ALARM one out of six children....

"You have said about ten times that you don't agree with the situation
and don't understand why people are supporting it. I am addressing
*you* and *your* disagreement, not the general American public. "

You've lost me here. I'm really not sure what you are going on about.

I think I've said I disagree with the war on Iraq in this conversation
once or twice. If you are looking for a debate about THAT then look
elsewhere. I'm really not interested. All I am saying is that your
constant exhortations for the American people to rise up and demand
things are misplaced since you are suggesting they demand stuff they
don't want. My opinion in that disucssion is irrelevant.


"Also the deficit has increased hugely as a direct result of the 'war'.

Everybody knows that. Even Bush has said that the justification for it
has to do with 9/11."

Not really, The surpluss disappeared and turned into a deficit but the
total debt of the US was alive and well a long time before GWB got
here.


"So what are you going to do about the deficit, anyways? What do you
think should be done? "

I don't claim to have a solution and can't see the possible relevance
to this conversation.



"How do you sleep at night knowing your tax money is going towards so
many civilian deaths? "

Well, hold on there. There have been Canadian troops in Iraq as well so
you can just climb down off of the high horse. FWIW I sleep just fine.


"You've already said you don't support the war.
Why do you keep defending the American government if it isn't
supporting your interests? That makes no sense. "

Where did I ever support the US gov't? I just pointed out that GWB
has the support of the majority of Americans. He can be faulted for
many things but disregarding the wishes of his electorate on the issue
of Iraq is not one of them.


"What do you mean? How is a company a person? My point is that without
government regulations based on human rights, people can be exploited.
Again, I don't understand why you have a problem enacting laws that
guaruntee human rights as they were drawn up in the UN charter. "

We don't. We just don't accept the UN as defining what we should and
shouldn't do (and I have my doubts about your characterization of what
the UN really says on the matter).




"Article 25 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights:


(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for
the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food,

clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and
the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness,
disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in
circumstances beyond his control.


This includes check ups, as they are argueably 'necessary' to ensure
health and well-being. What is so confusing about this? If you
disagree, please explain. "


The operative word being "arguably". This could be read to say that the
people have a right to treatment of illnesses - not preventative health
services - which the US gov't does provide for.


It seems that you want to turn this into a far ranging debate on US
foreign policy, US healthcare, our relationship to the UN, our charity
(or lack thereof) toward poorer countries, the general definitionof
"rights", etc, etc. Well, no thankyou.

I posted to adress a few narrow points:

1) That preventative healthcare is not currently considered a right in
the US and is not clearly delineated as such by any of the usual
sources used to define the word.

2) That your idea that Americans are being ignored by their government
and that gov't healthcare (and he war in Iraq as a tangent) are likely
to be obtained by popular uprising.demand is not supported by the
recent elections or polls.

If you have a comment relevant to those two points - go ahead and
comment. If you want to argue about the other stuff take it to a
politics newsgroup.

BTW - I like how this post was not on my home server as of midnight
last night, apppeared on Google at 7:05 am, and at 8:01 am you
complained in another thread that I was ducking you and refusing to
answer. I'll be checking for your response to this within the half
hour.

--
00doc

"Please. Actually the Canada Health Act of 1984 states that "all
patients are entitled to receive medically necessary services delivered

by doctors and hospitals" and it further stipulates that all health
coverage must be "universally available, comprehensive, portable,
accessible and publicly administered."

How does that *not* read as Health Care is a right? "

There is a difference between and entitlement and a right. Governments
grant entitlements. Rights come from whatever higher power you believe
in.



"And as far as being ok with the way things are in America, I still
think you are nuts. You people have to live in a constant state of fear

- fear of massive terrorist attacks, fear of being shot by a fellow
citizen, fear of becoming unemployed, fear of getting sick, fear of
living in the wrong school district, fear of getting pregnant (without
a guarunteed maternity leave compensation). Etc. Etc. "


Actually what we fear the most is arrogant Canadians trying to foist
their dysfunctional solutions upon us. Bush definately invaded the
wrong country. The war could have been over by now.

--
00doc

Medina Wilson wrote in message:

Its still better here.

I'm not into whose country is better games, and I'm sincerely happy
that you're happy where you are. I'm also happy where I am, and am
working (or so I believe) to make it better here, in the US. It's not
perfect here, never has been, but, well, it's corny to say but I'm a
believer in the 'working together for a better tomorrow' ethic. Snicker
if you will, but that's my take on the US.

And as far as being ok with the way things are in America, I still
think you are nuts. You people have to live in a constant state of
fear
- fear of massive terrorist attacks, fear of being shot by a fellow
citizen, fear of becoming unemployed, fear of getting sick, fear of
living in the wrong school district, fear of getting pregnant
(without
a guarunteed maternity leave compensation). Etc. Etc.

I'm unwilling to speak for 'all Americans' (or 'you people') but will
go out on a limb and say with confidence that, in general, I don't
believe that the majority of people here in the US live in a state of
fear. Yeah, sure, we'd rather not get sick, yeah sure, there's no
guaranteed employment, and certainly, the healthcare options for those
'in the middle' are poor. But fear? Not really. You cited some
television show earlier (a daily talk show? my tv viewing is limited)
and I'm wondering if perhaps your perspective of life here in the US is
influenced by how things are portrayed by a studio in Burbank....

I don't know, it really doesn't sound like much fun to have constant
terror clouding up part of your day to day lives. But then, I'm not
really used to it.

Medina

Um, I don't have constant teror clouding up part of my day-to-day life,
even when driving in Boston .

Caledonia

Well, hold on there. There have been Canadian troops in Iraq as well
so
you can just climb down off of the high horse. FWIW I sleep just
fine.



There were Canadian troops in the Middle East at the time of the
invasion, but they left pretty quick and didn't participate. Everyone
knows Canada took a pass on Iraq. Please. Next your going to tell me we
went to Vietnam too, at the same time as we welcomed the dodgers. Get
real.

Where did I ever support the US gov't? I just pointed out that GWB
has the support of the majority of Americans. He can be faulted for
many things but disregarding the wishes of his electorate on the
issue
of Iraq is not one of them.


If you don't want to talk about this why are you bringing it up? (-;


We don't. We just don't accept the UN as defining what we should and
shouldn't do (and I have my doubts about your characterization of
what
the UN really says on the matter).


Hmmmm. So the UN is wrong about what human rights are. Interesting.
They are widely concidered to be the authority on the subject.

As for your ludicrous suggestion that I misquoted the Declaration? What
a cop-out. Have a look yourself. http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Check out Article 125. I wasn't summarizing, I was quoting.



The operative word being "arguably". This could be read to say that
the
people have a right to treatment of illnesses - not preventative
health
services - which the US gov't does provide for.

So how do preventative services not ensure health and well-being? Any
doctor will tell you they are necessary. Are you more equipped to call
that than them? You are really grasping at straws now.


It seems that you want to turn this into a far ranging debate on US
foreign policy, US healthcare, our relationship to the UN, our
charity
(or lack thereof) toward poorer countries, the general definitionof
"rights", etc, etc. Well, no thankyou.


They are related. I've made that clear.

I posted to adress a few narrow points:

1) That preventative healthcare is not currently considered a right
in
the US and is not clearly delineated as such by any of the usual
sources used to define the word.


I agree, I'm saying that isn't ethical or fair or equitable.

2) That your idea that Americans are being ignored by their
government
and that gov't healthcare (and he war in Iraq as a tangent) are
likely
to be obtained by popular uprising.demand is not supported by the
recent elections or polls.


I never said that. People on this thread were whining about the
American system. I suggested changing it. Go back and re-read.

If you have a comment relevant to those two points - go ahead and
comment. If you want to argue about the other stuff take it to a
politics newsgroup.

BTW - I like how this post was not on my home server as of midnight
last night, apppeared on Google at 7:05 am, and at 8:01 am you
complained in another thread that I was ducking you and refusing to
answer. I'll be checking for your response to this within the half
hour.

OOOOOh. Scary! If you are not for changing the American system than I'm
sorry you got caught up in this. My original comments were directed at
people who are, and you jumped in. All these issues are related
anyways.



--
00doc

Caledonia wrote:
Medina Wilson wrote in message:

Its still better here.

I'm not into whose country is better games, and I'm sincerely happy
that you're happy where you are. I'm also happy where I am, and am
working (or so I believe) to make it better here, in the US. It's not
perfect here, never has been, but, well, it's corny to say but I'm a
believer in the 'working together for a better tomorrow' ethic.

Wow. Human rights are corny! It's so much cooler to be a total ****ing
asshole to everyone not in your family! So I guess we'll assume if you
are the victim of anything unjust, we can step over you, even spit on
you if we feel like it. Gross.


I'm unwilling to speak for 'all Americans' (or 'you people') but will
go out on a limb and say with confidence that, in general, I don't
believe that the majority of people here in the US live in a state of
fear.

OK. So the coloured terrorist warning chart has no effect on the
majority of Americans? Interesting. We'll see about that the next time
the warning level is raised.

Yeah, sure, we'd rather not get sick, yeah sure, there's no
guaranteed employment, and certainly, the healthcare options for
those
'in the middle' are poor. But fear? Not really. You cited some
television show earlier (a daily talk show? my tv viewing is limited)
and I'm wondering if perhaps your perspective of life here in the US
is
influenced by how things are portrayed by a studio in Burbank....


America is defined by its media, and vice versa. That has been true for
a very long time.

There is a difference between and entitlement and a right.
Governments
grant entitlements. Rights come from whatever higher power you
believe
in.



I didn't know you were a Jesus-freak. That definition of rights is most
peculiar. I'm pretty sure you can use entitlement and right
interchangeable in a sentence.

Higher power? Please. That doesn't even make sense.


Actually what we fear the most is arrogant Canadians trying to foist
their dysfunctional solutions upon us. Bush definately invaded the
wrong country. The war could have been over by now.

That's like, totally South Park funny man. Rock on!


--
00doc

Medina Wilson wrote in message:
Caledonia wrote:
Medina Wilson wrote in message:

Its still better here.

I'm not into whose country is better games, and I'm sincerely happy
that you're happy where you are. I'm also happy where I am, and am
working (or so I believe) to make it better here, in the US. It's
not
perfect here, never has been, but, well, it's corny to say but I'm
a
believer in the 'working together for a better tomorrow' ethic.

Wow. Human rights are corny! It's so much cooler to be a total
****ing
asshole to everyone not in your family! So I guess we'll assume if
you
are the victim of anything unjust, we can step over you, even spit on
you if we feel like it. Gross.

I'm no longer even sure what you're talking about, but you do seem very
wound up about it. I'm just not getting it.

I'm unwilling to speak for 'all Americans' (or 'you people') but
will
go out on a limb and say with confidence that, in general, I don't
believe that the majority of people here in the US live in a state
of
fear.

OK. So the coloured terrorist warning chart has no effect on the
majority of Americans? Interesting. We'll see about that the next
time
the warning level is raised.

Uh, no, I don't see Tom Ridge's powerpoint affecting the daily lives of
most Americans. (My friend told me that they show this chart every day
on some TV show -- is that where you're getting this from?)


Yeah, sure, we'd rather not get sick, yeah sure, there's no
guaranteed employment, and certainly, the healthcare options for
those
'in the middle' are poor. But fear? Not really. You cited some
television show earlier (a daily talk show? my tv viewing is
limited)
and I'm wondering if perhaps your perspective of life here in the
US
is
influenced by how things are portrayed by a studio in Burbank....


America is defined by its media, and vice versa. That has been true
for
a very long time.

I think I now see where you're coming from. So, it's more of a 'Dirty
Harry' or 'Dallas' perspective, yes? I'm out of my depth here vis a vis
popular television (and I'm inferring pretty quickly your perspective
is not 'Gilligan's Island,' 'McHale's Navy,' or 'Petticoat Junction,'
three favorites from when I used to watch television. *Those* were
great shows, b/t/w. My recent viewing is limited to watching Bernard
Hopkins, and I'll go out on a limb and say you're not a Hopkins fan but
probably more like Norman Stone in Ruiz' corner...). I think we're
experiencing a 'when worlds collide' moment, as I'm not up on most of
what's being broadcast today and a great deal of your perspective is
based on television. Do you watch Chris Rock or 'Chapelle's Show'?
Those two I also catch whenever-- maybe we can find common ground
there...

Perplexed,
Caledonia

"Medina Wilson" wrote in message
oups.com...

I'm unwilling to speak for 'all Americans' (or 'you people') but will
go out on a limb and say with confidence that, in general, I don't
believe that the majority of people here in the US live in a state of
fear.

OK. So the coloured terrorist warning chart has no effect on the
majority of Americans? Interesting. We'll see about that the next time
the warning level is raised.

Actually, the vast majority of USAmericans are not impacted by the raising
of the threat level. I live in the NY metro area, and the only time I saw
any changes that could be attributed to an increased threat level was during
the Republican National Circus last August. At that time it was a rise to
Orange, and with Bush coming it made sense to be extra careful in the area
surrounding Madison Square Garden.

However, eight blocks away from there, that would be in Times Square, you
could not tell the difference.

I own a large boat, with an electronics package that is comparable to that
found on a Coast Guard cutter of similar size. I am active in the CG
Auxiliary and, even when the threat level changes, I see and hear of no
change in the local world.

"Kevysmom" wrote in message
lkaboutparenting.com...

(...)

I agree 110%!! I met a woman at store with a severely disabled child, She
flys to Spain every six months for treatments with her child! If you have
a severly disabled child you know how hard this would be. Of course she is
desperate for anything to help her child, I just wish she wouldnt have to
go out of the country for treatments, And I wish I didnt have to go out of
the country for my sons medicine.

But are these treatments effective?

When ever I hear any Canadian complain about healthcare, I say hey 40
million Americans have no healthcare!

They do have health care. No ER can turn them away.

From what I was told, Its taken out of your pay, the same way they do for
taxes except this goes into the fund for medical. Today a older woman
told me that she got a perscription for hose for her legs, 167 dollars for
one pair! Some one told her to go to Target they have them for 6.95! She
bought 4 pair, I said what about the people on medicare, I bet they just
go ahead and have medicare pay for this. Someone needs to fix this!

According to the people who sell these hose for $167, it is working just
fine.

And, Medicare and Medicaid cannot, under law signed by Dubya, negoiate with
drug companies for lower rates. I think it was the "No Drug Company Left
Behind Act."

Jeff

Donna

Caledonia wrote:

I'm no longer even sure what you're talking about, but you
do seem
very wound up about it. I'm just not getting it.

Ditto - I think (s)he just knows that (s)he wants to fight
and really isn't following his or her own comments very
well.



America is defined by its media, and vice versa. That has
been true
for a very long time.

I think I now see where you're coming from. So, it's more
of a 'Dirty
Harry' or 'Dallas' perspective, yes? I'm out of my depth
here vis a
vis popular television

Better to be out of your depth in discussing TV than
reality.

I think I'll just let Medina be alone with his or her
delusions.

--
00doc