NO MISUNDERSTANDING, PLEASE, TOWNHALL

It seems that there are several commenters here who dominate the senior circuit blogs (who do not have their own blogs) who immediately resort to the vilest lies when cornered with logic and facts.

Just read a couple of your previous essays and discovered that you are not a brother. Amen sister!

Thank you so much, brother -- and another Amen! I knew -- I just knew -- there was intelligent life out there, and it does not surprise me that it would be someone with your intellect, which I believ to be highly acute, who would agree with me with respect to this matter.

As you may have seen in some of my past blog entries, I fought tooth and claw against the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan, which any half-wit can see is a socialistic boondoggle if there ever was one, but our Republicans apparently thought it was time for a good socialistic boondoggle. Even my Democrat Senator voted against it!

However, I cannot imagine how it would have turned out if Gore had been President.

For the record, the Prescription Drug Plan DOES help me, by the end of the year when I'm out of the doughnut hole, but I have sense enough to realize just who is picking up the bamboozling tab, and I certainly have sense enough to realize just how expensive those drugs need to be to help all those middlemen make a profit. Just imagine the middlemen necessary to make these PDPs operate in the black!

And let us not forget that then-FDA Commissioner Tommy Thompson was parading around on the floor of the Senate during the all-night session before the PDPs were given the "aye" vote. That's strictly a no-no, but TT said he was there simply to answer questions. Yes, and I'm the Queen of England.

As far as voting Republican to "fix" the problem, I have voted Republican 98% of the time, beginning with Nixon. I made a big, big mistake in voting for Carter -- as a lot of people did. And I cannot remember voting for any Democrat since, except a time or two in the Senate/House elections.

Thank you again, Pasadena Phil, first of all, for responding, and, second, for responding in the manner you did. I am more appreciative than you can imagine.

I left an "e" off "believe" in the third line of the first paragraph.

In the fourth line of the fourth paragraph, replace "expensive" with "overpriced." That's the truth of the matter.

I can see this...I think Doc got that idea from this statement:

"and the greed of American companies who use their products and labor to make more of a money grag. As if they don't gouge us enough already."

What did you mean by that? The context was you were discussing a drug that theoretically had some ingredients in it from China. And you added that statement.

What does "Green of American companies who use products and labor to make more money" mean?

Shining City: I had to go back a few days to see the comment to which you referred. That comment was one made to 1maschrom in my blog post about China's Precious Metals -- and how we needed to buy that country's entire supply of lead so there would be no possibility of their using it to kill us by degrees.

It specifically referred to a drug, a part of which had been made in China, and that it was poisoning some people to death. No specific drug was intended, although they are probably legion. I was probably thinking of Heparin.

I was bemoaning the fact that the part of the drug that was poisoning people was made in China, that American companies were utilizing the manufacturing facilities in China.

I mentioned that I was "sick, sick, sick just thinking about its [China's] complete disregard for human life and the greed of American companies who use their [China's] products and labor to make more of a money grag [sic] (what was meant was "grab"). As if they [American pharmaceutical companies] don't gouge us enough already. Enough already!

We have in many instances outsourced our livelihoods to countries outside the borders of the U.S.

The fact that in so many instances drug companies are outsourcing the production and manufacturing of prescription drugs to developing countries who just may not have the best interests of Americans in mind is not something that cheers me very much. It does not instill a sense of security about the FDA or any of the companies manufacturing overseas to save a few bucks, perhaps at the risk of your life or mine.

I hardly see any reason why my opinions about these subjects suddenly make me a flaming socialist. Au contraire.

Some people are just all or nothing where capitalism is concerned. If a little is good, than more must be better. I am of the opinion that it has gotten completely out of control. Sadly to the detriment of this country and it's citizens.

My husband is in the construction business and is forced to compete with illegals for work. Why? Because big companies can get more "bang for their buck". This is a rampant problem. It is NOT ok to do ANYTHING just to save money and make more profit. Just as in the micro, there should be bounries which these companies will not cross to make a buck.

Just look at how Bush is attempting to flood the U.S. with Mexican truckers who are cheaper and don't have to follow ANY of the rules American truckers do. AGAINST a congressional madate no less. I'm sorry but that is just plain wrong.

1maschrom: Thank you for your comment. I apologize for not responding to it earlier. If you looked, there are a couple of bloggers here, one of whom has done some fairly heavy lifting on my behalf -- the irrepressibly intelligent Pasadena Phil. I've attempted to put my two cents' worth in, but having Pasadena Phil say so many things that support my long-thought-out opinions makes my comments fairly -- not totally -- by fairly unnecessary.

As far as there being boundaries over which big business should not creep in order to make a buck (free, insofar as many pay no taxes and surely pay no health insurance for these leeches from south of the border), I agree with you. And, indeed, from my understanding there IS a boundary, but nobody pays any attention to it. That boundary is called U.S. law, but lawlessness seems to be the creed of the day. All I know is that if I were the one stomping on so many of our own laws, I would be put in the slammer faster than you could say Boo. But big business? Forget about it. They make up their own laws -- and probably share their profits with their crooked in-their-pockets politicians. I guess I'm one of those "bitter" ones.

Those Mexican truckers, to my knowledge, sail through the United States as if they owned the place -- which they will if the silent majority doesn't begin voting those creeps (the appropriate ones in Congress) out of office.

I don't even know who it is that tests these Mexican truckers to see if they can read English traffic signs or read any signs, for that matter.

I'm for businesses making a profit, but I am not in favor of their profiteering, which so many of them do. After all, capitalism should be lively but fair. "All's fair in love and war," they say, but I don't believe "all's fair" in the current American economy.

Thanks for your comments.

And FYI NOBODY is testing the truckers. God forbid it be exposed that many are criminals, they drive for days without proper rest, take amphemines, drive seriously unsafe rigs, and can't read or speak english worth a crap.

And I love the administrations baloney about how if we don't let the Mexican truckers have full rein of our roads, they are going to retaliate and not let the American truckers into Mexico with cargo. Bwahhhhhhaaaaaaaa! NEWSFLASH- our truckers DON'T WANT to go into Mexico so they can be hijacked by the drug cartels. I say, LET THEM RETALIATE!!!!

But good ole Jorge Bush doesn't bother with details. Might put a cog in his wheel. And we wouldn't want that would we?

...as Martin Luther so aptly once said, "The history of the human race is the history of a drunken man reeling from one wall to the other," by which he was pointing out our human tendency to react to one extreme by going to the other. Reading over the last several posts and comment threads, coming late to the party as such, I see truth on both sides of this kerfuffle. To label Friggles a socialist over one issue is absurd. To accept the liberal talking points contra big industry is likewise absurd. All too often, the truth lies in the middle, because reality is usually so much more complex than our limited ability to collect all the relevant data on any given point. Above all, we need to be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem responses (http://theinterface.blogtownhall.com/2008/04/17/the_pyramid_of_disagreement__a_critical_tool_for_analyzing_arguments.thtml).

...for the long link that, at least on my computer, makes the display rather "odd." To add insult to injury, I've bumped that post to 4/23, so the link probably won't work anyway. Just come on over to the Interface and you'll find it, since I'm trying to keep it on top for awhile. Yeah, Townhall is technologically...um...how shall I put this...character developing? But it is free!

Things are NOT black and white. There are middle grounds (shades of gray if you will). To be completely on one side or the other is to be rigid and unanalytical.

Like I said, it's like how people behave in their personal lives. Just because one CAN do something unethical or even illegal to make more of a profit/money doesn't mean one SHOULD.

I honestly think that is what is wrong with people, they have given up on common sense. Which will take you a LONG way if you let it!