agenda
meg...@my-deja.com
Well that last message was a lot of heresay, I must say....
Thanks for that Amy. The agenda here folks is lyme disease,
not "hypothosis" on what a certain candidate will or wont do for us.
NONE of the candidates have come forward to say what they will do for
lyme disease, even Leiberman wont single out lyme disease as his pet
project "IF" he makes it to the White House. If he did, the folks with
MS, Lupus, Aids, Cystic Fibrosis, on and on, would be up in arms that
he is excluding them. Why dont you people with favorites for candidates
go make posters and picket on the streets?--or would that not be as
easy or as cheap as political endorsements posted here?...guess what,
it's the same thing.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
meg...@my-deja.com
OOps, sorry this was supposed to be posted under Bush/Gore discussion
below. My first post, that's the only excuse I have!
Kathleen
What we are concerned about is
the future of managed care. It has
to go away or be significantly modified.
If not for insurance companies usurping
or constitutional right to well-being
we would not be having so much trouble
getting treatment.
Laws have to change for this kind of
abuse to stop. It doesn't just affect
Lyme disease, it affects all diseases
that stand poised to be spun to fit the
intended financial benefit of
patent holders and Ins Co harlots.
Thanks,
Kathleen
meg...@my-deja.com
So Kathleen,
What do you want Government managed health care? Al would bring us
closer to what they have in Canada....is that an acceptable alternative?
Bryan Korff
>
>What we are concerned about is
>the future of managed care. It has
>to go away or be significantly modified.
Hi Kathleen,
I vote it goes away. Government generally destroys whatever it taxes or
funds. The problems are inherent in government sponsorship as demonstrated
in the behavior of the CDC and the NIH. Politicians trade promises for
votes and actions for money. I'd rather they just had less power.
>If not for insurance companies usurping
>or constitutional right to well-being
>we would not be having so much trouble
>getting treatment.
It's the insurance companies in collusion with the politicians. Burrascano
would not be in trouble of losing his license if there were not this
marriage of government power and the medical community's self-interests.
This type of partnership has been an historical facet of fascism not free
market capitalism. Steere would be an empty wind bag without government
support.
But my main point is that I could not let this go by because there is too
much misinformation and misunderstanding about the Constitution. There is
no constitutional right to well-being. In fact, there are actually no
constitutional rights. The Constitution merely recognizes explicitly a few
rights and implicitly many others. These rights are inherent to the human
condition. They predate the Constitution and they exist even where the
Constitution does not hold force (pretty much the whole world now :-(). For
instance, the Chinese people have the right to free exercise of religion;
it's just that they run the risk of being beaten up, put in prison and
tortured for expressions of religion that are not tolerated by the
government in power.
You may be referring to the line in the Declaration of Independence about
"pursuit of happiness". The Declaration of Independence has no legal
standing in court to my knowledge. Also, it is arguable whether or not this
right is a right. It was Thomas Jefferson's substitution for the more
traditional right of property which is what is actually used in the
Constitution. It may not be a right not because it is not recognized that
you should be able to pursue happiness but because you can pursue happiness
regardless of your ability to exercise rights. It seems different in kind.
Also, the right to pursue something is not the right to have it.
>Laws have to change for this kind of
>abuse to stop. It doesn't just affect
>Lyme disease, it affects all diseases
>that stand poised to be spun to fit the
>intended financial benefit of
>patent holders and Ins Co harlots.
I agree strongly but I don't think that I trust politicians any more than
insurance companies. A historical perspective applies well here. I was
once told straight out by a co-worker that she trusted government more than
business. I pointed out that businesses did not kill 6 million Jews in
Germany plus many others nor did it kill 15 to 50 million soviet citizens
nor the 50 to 60 million killed in Mao's cultural revolution.
I'd rather have a free market where I'm free to go to whomever I please for
whatever treatment I think best.
>Thanks,
>Kathleen
Have a great day Kathleen.
Bryan
meg...@my-deja.com
me not voting is not an option...it is a state of apathy.
If you are planning to vote and you are interested in healthcare
issues, you should visit each site for the major candidates. Bush's
site and Gore's site. You can go straight to the healthcare issues
(patients bill of rights, HMO's insurance, etc.) at each site and I
guarantee you will be suprised at the views held by each of them as
well as the hypocrisy and lies that you will find.
Even if you think they will do nothing, or that they are in collusion
with all that is bad for us, it is a fact that whoever is in the White
House will influence our lives.
By the way, the debate is tomorrow night.
Kathleen
>
> So Kathleen,
> What do you want Government managed health care? Al would bring us
> closer to what they have in Canada....is that an acceptable alternative?
No, but there are solutions.
There will not ever be any drastic changes
to the current system in the near future.
But slowly, if we are conscious of opportunities
to make the present system work more equitably,
like not voting for Bush and the BIG BUSINESS
he represents, we will mov forward.
I'm not worried that it will be accomplished,
I just hope in time to get the sick people
better and to prevent the yet-to-be-infected
Lyme people from going to the HELL we've had
to face.
That's all. It's really quite simple.
I just want progress. The Humanitarian
kind, not the "Barbarians at the Gate" kind.
Kathleen
Kathleen
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.preamble.html
We the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
Promote the general "welfare"
Means "well-being"
The intention of the constitution was to
protect our basic liberties and that included
our right to well-being. Health. Well-being.
OUR RIGHT TO HEALTH
HMOs do not allow us our right to health.
They allow themselves the right to keep
means to health away from us. That is
entirely their modus operandi.
Now, if it were not for this basic goal
of HMOs, the ALDFers would not have *structured
their stance on Lyme* according to servitude of
these Managed Care goals.
"It's in there"
;)
Kathleen
FIG4159
Their subscribers health, or lack of it, is irrelevant.
Julie in SW Florida
Kathleen e:
>HMOs do not allow us our right to health.
>They allow themselves the right to keep
>means to health away from us. That is
>entirely their modus operandi.
Julie in SW Florida
Bryan Korff
Papers for starters.
The operative word is general. It meant what benefited everyone more or
less equally. An example would be common defense. A benefit to a given
individual or group of individuals was not what was intended. Also, this is
the preamble. It has no purpose other than a declaration of why we are
laying out the Constitution. It's the Constitution itself that is specific
and binding.
Along the lines of your reasoning was why AFDC and other programs were
called "welfare". It put a very thin veneer of constitutionality on it in
the minds of some people.
Bryan
--
Faith and Liberty Books
Feed Your Head (tm)
Bryan Korff
were intended as an intermediate step to nationalized health care. If true
this supports my desire for government to back out before it's too late.
--
Faith and Liberty Books
Feed Your Head (tm)
FIG4159 wrote in message <20001011115416...@nso-cr.aol.com>...
meg...@my-deja.com
If you are voting for Gore, you are voting for Government controlled
HMO based health care for the people of this nation. As flawed as this
health system is, or as far from perfect as it is, I can at least pick
which Dr. I want and to a certain extent, which insurance I have. My
vote is for having the choices that I now have, with controls put into
the system, something of which is a long way from what Gore is offering.
Kathleen
>
> If you are voting for Gore, you are voting for Government controlled
> HMO based health care for the people of this nation. As flawed as this
> health system is, or as far from perfect as it is, I can at least pick
> which Dr. I want and to a certain extent, which insurance I have. My
> vote is for having the choices that I now have, with controls put into
> the system, something of which is a long way from what Gore is offering.
>
And as far as energy independence, Bush
is offering Pipelines, Pipelines, more Pipelines
and mining for more oil, which eventually will
be depleted, but probably not until after his
life is over, and meanwhile he makes money
from it, so who cares? And who cares if more
Islamic fundamentalists are funded to carry
out their hatred against anyone who doesn't
believe in their psychopathic philosophies?
You vote for Bush, you vote for continued
Islamic terrorism.
If energy is expensive, so too will be healthcare.
As well as everything else. Geez, how many times
to we have to see a Recession related to an energy
crisis until we understand how uncomfortable poverty
is?
Duh.
Kathleen
BCLyme
writes:
>And as far as energy independence, Bush
>is offering Pipelines, Pipelines, more Pipelines
>and mining for more oil, which eventually will
>be depleted, but probably not until after his
>life is over, and meanwhile he makes money
>from it, so who cares? And who cares if more
>Islamic fundamentalists are funded to carry
>out their hatred against anyone who doesn't
>believe in their psychopathic philosophies?
>
>You vote for Bush, you vote for continued
>Islamic terrorism.
>
>If energy is expensive, so too will be healthcare.
>
>As well as everything else. Geez, how many times
>to we have to see a Recession related to an energy
>crisis until we understand how uncomfortable poverty
>is?
>
>Duh.
>
>Kathleen
Kathleen:
Please honor the previous requests from others who have suggested a more
appropriate forum where you can share your political views.
Seriously.
Regards,
Brian
Kathleen
Thanks, Brian.
But I won't.
It's not a political view.
It's a practical one.
Kathleen
BCLyme
writes:
Well, no Kathleen, it *is* your political view and it really doesn't belong
here. Not because I disagree with you, but because telling people things like
"You vote for Bush, you vote for continued Islamic terrorism" has zero to do
with Lyme disease.
Give us a break.
Brian
meg...@my-deja.com
Her view is political terrorism....the party line. Speaks well for
them doesnt it? They will not be happy until the combustable engines
are gone and then we will be at the mercy of the terrorists, who of
course will not be without what they can use to bury us.
Mariah's Mommie
I like Kathleen just where she is.
What she is saying is really not off
the subject. She is a smart lady that
gives me info on all subjects. And
right now the subject is the Presidential
Election, which seems to have much to
do with Lyme, Doctors, Hmo's, etc. etc..
ALL OF YOU .......PLEASE LEAVE
KATHLEEN WHERE SHE IS!!!!!!!!!!!
THANKS!!!!!!
Helen
Empty~Nest~Cape~Cod
Helen~Jim~Mariah
meg...@my-deja.com
You assume that all who are Conservative Republicans who are for
Capitalism, which of course has been our way of life and freedom here
in America for hundreds of years, are rich. Wrong. I have lyme, I
cannot at this moment afford to find a good Dr., or go on a regular
basis to Mexico to buy my meds. I am relying on veterinary supplies at
the moment to fight what is an impressive enemy. Shouldn't I be
someone who would be for Government controlled healthcare? I know it is
not the answer.
I grew up in the 60's, am of the boomer generation and I assume you
are also or are a child of those boomers. I went thru the radical
stage, and saw it for what it was, shallow. I did recover. I am sorry
you have not.
We have a local food drive for canned goods and meat to needy
families that I run, as well as delivering dinners to the elderly as
well as to those who are dependant on Government support. We have no
criteria to exclude those who use this charity and we will keep it that
way. Those who express a need, get the help, also those who do not
express a need get the help.
We are lucky here, and have a grassroots farming community that
contributes the food that is given. They are not rich, and are
struggling to make ends meet but they give from the heart. These
farming families are Conservative, Republican by the most part and what
would be termed in this desert town and elsewhere as "redneck".....this
is only a sampling of the giving attitude that prevails here... call it
what you like, we do have compassion.
BugOff2468
The only subject of real concern to Kathleen is Kathleen.
She even named a thread after herself and those sadistic Franks.
Her favorite issues are telling people what to think and who to like and who to
hate, and calling you a traitor if you disagree.
When she messes up (every time she sits at the keyboard) it's Lyme
encephalopathy. When others object, it's treachery.
Her narcissism and self absorption have overtaken any meaningful discussion.
I've lurked here for months, and read a lot of archives, and this was a good
newsgroup before she moved in and took over.
prophet...@webtv.net
one camp is committed to Rx coverage for all those on Medicare, a new
Patient's Bill of Rights, Universal Healthcare, and HMO Regulation. I
am neither a Republican nor Democrat supporter. Indeed I have been a
Republican supporter in te past and would label myself as a very
bleeding conservative, but the fact is the Republicans will by and large
not address these issues in any meaningful way. It pains me to say
this, for I have much to hold against this scandal -ridden
Administration and all associated with it. I voted against Clinton both
times, but all that said and done the HealthCare crisis requires
immediateattntion - for u see people are dying for lack of access and
rights. I have relatives on Medicaid,a friend on welfare and medicaid
due to lyme disability and an aunt who works at a hospital clinic where
they deal with mostly Medicaid and uninsured patients, plus very
extensive, very extensive experience with the medical system has shown
me how people are ROUTINELY unteated, mistreated, and disrespected due
to the aforementioned issues. I have seen the suffering first hand.
And intellectually speaking thse issues need addressing- NOW.
Mariah's Mommie
That is your opinion
and you have every
right to it....as I have every
right to mine. Thank You.
Empty~Nest~Cape~Cod
Helen~Jim~Mariah
meg...@my-deja.com
So what do you think Gore is going to do?
WISHXXX
bcl...@aol.comkillspam (BCLyme) writes:
>telling people things like
>"You vote for Bush, you vote for continued Islamic terrorism" has zero to do
>with Lyme disease.
DITTO
Mariah's Mommie
change my ways.
As far as Kathleen goes, I have never see anyone but you come down on
her for anything.
So, once again, it is your opinion and you have every right to it.
Thank You!
Helen
Empty~Nest~Cape~Cod
Helen~Jim~Mariah
Phyllis C. Mervine
far out (what do you expect before 6am?)and certainly has nothing to do
with Lyme disease, but you were the one who opened the message with
Bush/Gore in the subject line. Surely no one made you do that? We are a
community here and do talk about things other than Lyme from time to
time. I appreciate it when the political comments are clearly indicated
in the subject line.
Phyllis
BCLyme wrote:
>
> In article <39E5B2...@snet.net>, Kathleen <kathleen...@snet.net>
> writes:
>
> >BCLyme wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <39E561...@snet.net>, Kathleen <kathleen...@snet.net>
> >> writes:
> >>
> >> >And as far as energy independence, Bush
> >> >is offering Pipelines, Pipelines, more Pipelines
> >> >and mining for more oil, which eventually will
> >> >be depleted, but probably not until after his
> >> >life is over, and meanwhile he makes money
> >> >from it, so who cares? And who cares if more
> >> >Islamic fundamentalists are funded to carry
> >> >out their hatred against anyone who doesn't
> >> >believe in their psychopathic philosophies?
> >> >
> >> >You vote for Bush, you vote for continued
> >> >Islamic terrorism.
> >> >
> >> >If energy is expensive, so too will be healthcare.
> >> >
> >> >As well as everything else. Geez, how many times
> >> >to we have to see a Recession related to an energy
> >> >crisis until we understand how uncomfortable poverty
> >> >is?
> >> >
> >> >Duh.
> >> >
> >> >Kathleen
> >>
> >> Kathleen:
> >>
> >> Please honor the previous requests from others who have suggested a more
> >> appropriate forum where you can share your political views.
> >>
> >> Seriously.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Brian
> >
> >Thanks, Brian.
> >But I won't.
> >It's not a political view.
> >It's a practical one.
> >Kathleen
>
> Well, no Kathleen, it *is* your political view and it really doesn't belong
> here. Not because I disagree with you, but because telling people things like
> "You vote for Bush, you vote for continued Islamic terrorism" has zero to do
> with Lyme disease.
>
Jonathan R. Strong
>
> She even named a thread after herself and those sadistic Franks.
>
> Her favorite issues are telling people what to think and who to like and who to
> hate, and calling you a traitor if you disagree.
>
> When she messes up (every time she sits at the keyboard) it's Lyme
> encephalopathy. When others object, it's treachery.
>
> Her narcissism and self absorption have overtaken any meaningful discussion.
>
> newsgroup before she moved in and took over.
Anyone who has suffered with Lyme disease and been a participant (active
or silent) on this group for any length of time should, in fact, be aware of the
tremendous contributions that Kathleen has been making to our cause for
a long time.
Kathleen is one of the reasons this *is* a good newsgroup. She's one of
the reasons that we have a substantial amount of solid researched data
organized to support chronic lyme disease patients in their battle against
ultra-conservative doctors and insurance companies. She's has done more
more in the last several months to help thousands of us -- complete strangers --
than many of the outspoken and carping individuals have on this forum in
several years.
Narcissistic and self-absorbed? When she puts in enormous hours and
effort on behalf of thousands of strangers, and still has to deal with random
critique from those remain silent except when attacking? Hardly.
When Kathleen, or anyone else here, posts a statement -- it's clearly a
personal opinion. If the poster feels strongly about the issue, odds are it
will be stated directly, without a qualifying "I think...". That doesn't mean
that opinions are being forced on anyone. This is a forum in which people
share information, experience and opinions -- and with the more constructive
members, like Kathleen, the opinions are based on extensive personal
experience and detailed research.
It's also telling that the people who work to make a real contribution
here almost invariably sign their name to their posts. A consistent pattern
over the past couple of years has been the snipers and trolls appearing
out of nowhere, whining, criticizing and doing what they can to disrupt
constructive threads, all under cover of anonymous ID's and unsigned
posts.
- Jon
Kathleen
belong
> here. Not because I disagree with you, but because telling people things like
> "You vote for Bush, you vote for continued Islamic terrorism" has zero to do
> with Lyme disease.
>
> Give us a break.
>
> Brian
I shall make it simple. If we stay with
oil as a primary means of energy, and do
not aggressively invest in energy alternatives,
we will have another recession and postpone
the inevitable: investing in alternative
forms of energy. Postponing it now while
times are good for us economically will make
it all the harder.
A recession means everything, including
healthcare, will become even more expensive
and less accessible.
Our economy must move away from oil
as a means of energy and we can thereby
cease to support Arab terrorism.
This has to do with Bush, because he owns
an oil company and has personal financial
interest in keeping that industry alive,
which he will bring to White House energy policy.
Clear? We get Bush, we get more oil and
lack of investment in energy alternatives,
more terrorism, more pollution, a recession...
We get Gore, we get an investment in energy
independence. They will be somewhat tough
economic times, but that's exactly the
nature of "investment": put off spending
what you have today so you will have even more
tomorrow.
Nobody can argue with that.
Kathleen
Kathleen
>
> Her view is political terrorism....the party line. Speaks well for
> them doesnt it? They will not be happy until the combustable engines
> are gone and then we will be at the mercy of the terrorists, who of
> course will not be without what they can use to bury us.
>
Wow, did YOU ever miss the point.
K
Kathleen
>
> Brian,
> I like Kathleen just where she is.
> What she is saying is really not off
> the subject. She is a smart lady that
> gives me info on all subjects. And
> right now the subject is the Presidential
> Election, which seems to have much to
> do with Lyme, Doctors, Hmo's, etc. etc..
> ALL OF YOU .......PLEASE LEAVE
> KATHLEEN WHERE SHE IS!!!!!!!!!!!
> THANKS!!!!!!
> Helen
>
Thanks, Helen.
Nothing I say is for selfish reasons.
I have nothing to gain personally
from either one of them becoming president.
How hard is that to see? I would not
be a Lyme fighter if I wanted to protect
myself, solely. I would be trying to
make money. I write stories. I could
be making money rather than hanging out
here and elsewhere in the Lyme underground.
I do not get bothered by people trying
to straighten me out and tell me what
I should write about here, because I
know I am not being selfish.
People ought to self-examine why they are
bothered by what I write.
This a war. I expect some friendly fire.
I do not take it personally. And I do
not hold grudges.
Kathleen
WISHXXX
<p...@pacific.net> writes:
>Do you know how mail filters work? It's really very simple to avoid
>reading certain posts.
That is very true, but unfortunately those who we might choose to filter out
are very often posters who have extremely important information and experiences
to share BUT seem to get side-tracked and wonder off into other areas. Mona
WISHXXX
writes:
Oh, no, now we are into OIL? I certainly hope this newsgroup doesn't become a
forum for " terriorist attacks" today........PLEASE lets get back to Lyme
disease. Thank you. Mona>
Kathleen
> >
> >
> Oh, no, now we are into OIL? I certainly hope this newsgroup doesn't become a
> forum for " terriorist attacks" today........PLEASE lets get back to Lyme
> disease. Thank you. Mona>
ya missed the point again.
K
Gcldsg
who are passing by. It may do a lot for the shouter, but the passing people
are only annoyed.
I doubt that any of us are going to be influenced by others in this
newsgroup when it comes to our vote on election day. Opinions can be useful
when dealing with Lyme disease as they are based on experience, publications,
research etc.
Can we please keep on topic with Tick-borne diseases?
If you don't agree with me or if you do, please do not respond to this. I am
no longer reading the posts on the presidential race.