Sorry to get all serious again...
-
Aaahhh... I remember you talking about this the other day but I didn't make the link. But... ...my point wasn't so much about the legislation itself, shitty as it appears to be, but how is it possible that something can be put forward to be made the law of the land and nobody knows who the fuck put it there?!?!
he he he. I like it in the kitchen! - Marc Clifton (on taking the heat when being flamed) Awasu v0.4a[^]: A free RSS reader with support for Code Project.
:laugh: I bet Bill wonders the same thing about some whacky function in Windows every once in a while. While my understanding is very fuzzy on this, I've heard that it's pretty easy to add something to a bill as it gets circulated among the various politicians. Unless you specifically put your name to it, nobody really knows the source of the amendment. It is pretty pathetic though, isn't it? And it speaks volumes of how corrupt the legislative process is becoming here in the US. Especially since no one initially stepped forward to claim responsibility. Oh, but wait, wasn't there something I read recently about being more tolerant??? :laugh: Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka -
Brad Jennings wrote: What can I do to alleviate the problem? We have that right to vote, remember? The funny/sad thing is, everyone bitches about politicians, yet year after year it is the incumbants who have it easy on election day. Why do we keep reelecting the people we are complaining about? BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius
brianwelsch wrote: Why do we keep reelecting the people we are complaining about Exactly my point ! Everybody complains politicians are corrupted, but when they go out of jail they are reelected triumphantly! We have had two examples of this here recently. Look also in Italia, where Bersculoni makes laws to protect his own business, or to avoid to be trialed. Everybody knows it and however he's very popular :confused:?
One small village of indomitable geeks still holds out against the invaders. And life is not easy for the managers legionaries who garrison the fortified camps of Microsoftum, Javum, Ceplumplum and Vebasum
-
...but how the hell does something like this[^] happen?!?! In November, as Congress finalized the legislation authorizing a new Department of Homeland Security, two paragraphs suddenly appeared in the bill giving drug maker Eli Lilly & Company something it desired: a shield from lawsuits by parents who claim the company's vaccines caused their children's autism. ... Who inserted the provision? Reporters tried and failed to find out. Lilly's lobbyists (laughably) claim ignorance. No one on Capitol Hill is proud enough of his handiwork to claim it.
he he he. I like it in the kitchen! - Marc Clifton (on taking the heat when being flamed) Awasu v0.4a[^]: A free RSS reader with support for Code Project.
While i am not sure who added this provision I have heard a reasonable defense of its' additiion. The defense is in two parts. First, there are a series of claims against Eli Lilly. The claims stem from the fact that vacines made by Lilly contain a very small amount of mecury, an ingredient that is supposed to act as a preservative. The claims content that the mecury has caused autism. There does not appear to be any proof that either the the specific vacines taken or mecury in general cause autism. The problem is that lack of proof does not stop lawyers from bringing suit, drug companies are large targets, nor will it stop juries from granting huge awards. By the way, while the rants go on regarding politicians, Dan Burton (an arch conservative congressman from Indiana, where Lilly is headquartered) is fighting mad at this portion of the legislation. He has a grandchild (I believe) who is afflicted by autism and contends it was a Lilly vaccine that caused the prolem although even he says he can't prove it yet. The second reason is that Lilly, and others, will be being asked to create many vaccines in the coming years. These vaccines will no doubt be administered as the result of a government directive, as with smallpox vaccine for the military. So you'll have created a huge problem for the drug companies who create the requested vaccines if you don't find a way to cap potential awards. The problem is complex, made worse by a legal industry that makes huge profits off of others' misery by taking on whoever had the deepest pockets. On the flip side, if there is no protection fo rthe drug companies there would be no vaccines. Of course we could nationalize the industry and outlaw suits against the government. Mike
-
brianwelsch wrote: Why do we keep reelecting the people we are complaining about Exactly my point ! Everybody complains politicians are corrupted, but when they go out of jail they are reelected triumphantly! We have had two examples of this here recently. Look also in Italia, where Bersculoni makes laws to protect his own business, or to avoid to be trialed. Everybody knows it and however he's very popular :confused:?
One small village of indomitable geeks still holds out against the invaders. And life is not easy for the managers legionaries who garrison the fortified camps of Microsoftum, Javum, Ceplumplum and Vebasum
Until the majority realizes it must make the effort to learn about and get involved with those it elects, we will never make any progress. BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius