FlaSoxxJim

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 11:03 AM) I don't insult anyone's music tastes because mine have crystallized over the past few years. Sort of like an alcoholic who only drank fine wines and single malt whiskies for the last five years and now things rubbing alcohol is a suitable replacement. Pretty much anything works for me these days. Does that mean you have many fine wines and single malt whiskeys lying around going undrunk. I could help with that problem.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 06:10 PM) What makes the ipod mini a fashion accessory? Because I know I won't need to go over 1000 songs and I don't wanna spend 50 more? What's the point of spending 50 bucks on something that will go unused. It's afashion accessory because it comes in several brushed metal colors, versus the plain stark white of the iPod. you WILL want the extra space, no mater what you think now. If you can swing it you won't be sorry getting the full-size model. EDIT: Oh yeah, remember that large capacity external drive I thought you might need to get your computer files back? The 20 or 40 GB iPod would work like a charm.

It's the FDA head honchos who are the real villains here. It took David Graham blowing the whistle on them to bring to light the fact that he and his colleagues were being silenced about riskes they were aware of regarding Vioxx and other drugs. EDIT: And the following link can go in the thread about killing the state-shopping in class action drug suits, but it's wholly relevant here and this appears to be the thread with more legs... I'd feel better about the move to scuttle the lawyers' easy route to class action payoffs if we didn't also have to deal with this: http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/04/07/26.php To summarize, the Bush Administration has been actively blocking individual citizens who have been seriously harmed from drug-related hazards from suing drug manufacturers. The argument, seemingly sound on the surface, is that a judge or jury finding that a drug or device is unsafe, that finding directly conflicts "with the conclusion [of reasonable safety] reached by the FDA after years of rigorous testing and evaluation." The problem is, it's bulls*** if the people at the FDA are actively and willfully witholding information from consumers about product safety. Consumers are f***ed over up front because they are not given all the facts about very potent drugs. Then they are being f***ed over at the back end when their reasonable avenues of legal recourse are being taken away when they suffered from taking the drugs while unaware of KNOWN serious issues. Without looking for any fights, I would like to see a response to this situation from Nuke and Killa, or Eye, as they are among the most vocal in favor of shutting down the multi-state class actions or other such reforms. I agree with them in principle, but as the reality is that the FDA and the Sdministration are so seriously stacking the deck against individual claimants, I see this as one more avenue injured citizens are excluded from.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2005 -> 09:25 AM) Quick thread jack... I heard on the radio the other day that they were testing blood they thought might be Hoffa's on a deadbed confession from the guy who claims to have shot Hoffa. I never did hear the results of the test... has anyone else? You missed the news?? They Found Hoffa. Alive and well. In a hospital delivery room. Organizing labor, of course.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 07:06 PM) Everything lost. f***ing damnit. Not cool at all. Anyway so recover anything? Please help the computer dumbie. That sucks rocks, I've been there. If your hard drive is not fried you should be able to recover most of your life. Try repairing the damaged disk with a bootable repair program like Norton. It will help to have an external large capacity drive to recover everything to if you need to. Failing that, take out the hard drive and either have it diagnosed locally, or put ot into an external drive box and try to get it to come up on another machine so you can pull stuff off of it.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 10:34 AM) What do you mean, "why"? Maybe because, like tobacco, alcohol has very negative effects on one's health with little benefit? Hell, at least presecription drugs have some important medical use. I think wino is suggesting the important part is that these side effects are occurring even when the drugs are "used as directed," within reccommended dosages. IF (and that's a big IF), alcohol were used at the so-called "recommended dosages," people wouldn't be dropping dead, developing psorosis and other alcoholism-related illnesses, etc., and we're told there may ven be slight benefits. Again, of course it's a big if. Even with hard liquor ads pulled years ago, the beer adult beverage industry is phenomenally irresponsible in their advertizing. All the "know when to say when" and "drink responsibly" tag lines in the world don't dilute the message that to be hip and young and popular and sexy tou need to drink brand X and lots of it. Wholly apart from the drug ad issue, I think alcohol advertizing has it's own problems.

Hope it's a great one!

QUOTE(Pastime @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 05:52 AM) I would say that I'm stupid - but that would be redundant. I try to be helpful and nice, but just end up looking like a complete jackass. My life story in a nutshell, ladies and gentlemen. No, I'd say it was good information for hi8is to file away. That Vanagon looks like it might see some action and you never know, fatherhood might be just aroung the corner... What am I saying... risk ruining those nice seats? Never!

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 03:13 AM) Thanks. But why not let this be decided on the state level? Why does it always have to be a federal or nationwide policy? I don't think it does need to be decided at the federal level by any means. It appeared to be the dissenting voices that suggested that the 49 states that had some vehicle for reinstatement of tights got it wrong. They're answer to most of our lefty drivel is "move to Canada,".... Maybe the answer here is for them to move to Alabama...

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 02:44 AM) I see nothing wrong with making these people prove their value to society before just arbitrarily handing them the same rights as a law abiding citizen. I don't disagree with that, just allow that there is a mechanism by which those rights are lawfully reinstated in reasonable time. How about two years on the outside and no trouble, and you can vote again? You set yourself apart from the other dissenters in that you allow that ex-cons CAN prove their value to society. It seems that should be a given or we'd never bother ever releasing anyone back into society.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 02:27 AM) Of course, when you stop and think about it, it's those type of people who have made discoveries, innovations and advances throughout the history of man. The first man to see he mainland recede to the horizon The first tribe to harmonize with fish, bird, and bison The first to cross the desert to see what lies beyond The first to climb the mountain to be closer to their god These brave pioneers reigned in their fears And dared to touch the sky So why won't I even try? If no mortal fear of freefall kept Icarus from flying Then why must I build this Great Wall to 'ere keep me from trying It's time to loose' the shackles that keep us from our fate To tear apart the scaffold and bear up our own weight Brave pioneers reigned in their fears And dared to touch the sky So why can't I even try? Seanaches, shamen, soothsayers, seers Your time is past, yet your time draws near Old story tellers breathe life to the past For I'm ready to learn all your secrets At last...

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 12:12 AM) Or break the law and have enough money to give to Bill and Hillary to get yourself pardoned. But be sure to get a sizeable library donation out of it... touche'

QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Feb 19, 2005 -> 12:00 AM) Or..... Break the law and don't get caught. Or...... Break the law and have an expensive enough lawyer to get off... Or break the law and cost taxpayers $1 billion in a S&L bailout but be lucky enough to be a Bush and have Asian hotties inexplicably come to your hotel and have sex with you for no apparant reason...

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 11:55 PM) 1. The "etc" after the 4 or 5 types of felons I mentioned would include those convicted of white collar crimes. 2. Felons should not be given back the right to elect lawmakers after being convicted of a felony. If you wanna vote, obey the law. It's quite simple actually. Yes, yes, I believe that the etc. was intended to refer to the country club criminal contingent. And it's not that simple. If we consider that once ex-cons are on the outside they are "rehabilitated" and have "paid their debt to society," it is proper and just to reinstate the right to vote. THAT is quite simple actually.

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 11:45 PM) They have the right to vote until they commit a felony and are convicted in a court of law. It is generally accepted that when you commit and are convicted of a FELONY, you have given up your right to elect the future law makers of America. Excuse me as a moderate if I don't shed a tear over the rights of burglars, armed robbers, child molesters, drunks that kill people other than themselves driving home from the bar, convicted murderers, gangbangers, etc., to vote. Once again, white collar criminals are amazingly (if not unpredictably) left off the hit list. Is there a big machine somewhere that just pops you guys out? Once you have been parolled and are an ex-felon, why should you not get back your right to participate in the democratic process?

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 11:34 PM) They've been fighting this battle on a smaller scale for decades. You just didn't hear about it because the US put their heads in the sand for nearly thirty years. The United States accused of ever being "not concerned with fighting terrorism...." I'm shocked -- SHOCKED, I tell you! It was OK when it only happened to somebody else, silly.

Uh, Good Day, eh? Sorry my brother Doug couldn't be here because he broke Dad's beer, but today's subject is interesting hockey rumors...

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 11:10 PM) Wasn't it until only recently that the FDA would allow prescription drugs to be advertised on TV? Yes. A decision that should be revisited, I'd suggest.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 11:08 PM) Canadians have penises? Yes, they just have to look south... er..., down.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 11:01 PM) I'm going to head over to a Toronto Argonauts message board and insult the Canadian government ad nauseam ("to a ridiculous extreme," for those who never read). You think they'll appreciate my comments? They'd be fairly amused, I'm sure, and chalk it up to national penis envy. Then again, if you went to a board inhabited by a buncha Newfies, I'm sure they wouldn't get it...

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 09:46 PM) Sorry. I never saw the addendum to "all men are created equal." I'll make a note of it. You never had to read "Animal Farm" in school?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 10:11 PM) I see ZERo reason to make it a holiday. If you can't take 30 minutes of your day to an hour once every year then the hell with it. Its not a diffucult thing and you should be proud you get to vote at all cause its not the case in some countries. I see you feel doubly strong about this.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 10:10 PM) I see ZERo reason to make it a holiday. If you can't take 30 minutes of your day to an hour once every year then the hell with it. Its not a diffucult thing and you should be proud you get to vote at all cause its not the case in some countries. I see you feel doubly strong about this.

The whole "ask your doctor about [insert drug here]..." direct-marketing culture is problematic. It's good for consumers to be educated and informed about options, but the incessant ads shoved down our throats tell us to march in to our doctor's office and WE TELL HIM what he should be prescribing us. If he disagrees, we go find another doctor, and so on, until we find one that will give us the drugs the TV told us WE NEED (of course, we neglected to listen to the 2-minute litany of possible side effects that are almost as bad as the original condition). At that stage, we are essentially self-medicating, and as we are seeing that can mean trouble. Compounding the problem of course, now you can get just about any drug you'd want online with little or no worries that anybody will actually check to see if a doctor has actually prescribed it to you.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 18, 2005 -> 10:40 PM) Yah I guess I shouldn't have looked it up in the dictionary. WHO IS THIS GUY!?! Ach, I think it's acceptable for a Canuck to not know the term (you do have like 30 words for "snow" though, right? ). It would be a fairly foreign concept up your way. Down this way, however, we're swimming in 'em.