It's pretty clear there is no lack of time & space in the media for Dems viewpoints. They speak & regardless of how useless their speech is someone will write about it.

 

The real problem as Nuke has eluded to is that the Dems just want to whine. They don't want to do something about it. Our any of them proposing legislation to insure that we have adequate manufacturing capacity of vacines here at home in the future? That's doing something about the problem. That's not just whining about it.

 

Of course that action goes against the "global economy" paradigm that rules over both parties today & is otherwise considered unthinkable. So global capitalism overrules common sense in taking care of our own.

The real problem as Nuke has eluded to is that the Dems just want to whine.  They don't want to do something about it.  Our any of them proposing legislation to insure that we have adequate manufacturing capacity of vacines here at home in the future?  That's doing something about the problem.  That's not just whining about it.

The answer to your question "Are (our????) any of them proposing legislation..." is right up there.

 

On September 29th, the Senate approved $4 billion to buy antivirals and to fund “other measures” (including surveillance, vaccine development, and state and local preparedness) to ready for a pandemic. However, it’s not certain this will pass through Congress, as Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens ® threatened to block the money, as the avian flu “has not yet become a threat to human beings.”

The answer to your question "Are (our????) any of them proposing legislation..." is right up there.

 

Avian Flu= not a threat to humans=holding up legislation

Bridge to serve 35 people=$350 million= in highway bill legislation

 

Makes sense to me.

How much of the $4B is going towards subsidizing manufacturing here in the US?

Since the patent in question I believe is not actually held by a U.S. company, I would guess very little. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Since the patent in question I believe is not actually held by a U.S. company, I would guess very little.  Feel free to prove me wrong.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How should I respond to this? I can go the personal attack route .. which you have in the other threads .. or I can go the sensei route & enlighten you.

 

When you consider the size of the American economy in relation to the rest of the world it's impractical to believe that a company holding the patent to this vaccine or any other would not setup manufacturing in the US if given the proper incentive to do so.

 

As to that incentive, conservatives are not chained to the minimum wage as liberals are. In the interest of national security the US Congress can make an exception for this.

 

I actually agree, to an extent.

 

But it's pretty interesting how Congress isn't motivated until they get their fingers in the pie, now isn't it?

It reads like something out of the movie Outbreak. Scary stuff:

http://www.yahoo.com/s/247969

How should I respond to this?  I can go the personal attack route .. which you have in the other threads .. or I can go the sensei route & enlighten you.

 

When you consider the size of the American economy in relation to the rest of the world it's impractical to believe that a company holding the patent to this vaccine or any other would not setup manufacturing in the US if given the proper incentive to do so.

 

As to that incentive, conservatives are not chained to the minimum wage as liberals are. In the interest of national security the US Congress can make an exception for this.

 

I'm a little confused. Are you suggesting that you want the Avian Flu vaccine produced by people who are making less than minimum wage?

I'm a little confused.  Are you suggesting that you want the Avian Flu vaccine produced by people who are making less than minimum wage?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It is not what I want but rather what the market will bear. If that is the needed incentive to base manufacting of vaccines vital to national security interests in the USA then I think it should be on the table.

 

Let's just say the need for the supply far outweighs the methods to produce the supply.

Nuke: "Could they, just once, just shut the hell up and do something useful?"

 

As a Democrat, I think you're right. Many Democrats have become dopplegangers of the Clinton-haters of the late 90s.

 

We have outstanding ideas on things like energy independence, science education, and fiscal policy. However, many are way too obsessed with hating Bush, even to the point of wishing failure to America to see a Bush failure. Since the clown isn't going to be here past 2008, people in my party need to get a clue.

So many people in my party who say that aren't on the clue train either.

 

If you want ideas, that's fine - but producing an alternative to a scenario that was never acceptable in the first place - is never a good idea.

Nuke: "Could they, just once, just shut the hell up and do something useful?"

 

As a Democrat, I think you're right. Many Democrats have become dopplegangers of the Clinton-haters of the late 90s.

 

We have outstanding ideas on things like energy independence, science education, and fiscal policy. However, many are way too obsessed with hating Bush, even to the point of wishing failure to America to see a Bush failure. Since the clown isn't going to be here past 2008, people in my party need to get a clue.

 

I still say give me a Democrat that stands for something that mainstream America believes in, I'd vote for him (I didn't say HER because there's only ONE "her" and I'd die before I'd vote for "HER").

 

I'm not tied to the Republican Party, I'm tied to the ideals of conservative viewpoints.

 

Frankly the Republican Party sucks balls too right now. They just identify more closely with what I believe to be true.

Yeah, because Harkin's facing a real threat of not getting re-elected....right. Harkin's not going anywhere anytime soon, even in a red state. Either is Grassley for that matter, because, as my dad (a liberal who votes democrat all the time, but votes for Grassley) says, he'll not just go along party lines. I don't see Iowa's senators changing at all until one of them dies or steps down. I think people like the balance.

 

Politics, the neverending struggle.

 

Yeah, Harkin and Grassley are here to stay until they die or decide not to run again.