In article ,
wrote:
Supreme Court? Is that like a regular Court, but with tomatoes and
sour cream?

Don't forget the guacamole.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

Dave wrote:
That's the standard Dem message, Doug--"I'm gonna give you something and the
other fella is gonna pay for it."

As opposed to the standard Republican message: "Screw the environment,
screw the French and all those other foreign sissies, and as long as
you're not a multimillionaire, screw you."

DSk

In article ,
Dave wrote:
Now, what was that one case you read that makes you an expert?

Well, duh, I already answered that.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 19 Oct 2004 10:21:51 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

He's the DA in NY.

Close, but no cigar. He's the State Attorney General with ambitions for
higher office.

Yup... I was thinking NYC for some reason.


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 19 Oct 2004 12:24:58 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

Now, what was that one case you read that makes you an expert?

Well, duh, I already answered that.

Ah. It wasn't clear to me that you had unequivocally admitted that Marbury
v. Madison is the only case you read to become an expert.


Ah, I know it wasn't clear to you. Who said I was an expert? You??


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

"DSK" wrote
Vito wrote:
... There currently is no "approved" cure for
diabetes so millions of people throughout the world each spend $100s per
month to stay alive.

There is no cure for diabetes, period. It isn't a matter of "approval."

Are you sure? Ron Reagan Jr said stem cells had been used experimentally to
cure rats.

... OTOH scientists can take a few of your cells, strip
out your DNA and inject it into, say, a frog egg stripped of its frog
DNA,
and that cloned egg will divide into YOUR stem cells. That's a fact
(Remember Dolly the sheep?). Now if my stem cells were injected into my
pancreas they would say "Gee, we must be Vito's pancreas cells!" and
begin
making insulin - and my diabetes would be cured.

Well, if it's that simple, why don't you do it yourself?

Same reason I can't duplicate my VHF rig on a work bench - lack of equipment
and skill. But that doesn't mean the equipment and skill doesn't exist, as
witness Dolly.

... So why isn't that
happening? Because additional research is needed to get the proceedure
approved and who is going to pay for that?

Actually, it is happening. But very little of it is happening in the U.S.

I guess that's good news.

... Not the drug companies! It'd cost
them $billions!! Maybe that's why Bush won't allow federal funding.
Y'see
it takes PATIENT DNA to do the research and Bush only allows a dozen or
so
"established strains" to be used. Or maybe it's because the good folks
who
eat their god every sunday also think that every lump of stem cells is a
baby.

You may be blaming the wrong folks. It turns out that George Bush Jr.
ain't "church people" after all.

Where'd you hear that? He says he is - altho some here say he lies (c: And
then there's the anti-gay marriage amendment and his promise to appoint
anti-abortion judges and ...., and .....

In any event, you're crying for the moon and getting mad at Daddy for
not fetching it for you.

No, I am angry at GW Bush for preventing science from fetching it for me and
1000s of others.


How much have you donated to the American Diabetes Society this year? Last
year? How much translational research
have you funded?

About $1000/year. You?

You're angry at the docs & drug companies for making a profit, and
insisting that they cure you for free. That doesn't make much sense.

No, I am angry at the AMA and drug companies for creating a monopoly that
forces Americans to pay more than we should for treatment. A PhD Chemist or
Microbiologist is lucky to earn $125K/yr but MDs think themselves killed if
they don't make a $mil/yr. The difference? Chemists, et al, don't have a
powerful union like AMA. Drug companies charge Americans 2 - 10X what
Canadians pay. Why? Because we have the finest politicians money can buy,
and they own plenty. I used to buy some of my medicines overseas but Bush
put a stop to that. Jeeze, if the Teamsters were as bad as AMA we'd have to
get prescriptions from truckers to buy a new car.

Well, if it's that simple, why don't you do it yourself?


Vito wrote:
Same reason I can't duplicate my VHF rig on a work bench - lack of equipment
and skill. But that doesn't mean the equipment and skill doesn't exist, as
witness Dolly.

In case you hadn't noticed, rats & sheep are different from people.

But go ahead, if you succeed I guarantee you'll be one of the world's
richest men.


You may be blaming the wrong folks. It turns out that George Bush Jr.
ain't "church people" after all.


Where'd you hear that? He says he is - altho some here say he lies (c: And
then there's the anti-gay marriage amendment and his promise to appoint
anti-abortion judges and ...., and .....

Well, I guess if talking about it is what defines one's religious
beliefs, then sure. But it's easily documented fact that George W. is a
very infrequent church goer.


In any event, you're crying for the moon and getting mad at Daddy for
not fetching it for you.


No, I am angry at GW Bush for preventing science from fetching it for me and
1000s of others.

It's not entirely his fault because 1- he is a puppet and 2- it is still
years away from even experimental protocols on human patients. Of course
it is still a free country... wait a minute, it's not really, but you do
still have the freedom to experiment on yourself.




How much have you donated to the American Diabetes Society this year? Last

year? How much translational research

have you funded?


About $1000/year. You?

None to diabetes. Quite a bit more than that to the Leukemia/Lymphoma
Society, which is a matter close to our family. We also donate a lot of
money to various medical foundations & two universities. Not that I'm
bragging or anything



You're angry at the docs & drug companies for making a profit, and
insisting that they cure you for free. That doesn't make much sense.


No, I am angry at the AMA and drug companies for creating a monopoly that
forces Americans to pay more than we should for treatment. A PhD Chemist or
Microbiologist is lucky to earn $125K/yr but MDs think themselves killed if
they don't make a $mil/yr.

That's a laugh. I know a lot of MDs who make less than your 125K$/yr.
And I know a lot that are not accepting new patients.

In any event, if there is no profit then there is no incentive to
provide goods or services. If the pharmaceutical companies are making
obscene profits in your humble opinion, then the answer is to 1- not buy
drugs and/or 2- buy stock in those pharm companies.

.... Drug companies charge Americans 2 - 10X what
Canadians pay.

I think that is somewhat of an exaggeration. But the higher prices in
the US is a problem.

Meanwhile, you are making a number of unwise assumptions. Why should
drugs be cheap, other than that you want it that way? Some even demand
free drugs and health care... why should it be free any more than
gasoline or electricity or video games should be free?

... Why? Because we have the finest politicians money can buy

No argument from me there.

But politics is not the answer to everything.

DSK

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 19 Oct 2004 13:59:54 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

Who said I was an expert? You??

So as I suspected, you had no qualifications whatever for evaluating the
quality of Justice Thomas's opinions. Thanks for finally acknowledging that
you were again simply blowing smoke.

The only cases Thomas seems to have written majority opinions for are
gun related. Do you think he's paranoid since he lynching?



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 20 Oct 2004 10:27:30 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

The only cases Thomas seems to have written majority opinions for are
gun related.

Totally wrong again, Jon. Thomas has authored just over 100 majority
opinions of the Court. Very few have anything to do with guns. I can furnish
you the complete list if you'd like to confirm that you're blowing smoke
again.

And you would expect me to actually read it???



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 20 Oct 2004 13:38:15 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

I would expect that if you had any reasonable basis for your silly claims
you would have read enough of the opinions so you wouldn't need to even look
through the list. But then we already know you were blowing smoke as usual.

What happened? Did you see some such thing in one of your usual flaky
sources and simply swallow it whole?

Bzzzzz... the answer is a higher authority told me.



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."