AIDS research that they might care about HCV. Anyway, any info would be appreciated. I hope that this will not end up being a debate because that's not what I'm looking for.
Happy Holidays everyone.
Susan
Gee, I feel so much better about everything now. Thanks you guys for such insightful and stimulating dialogue. Mike
You are correct---I misstated what I intended to say. To clarify--I did not mean to say 5% of the wealth in this country was inherited. Rather , I should have worded it differently and didn't catch it until I read your post. What was meant was that 95% of those called 'wealthy" did not inherit their wealth. Upon doing some research I have found my number to be slightly off---I have been seeing 7%-8.3% of the wealthy inherited large sums at one point. I don't think this detracts from the point I was making, but perhaps you will.
Lobbyists play an important role in America. They have been around since the halls of Congress have been opened. I have mentioned this before---we have our own lobbyists in Congress--our Representatives and Senators---and they are the only ones who can cast a vote. I have participated as a lobbyist in our state capitol on numerous occasions, both for funding of HCV awareness, and HCV-related legislation. The purpose of lobbying to simply to draw attention.
And though its not considered lobbying, occasionally we also hold 'breakfasts' at the state capitol throughout the year. It's another way to keep them thinking about you.
Regional economies exist and for that reason alone perception of our economic health is not always consistent with one another. While perception may be reality it may not necessarily jibe with the overall national averages and statistics from economic data sources
.Here is an article I ran across at MSNBC website that I think brings to light some overlooked principles.
"That’s not to say that current economic conditions don’t feel like a recession to many readers. You might walk out the door, when the wind is blowing and the temperature is 33 degrees, and observe to a friend: “Wow: it’s freezing out here today.” And we wouldn’t say you’re wrong. But the weatherman won’t use the word "freezing" until the temperature is 32 degrees or lower.
Unfortunately, measuring the health of the economy takes a little longer than looking at a thermometer. Because of the time involved in collecting and analyzing economic data, it’s very possible to be well into a recession before the numbers confirm it.
Until the data makes it clear, no one can confirm that a recession is under way. Until then, it would be inaccurate (not to mention irresponsible) to report that the “U.S. economy is in a recession now.”--end
Of course I don't like nat'l debt to go higher. Who does ? I can assure you the answer is no one, especially if they hold political office on a nat'l level. Pres. Bush should have used the veto pen much, much, more than he did. And believe me, the Dems are just as guilty as the Republicans when it comes to fiscal responsibility.
Whether we should be expending blood and treasure in Iraq is a highly (and hotly) debated topic. When I look at the big picture, and in light of the stated goals of extremist Muslim factions, I support the decision.To think that if we go away the terrorists will too, as some people do, flies in the face of recent historical facts. WTC '94 and WTC 9-11 were committed before we went into Afghanistan and Iraq.
Lobbyists play an important role in America. They have been around since the halls of Congress have been opened. I have mentioned this before---we have our own lobbyists in Congress--our Representatives and Senators---and they are the only ones who can cast a vote. I have participated as a lobbyist in our state capitol on numerous occasions, both for funding of HCV awareness, and HCV-related legislation. The purpose of lobbying to simply to draw attention.
And though its not considered lobbying, occasionally we also hold 'breakfasts' at the state capitol throughout the year. It's another way to keep them thinking about you.
Regional economies exist and for that reason alone perception of our economic health is not always consistent with one another. While perception may be reality it may not necessarily jibe with the overall national averages and statistics from economic data sources
.Here is an article I ran across at MSNBC website that I think brings to light some overlooked principles.
"That’s not to say that current economic conditions don’t feel like a recession to many readers. You might walk out the door, when the wind is blowing and the temperature is 33 degrees, and observe to a friend: “Wow: it’s freezing out here today.” And we wouldn’t say you’re wrong. But the weatherman won’t use the word "freezing" until the temperature is 32 degrees or lower.
Unfortunately, measuring the health of the economy takes a little longer than looking at a thermometer. Because of the time involved in collecting and analyzing economic data, it’s very possible to be well into a recession before the numbers confirm it.
Until the data makes it clear, no one can confirm that a recession is under way. Until then, it would be inaccurate (not to mention irresponsible) to report that the “U.S. economy is in a recession now.”--end
Of course I don't like nat'l debt to go higher. Who does ? I can assure you the answer is no one, especially if they hold political office on a nat'l level. Pres. Bush should have used the veto pen much, much, more than he did. And believe me, the Dems are just as guilty as the Republicans when it comes to fiscal responsibility.
Whether we should be expending blood and treasure in Iraq is a highly (and hotly) debated topic. When I look at the big picture, and in light of the stated goals of extremist Muslim factions, I support the decision.To think that if we go away the terrorists will too, as some people do, flies in the face of recent historical facts. WTC '94 and WTC 9-11 were committed before we went into Afghanistan and Iraq.
When you start polarizing debate such that you each start citing that you've got the support of the members here, your debate has spiralled out of control and you begin to enter the territory that l-horn warned about. The potential acrimony that a political debate can cause risks what we're here for and that is to offer support to each other while we deal with our HCV.
So ask yourselves. Is this still a productive debate? Are either of you going to change your positions? I don't think so. You are both past the point of having any respect for anything each other says. You both border on or cross the border of defaming the other personally instead of their discussion points. So there is no point in continuing to debate with each other once that happens as the debate ceases to be academic but becomes a personal war. Neither of you has or will concede a point to the other and that is essential in a good and honest debate. That is, that when the other person says something of merit, you have the integrity to acknowledge that.
So... I respectfully suggest that go have a virtual soda and lime or together and talk of your common HCV struggles to get your perspective back...or go into your respective corners and take deep breaths before your next post...or simply call it a day.
So ask yourselves. Is this still a productive debate? Are either of you going to change your positions? I don't think so. You are both past the point of having any respect for anything each other says. You both border on or cross the border of defaming the other personally instead of their discussion points. So there is no point in continuing to debate with each other once that happens as the debate ceases to be academic but becomes a personal war. Neither of you has or will concede a point to the other and that is essential in a good and honest debate. That is, that when the other person says something of merit, you have the integrity to acknowledge that.
So... I respectfully suggest that go have a virtual soda and lime or together and talk of your common HCV struggles to get your perspective back...or go into your respective corners and take deep breaths before your next post...or simply call it a day.
"calling me a lier?"
I didn't coronate you a liar. You did it the old-fashioned way---you earned it.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
BTW you are not the only one getting supportive e-mails. Many I have received are from names you haven't even heard of. They are tired of the endless leftists postings, too, but just didn't want to get into it for various reasons. Tx being the reason for many.I just didn't feel the need to mention it as I don't feel the need to bolster any of my positions.. I appreciate their support, of course.
You, nor any of your friends have this figured out yet. But, it will hit you one of these days and I'm guessing it won't be long now. ;)
I didn't coronate you a liar. You did it the old-fashioned way---you earned it.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
BTW you are not the only one getting supportive e-mails. Many I have received are from names you haven't even heard of. They are tired of the endless leftists postings, too, but just didn't want to get into it for various reasons. Tx being the reason for many.I just didn't feel the need to mention it as I don't feel the need to bolster any of my positions.. I appreciate their support, of course.
You, nor any of your friends have this figured out yet. But, it will hit you one of these days and I'm guessing it won't be long now. ;)
You said:" Heard today we are headed for a recession due to the loss of jobs and the not creating new ones. Kinda makes Mr. Liver's claim that we are in such great shape a sham. You are NOT a liar and cited your claims. I too have read them. Guess that makes me a liar too."
Wrong on all accounts,as usual. You ,OH, and 4C stated that Bush had taken a good economy and ruined it. I proved that to be an absurd assertion in light of the FACTS. I provided those facts, which you could not dispute then, nor now. What happens today or tomorrow has NO bearing on what has happened up until this point which was the direct assertion I replied to. The assertion wasn't Bush WAS going to ruin a good economy (which won't happen). No , the assertion was Bush had taken a good economy when he was sworn in and has been "ruining it". THAT was the topic and nowehere did I see a refutation of the facts that I posted that held up to scrutiny in light of the known facts.
Please show me ANY facts cited by Forseegood that are from a reputable source (not someone's opinion) that are based on numbers that can be verified. I have yet to see any such evidence presented. For anything. One must assume they don't exist or I'm sure you would find and post them.
You are also dead wrong about me not acknowledging the latest unemployment figures and possibility of an economic downturn. This from me several posts above yours:
"The latest unemployment figures are not too bad if you look historically at them. In the last administration they were ABOVE 5% half the time. However,its never encouraging to see them go up and particularly now with other concerns such as in the housing market becoming more problematic. Many analysts believe these are clear signs that we are headed for recession. Some say it won't quite be that deep but I believe a consensus exists that a slowdown is coming to our economy. Its been on a long run and someday it will pull back. Much of this is cyclical. (Deep recessions take about 11 years to develop on avg) But, none of this is related to what I have previously posted about the economy, nor related to the assertions that I replied to. "
BTW jobs forecast for '08 have been released and they are slighly down from previous years. One million new jobs are expected to be created this year.
You know you and your friends would fare much better if you dealt in facts, rather than drawing upon the demagogeury and propaganda found from leftist sources. If you want to be successful when debating or even discussing politics you must deal in facts. Not innuendo, misrepresentation, or something your hairdresser told you. If you draw your views from slanted sources you will not unsurprisingly end up with slanted views. Those who watch Michael Moore for example. He is not a documentarian, but a propagandist, and uses the same technique as Forseegood employed as witnessed in the post above,e.g., cutting , pasting, and editing to achieve a statement that never existed as written.
Before accusing or attempting to make fun of me, perhaps you should first examine to see if your statement is true and not bs as it was in this case.
Wrong on all accounts,as usual. You ,OH, and 4C stated that Bush had taken a good economy and ruined it. I proved that to be an absurd assertion in light of the FACTS. I provided those facts, which you could not dispute then, nor now. What happens today or tomorrow has NO bearing on what has happened up until this point which was the direct assertion I replied to. The assertion wasn't Bush WAS going to ruin a good economy (which won't happen). No , the assertion was Bush had taken a good economy when he was sworn in and has been "ruining it". THAT was the topic and nowehere did I see a refutation of the facts that I posted that held up to scrutiny in light of the known facts.
Please show me ANY facts cited by Forseegood that are from a reputable source (not someone's opinion) that are based on numbers that can be verified. I have yet to see any such evidence presented. For anything. One must assume they don't exist or I'm sure you would find and post them.
You are also dead wrong about me not acknowledging the latest unemployment figures and possibility of an economic downturn. This from me several posts above yours:
"The latest unemployment figures are not too bad if you look historically at them. In the last administration they were ABOVE 5% half the time. However,its never encouraging to see them go up and particularly now with other concerns such as in the housing market becoming more problematic. Many analysts believe these are clear signs that we are headed for recession. Some say it won't quite be that deep but I believe a consensus exists that a slowdown is coming to our economy. Its been on a long run and someday it will pull back. Much of this is cyclical. (Deep recessions take about 11 years to develop on avg) But, none of this is related to what I have previously posted about the economy, nor related to the assertions that I replied to. "
BTW jobs forecast for '08 have been released and they are slighly down from previous years. One million new jobs are expected to be created this year.
You know you and your friends would fare much better if you dealt in facts, rather than drawing upon the demagogeury and propaganda found from leftist sources. If you want to be successful when debating or even discussing politics you must deal in facts. Not innuendo, misrepresentation, or something your hairdresser told you. If you draw your views from slanted sources you will not unsurprisingly end up with slanted views. Those who watch Michael Moore for example. He is not a documentarian, but a propagandist, and uses the same technique as Forseegood employed as witnessed in the post above,e.g., cutting , pasting, and editing to achieve a statement that never existed as written.
Before accusing or attempting to make fun of me, perhaps you should first examine to see if your statement is true and not bs as it was in this case.
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis Social Community
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
