Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richnorth who wrote (8640)	11/18/2006 2:16:54 AM
From: RMF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224660

Why would anything Michael Moore says be worthy of a post?

To: Richnorth who wrote (8640)	11/18/2006 3:45:34 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224660

You must be so proud of your commie comrades. I like the part how the rich get to jump to the front of the line. Beijing admits organ tourism By Richard Spencer LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH November 17, 2006 BEIJING -- China has acknowledged the practice of "transplant tourism," in which the organs of executed prisoners are sold to foreigners, and says it wants to regulate the sale of kidneys, livers and other body parts. "Most of the organs from cadavers are from executed prisoners," Vice Health Minister Huang Jiefu said at a summit for transplant doctors in Guangzhou this week, state newspapers reported. The practice had been repeatedly denied by the government. A ministry spokesman also said that "wealthier people, including foreign patients" could jump waiting lists because they were willing to pay more. Under new rules, foreigners would only be allowed to come to China for transplants under regulations yet to be announced but that would conform to international standards, the summit was told. Priority would be given to an estimated 1 million Chinese on waiting lists. All doctors would have to agree to the rules, which also include a ban on "organ trading" -- buying organs from live donors and transporting the organs for sale outside China. The rules appear to be a direct response to charges dating back to the 1980s that foreigners were arriving in China for transplants and waiting as little as two weeks for a donor to be found. In some cases, it was claimed that prisoners were being executed so transplants could take place. The claims were repeatedly denied by government spokesmen. In December, the Daily Telegraph was invited to act as a middleman offering organs for sale to patients fed up with waiting lists in Britain. Patients would be charged about $40,000 for a kidney and more than $60,000 for a liver transplant. The government said in April that it would ban the trade in organs from living people and insisted that all donations should be with consent, even in the case of executed prisoners. But this failed to address the fact that donations were already supposed to be with consent, a rule widely thought to be ignored. The regulations also only applied to ministry of health hospitals. Most transplant operations on foreigners are done at military hospitals run by the People's Liberation Army.

To: Richnorth who wrote (8640)	11/19/2006 5:45:56 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224660

Chaos out of the gate for Democratic majority in Congress by Charlotte Raab Nov 19, 2006 WASHINGTON (AFP) - Infighting among US Democrats after their victory in the November 7 elections has led some to wonder if the party is up to the task of controlling Congress. The first week of legislative work since the elections brought a personal defeat to incoming speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, who will become the first woman to be number three in the constitutional line of succession -- behind the president and the vice president. While trying unsuccessfully to impose a close ally as her right-hand man, she gave her followers reason to doubt her political skills. "Nancy Pelosi has managed to severely scar her leadership even before taking up the gavel as the new speaker of the House," The New York Times commented in an editorial. "The new majority -- led by a presumably wiser speaker -- must realize by now that intramural vendetta is hardly a substitute for productive government." In spite of the lack of clarity of their legislative agenda and the limited powers granted them the by the US Constitution, congressional Democrats have received a mandate from US voters. With all eyes now on the upcoming 2008 presidential race, Democrats' ability to create a credible alternative to the Bush presidency will be crucial in convincing voters to allow them to take back the White House in two years. For the moment, the Democrats, who will be sworn in in January, have two months to prepare for operating from the position of strength. The problem, however, is that Democrats have campaigned throughout the country on the theme of change. "They didn't have a detailed plan and they're now having to assemble one, and they have a small majority, so it's not like they can be very bold in what they propose," said Darrell West, professor at Brown University. For the moment, new Democratic leaders confirmed only a handful of priorities they plan to pursue in the coming weeks: an increase in the minimum wage, a new energy policy that is less favorable to oil companies, and efforts to combat the greenhouse effect. Bush has already indicated that he is open to raising the minimum wage as long as measures are taken to shield small businesses from the effects of the measure. However, their more ambitious proposals risk bumping against a presidential veto or fall victim of internal divisions among the Democrats themselves who hold disparate political positions on various issues. And their majority in the Senate will be particularly precarious: 51 Democrats versus 49 Republicans. It also is counting on cooperation from people with a pronounced independent streak such as former Democrat Joseph Lieberman, who was re-elected with strong support from Republican voters, and a former Reagan administration official, Jim Webb. Political scientist Larry Sabato from the University of Virginia has a simple piece of advice: "Narrow their focus, concentrate on just a few things and recognize that they're not going to be able to get much done until they have a Democratic president."

To: Richnorth who wrote (8640)	11/21/2006 10:40:45 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 224660

10. When we raise the minimum wage, we will pay you -- and your employees -- that new wage, too. They might just do that, at least if you count my income after taxes. <g> 3. We will not spend your grandchildren's money on our personal whims or to enrich our friends. How many seconds will that one last? we promise that you, too, will be able to see a doctor, regardless of your ability to pay. Assuming you have the ability to wait long enough once medicine is socialized. 9. We will not take away your hunting guns. If you need an automatic weapon or a handgun then you really aren't much of a hunter and you should, perhaps, pick up another sport... So they will take away handguns? As for automatic weapons that's a red herring. The so called "assault weapons ban" under Clinton did nothing about automatic weapons. It baned semi-auto weapons because of appearance, or non-important factors like bayonet lugs or flash suppressors. Automatic weapons have long been heavily controlled. Neither the "assault weapons ban" or its repeal affected them. 12. We will not tolerate politicians who are corrupt and who are bought and paid for by the rich. They've already tolerated politicians who are corrupt. I don't expect that to change.