Newsweek.com User Agreement

Why is anyone against raising taxes for anyone who makes $250,000 a year?. our tax system is based on the ability to pay.

Dr, Alan Phillips, Sr. wrote:
August 14, 2009 20:27THE HOPE OF AUDACITY
The recent labeling of American???s expressing their opinions and participating in the debate as mobs or maulers, is missing the point of what constitutes a democracy. President Obama wrote a book entitled The Audacity of Hope, Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. In recent weeks I have been speaking on the subject of Proclaiming American Greatness. I have observed that both titles have merit and usefulness when considering our constitutional freedoms and the right to share our views. Our disagreements can be made, agreeably, forcefully, and analytically???but rudeness does not add strength to our propositions, whatever side we are on.
I have been asked by friends recently, why I use a slightly different phrase from the one used by our President in titling his book. My phrase places the word ???audacity??? in the noun???s best role for my views. ???Audacity is defined by Miriam-Webster, as (a) intrepid boldness, (b) bold or arrogant disregard of normal restraints <???had the audacity to defy his boss???>.???
Why today are normal citizens offering their opinions on the administration and congressional health care proposals? Some participants have researched and studied the House Bill and await the Senate versions for their analysis. It may well be, citizens are expressing themselves, because they have discovered as did their forefathers THE HOPE OF AUDACITY.
Patrick Henry said on March 23, 1775 ???I shall speak forth my sentiments, freely and without reservation???Why stand we here idle???What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.??? He was audacious in defending liberty.
Wendell Phillips, Puritan, graduate of Harvard Law School, 1831, noted abolitionist orator, said several audacious [bold] things in arguing for freedom and liberty,
???Debt is the fatal disease of republics???
???Today it is not big business we have to fear, Its big government???
???Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty???
???If there is anything in the universe that can???t stand discussion, let it crack???
Our late young President, John F. Kennedy, believed in the Hope of Audacity, when he spoke at Rice University-Houston Texas in 1962, these bold words, as he sought to fulfill an age old dream of mankind. ???We choose to go to t he moon in this decade, not because [its] easy???and do it right, do it first, before this decade is out-we must be bold!???
Americans are entitled to join this debate everyone can discover the HOPE OF AUDACITY.
Dr. Phillips

Oh my freaking God, you're seriously still that affected by a little mud and rain?!? Get over it man, it's been 40 'effing years! I went to a Rage Against The Machine concert a few years ago where it rained nonstop, created huge mudslides, people were filthy and soaking wet, but it was still one of the best times of my life because of the MUSIC and what it stood for. I didn't have the privlege (yes, it was a privilege) of being alive when Woodstock happened and am honestly quite jealous. And bringing up a presidential affair that wasn't the public's busniess to begin with?!? That's just dispicable to even think that had more influence on American culture than such a magical musical experience. People have forgotten about Bill Clinton's indiscretions; they have not forgotten Woodstock and they never will. There's a reason the 40th anniversay of Woodstock is being celebrated...you just don't have to mental capacity to understand it.

Whoa! I can't believe the collective ignorance I am reading below! You people need to read more-a LOT more! Orosz55, if the author is severely misinformed, as you assert, where is your evidence to the contrary? These aren't scare tactics, I can assure you that! I have read probably 30 plus books on the subject and am humbled to say that I don't know fully enough. However, when the vast majority of international climate scientists including Nobel winning researchers ALL strongly assert that there IS unequivocal evidence that there is indeed man-caused CO2 level increases and that it directly correlates to global warming, what do you say? I say, leave it to the experts? Are you one of them?
brydges, very poor attempt at climate change humor. I'm glad you are amused. 10 feet tall bear? First, get your facts straight. Here they are: The American Black Bear usually ranges in length from 150 to 180 centimeters (5 to 6 ft) and typically stands about 76 to 91 centimeters (2.5 to 3 ft) at the shoulder.[6] Standing up on its hind feet, a Black Bear can be up to 2.12 meters (7 ft) tall.[7
These are "scare tactics" to those who are uninformed. To those that are, there is NO debate. Ask James Gustave Speth, Bill McKibben, Tim Flannery and a myriad of other environmental writers who know and have studied this all of their lives. No political agenda. Just facts. Face them and deny the denial.

GOD isn't going to be happy with society if polygamy is allowed. My guess is that GOD is still spinning from the same sex marriages. I suggest you all get used to that FACT. I wish you all luck in the afterlife. YOU WILL NEED IT.

I enjoyed the article, "Climate-Change Calculus. I noted that the piece mentions in detail the 1.6 trillion metric tons of carbon being released as the permafrost melts. I read years ago that the same type of massive carbon releases happens everytime a developer scraps off the natural grass and crops that cover empty fields, yet I have never heard one goverment official mention we should refrain from developing additonal fields to protect us from carbon melt down. Doesn't it seem responsible that we should use existing concrete jungles versus contributing to massive amounts of carbon being released for a new strip center?
Sincerely,
Sammy J

Let me share a non-political, personal "national healthcare" experience wth the readers. I was visiting friends in the Netherlands a couple of years ago when I came down with a kidney infiection. My hosts told me not to concern myself and we would just go to the clinic in the morning. The next day we left their house at 8:15AM, walked across the square and around the elementary school to the clinic. I signed in as the 13th person to be seen. I waited, saw one of the four GP doctors, went next door to the pharmacy to fill my prescription and walked back to my guests home. We were back in the house by 9AM. This cost me exactly $00.00. If this was an example of "socialized medicine"....BRING IT ON!

How will the proposed health expansion bill affect my current benefits under Medicare? Will it reduce any currently allowed benefits or will they remain the same? I getm the feeling that seniors will give up some medical benefits to foot the bill for a larger insurance package. Who is looking after senior health benefits? Are seniors to viewed only as a legacy cost rather than a vultural asset?
B. Fudim

I am very happy that I live in America.

Teddy revealed his lack of integrity when he cheated at Harvard and, despite his father's wealth was expelled.
He revealed his concern for human beings when he left MaryJo Kopechne to drown, trapped in a car, while he called is lawyer.
Who would believe anything this pathetic excuse for a man would say?

A terrific article. Extremely well written

What attracts me as a woman is that idea that a man (a vampire in this case) can give you (by turning you into a vampire) infinite health, youth, endless life, financial independence, being able to take care of ourselves not only emotionally and financially but physically as well and so much more??? Just look at Bella in the Twilight series??? Not only she???s got a great, loving, caring (and VERY attractive) guy, but she???s also got unlimited financial resources, infinite life, youth, beauty and health, GREAT loving and caring family, etc., etc., etc??????.. And another GREAT bonus that Bella???s got ??? just look at her in-laws ??? how loving they are??? I have a set of in-laws from HELL (literary)??? I am very surprised that my husband turned-out a good man coming out of those evil parents of his ??? they HATE people in general (and they hate me)!!! So, what would I chose ??? my human life or the ultimate dream?... You already know the answer ??? THE ULTIMATE DREAM any day!!! Too bad it???s impossible???. And that???s what any woman dreams about (I???m 10000000 percent sure)!!!

Stiglitz did NOT predict the COLLAPSE of the world economy and its capital markets, ONLY certain component(s). ONLY one economist in the world predicted, this and did so in 1991 and subsequently; and he disclaims being an economist (as it's ???the herd???). He's the paradigmist, whose work nearly all economists have disclaimed. Yet he cannot escape association with economics profession, because of this fact, as history now imposes that unwanted association. He has been compared to Lionel Robbins, John M. Keynes, Dean Acheson and others; yet AGAIN he disassociates himself with any such comparisons. He is the author of the post East West COLLAPSE new "convergence model" Humanomics(sm) Trilogy; whose prescription is "to all from God, from all according to God." And he herein and in counterpart cautions Stiglitz regarding his doubt, about the existence of the ???invisible hand.??? Reminding him that it???s today slapping his, Summmers and others faces, to wake them, from their significant error(s) and arrogance. Humanomics(sm) central organizing principle is "Receiving, to give(sm) "that is cognitive behavioral science's new first principle.??? And Humanomics(sm) parallel new economic paradigm is the "Integration of Labor(sm)." Herein we see the SOLUTION is not with Stiglitz nor Summers nor with any other ???official narrative??? mainline economists; nor is it with any other "demand stimulus," theoreticians. It???s found on the "supply side," confirming that ONLY to scale investment in world class NEW Global Technologic Infrastructure-GTI can and will create and sustain tens of millions of G-20 JOBS and growth, based on the economic model and its NEW methods of work. Its author Yehoshua Ya'acov dropped our of both HS and later college, after several years. And he's never been invited to the White House nor is he recognized. And his answer to this is "who cares for recognition." And further, he says "it's acceptance that leads the day," as this derives from the "hard power," from the much needed NEW science and technology SOLUTION(S) now proceeds, to lead the US and G-20 forward. And this both Sitglitz and Summers and all the others, are now compelled to endorse and support. Why must we risk, to do what is above claiming to be the certain SOLUTION. Is it NOT to risky, politically, as Axelrod???s action(s) confirmed. In answer, to do anything less, is a far greater risk and in this Stiglitz agrees and is partially correct, for the wrong reasons. This is because both consumer spending and housing have tanked and with it the entire US "financial services" sector, that was taking a third of annual GDP; as we must and will NOW create a NEW third macro sector of the US economy. One focused on "human health and well being," that will grow to be larger than the other two combined; with its new GTI's "new methods of work,"

I wonder if Mary Jo would have benefitted from the plan the drunk from Mass. is pushing? Oh, I forgot, you need to be able to make it out of the car to be able to be treated. You Dems are fools. Between Biden and the drunk, you make Palin look like a scholar.

Check on recent publication in Inhalation Toxicology:
Engelbrecht , J. P., E.V. McDonald, J.A. Gillies, R.K.M. Jayanty, G. Casuccio, and A. W. Gertler 2009. Characterizing mineral dusts and other aerosols from the Middle East ??? Part 1: Ambient sampling. Inhalation Toxicology 21:297-326.

Nationalize Big Banks. I am tired of Big Banks S******G small peop[le,. like me.

Thank you for posting your affiliates at the bottom of the page.

I can see why I do not have this RAG in my home anymore with articles of FACT by Rick Palstein. Does he write for MSNBC also???

Thank You so much. I will never never never buy or read your rag again. To out and out call people stupid, i.e. Sarah Palin. You people are really spooked by this woman, but as a liberal I am really beginning to think of leaving the party, you have gone way to far. Your bias is not just showing, let us just say you are flaming. Your bloggers are digusting and hateful and I no longer subscribe to your hatefilled comments.

As the lead author of a published Cochrane review, the Cochrane outreach coordinator alerted me to Sharon Bigley???s article praising the work of the Cochrane Collaboration. I take issue with her statement, ???And only once since Cochrane was established in 1993 has one of its reviews been overtaken by events.??? My review titled, ???Anticoagulants versus non-steroidal anti-inflammatories or placebo for treatment of venous thromboembolism??? (http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab003746.html) was corrupted by changes written by the editor and peer-reviewers rather than the authors. In 2007, Medscape General Medicine, a peer-reviewed medical journal, published my commentary titled, ???Evidence-Based Medicine and the Cochrane Collaboration on Trial,??? detailing my complaint about this issue: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/557263. Cochrane has issued no response to date. From 2007 ??? 2008, I submitted feedback letters to the authors and editors of 57 Cochrane anticoagulation reviews and protocols concerning methodological errors, biases, and financial conflicts of interests. Only 13 replies have been published to date and none of my points has been rebutted. In January 2009, the Medscape Journal of Medicine (new name for Medscape General Medicine) published my, ???Systematic Review of Cochrane Anticoagulation Reviews: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/584084. The review said, ???The 58 Cochrane anticoagulation drug reviews, including mine, contained 9 categories of methodological errors (207 total instances) and 4 types of biases (18 total instances). It concluded, ???The efficacy of anticoagulants for treatment and prophylaxis for 30 current medical indications should be reconsidered by the scientific community and medical regulatory agencies. At least 50,000 people per year worldwide have fatal bleeding due to anticoagulant treatment or prophylaxis for these indications.??? My recently updated research shows that about 100,000 people per year worldwide bleed to death from anticoagulants used for these 30 disputed indications: http://doctormanagedcare.com/ChaptersMDM.pdf pages159 -180.

To his credit, Dr. David Tovey, the newly appointed Cochrane Editor in Chief worldwide, has been conducting a comprehensive investigation of my challenges to the validity of the findings of these 58 anticoagulation reviews and protocols based on the critiques in my feedback letters. That investigation should result in replies by authors and editors to all my feedback letters and a transparent report to the public by Cochrane of the specific findings regarding each of my challenges. This is a chance for Dr. Tovey to reinforce and maintain the Cochrane Collaboration???s high standing in the area of evidence-based medicine.