Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)




wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Otherwise they are just words Harry.

Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)

I'm not Kevin, you asshole. Now, go along, don't you have someone's
children you want to say ****ty things about, you low life *******?

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.

" JimH" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.
While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.
Why is that?
When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.
Otherwise they are just words Harry.
I agree with you completely on this JimH. I too find cussing to be
offensive.

Jim C.

wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use
the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)

I'm not Kevin, you asshole. Now, go along, don't you have someone's
children you want to say ****ty things about, you low life *******?


Sure. Don't you think your kids are being greedy and materialistic by
asking for a bike, PS2, ipod, Nintendo DS
and other things for Christmas, with the list, according to you, growing
longer every day?

You may see it differently. I see it as greed.

Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.