Wei&Shu(Joe)

1 week and green card in hand 2 months later, but I think we were very lucky too.

What about this one:

And this one:

Or, this one:

One more:

yep, all phoney but all, I'm sure crafty enough to fool Mister_Bill, especially the first!

And don't forget to be sure you have the translation of your marriage certificate along with the certificate.

another question is to fill in the question of " Applicant's residence last five years. List present address first.", should my fiancee fill in her home address in China which I filled in on I-129, or should she fill in where she stay in the city of where she works, in another city.

thank you very much

You should put where she is actually residing and working and not her hukou address. If she has concerns that China doesn't know she is residing/working away from her hukou you can reassure her that only American Government sees the application and the Chinese Government isn't involved in the process.

If you send her to the 001 website, she will find lots of Chinese girls who can discuss the process with her.

Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected

"They weren't there because of the way they were investigated, because of the facts, because of the lack of witnesses and evidence."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...9,0,34626.story

Not to harp on the total wingnut nature of your posts, but isn't it interesting that the "former justice official", like every card carrying wingnut doesn't understand the difference between "fact" and "lack of evidence". Like every conspiracy theorist who has ever thrived in America he or she believes, and you sign on to with your promotion of such propaganda pieces, that if I couldn't find evidence of something, I can insert my own bias and it becomes fact! What a great trick.

So if I look with my telescope every night for a month and I don't see Jupiter, the "conclusion" is inescapable...Jupiter does not exist...and furthermore it then must be a liberal plot to make us feel small by telling us we aren't the only planet in the universe. Brilliant!

You do uncover a big problem in America with these posts, but it isn't the one you're thinking of. It is the deficit in the American education system that graduates people with no idea of how to think logically.

Would you care to logically defend the premise of this story, that if one investigation (by people who work for the criminals) doesn't find evidence, then no further investigations are warranted because it is now a "fact" that the event never happened? Really? Only the most conspiratorial minds believe that a lack of evidence means I can insert my own prejudice as "fact."

Most of what has been talked about lately is whether to prosecute Bush regime officials (and not Navy SEALS) for authorizing and encouraging torture. Care to defend logically why this story pretends (creates the straw man) that they are talking about a special prosecutor for Navy SEALS? Are we supposed to be detracted from reality by the straw man?

Ultimately, by spreading this propaganda, you are a pawn. The Bush officials and lawyers know that no one is going after privates and Navy SEALS (as THEY did when problems came out). They know they are the targets but they have a card up their sleeves...25% of the population is willing to swallow their straw men whole and pretend that reality doesn't matter. Then people like you go out and (unintentionally, I'm sure) do their dirty work to try to stop those officials from being investigated.

It is an incredibly difficult situation for a private or a SEAL, in a time of war, to decipher the legal from the illegal orders. But those who gave the illegal orders, who commissioned senseless legal opinions whose rhetorical gymnastics could have only one purpose, to make illegal orders sound "legal", should be held accountable. The officials who had people detained and tortured on the basis of rumors when they'd done nothing wrong (remember that could have been you, your family, your friends) should be held accountable.

However, their lies agree with your ideology and so you go on thinking these straw men are real and distributing their propaganda that is, to anyone not sharing your prejudices, a transparent attempt to keep their sorry asses out of jail. My guess is that you don't have the logical skills to see through this BS and so you'll go right on distributing propaganda as "fact."

No worries. Soon we will all be poor, and out of work.

FDR had an answer for it and Obama is following along the same lines. I don't know any Democrat that doesn't think of FDR as one of the greatest presidents we ever had.

You mean Obama is going to allow North Korea to nuke Hawaii and Iran to invade her neighbors?

Ah yes, many people forget about that part of history when japan asked FDR if it would be OK to attack Pearl Harbor and he cabled back giving his permission. And of course his many letters to Hitler inviting him to invade his neighbors. (Reference: American History for Wingnuts by The Grand Council of Wizards of Wingnuttia)

Then again, there are those non-wingnuts who have some sense of the actual historical record and note the grave domestic situation leading up to America's entrance into the war, the deep isolationism that was not concentrated in one man (FDR) and they come away from that with a sense of, well, reality.

But reality, as we all know, has a decidedly liberal bias and is of little use to people who are prone to believe things on "faith" rather than reason. So, your wingnut fantasies aside, how about commenting on the actual topic? Do you have any reality based comments on the graph presented?

The 2 year's condition applies itself from the first time you and your fiance/e met face to face to the date that you sent your petition to the USCIS.

No, it doesn't have to be filed within 2 years of your FIRST meeting. You just have to have met face to face within the 2 years prior to your filing date. That meeting could have been your 50th or 100th, doesn't matter.

Our tax dollars hard at work... Go VSC!!!!

Seems like the most likely scenario is that someone else with a similar email address applied for a work visa and when they set up their online account the applicant incorrectly entered their email address and it happened to be the OPs. The person looking for the work visa will wonder why he never got an email and probably make some derogatory comment about VSC. No tax dollars would be harmed in the making of that mistake.

And isn't VSC supported by our fees and not taxes. That would help keep our tax dollars safe as well!

I didn't know immigration could lie.

And so can any law-enforcement personnel. This is why if we're ever detained or arrested, we do best to claim and exercise our right to remain silent (completely silent!) and to confer with an attorney.

what would be the reason for the immigration to lie, is it just to send people back even if they are bona fide couple and everything is under the law?

It's summed up this way: The State (meaning from the local police up through the Federal level) is after BODIES. This is to get money (through fines), to incarcerate, to deport, or whatever else. ANYTHING that they see (in your home, in your car, or on your person), and ANYTHING that you tell them -- even in a simple "contact" on the street that seems to you like a harmless chat -- can and will be used against you. Do not let the State have that opportunity!

In the U.S., only a judge can order us to answer questions. Let the State drag us into court without our willing or unwitting help. If the State is interested enough, it will, but we'll have at least some time to prepare and to operate through the legal system, with an attorney to represent us... as long as we didn't hose ourselves ahead of time by consenting to warrantless searches or by volunteering information by answering questions!

When an agent of the State asks us something, the response "Nothing personal, sir, but I don't have to answer that" is quick, true, and elegant.

THREE different attorneys -- two of whom are immigration attorneys -- gave me this advice, over time, in differing words: In every circumstance, avoid Federal agents like the plague!

If anyone believes that the above is paranoid, I prefer to call it "being prudent." We don't KNOW what immigration agents or others really want from us, which is why it makes sense to protect ourselves from the unknown.

Thank you for the reply!!!

Well, may I ask one more question? Let's say you are driving or walking on the street and some officer stops you. Are you in this kind of risk?

The thing that makes me so upset about this is that it seems like they care more about busting legal people more than illegal. I don't wish anything bad to illegal people but unlike us, they don't have to wait, they don't have to pay what we pay, even my husband is very upset with this fact. While we are here to live with our families forever, after all we have passed with K-1 or CR-1/k-3, most of illegal people are here to make money and go back to their country.

And please, if u can answer I have another question: does this happen even after our naturalization?

Thank you for the patience with me.

I think we tend to ignore all the people who are released from jail after 10 years when the real perpetrator is discovered and how many of them cooperated with police because they knew they were innocent, therefore they couldn't possibly end up in jail for 10 years for something they didn't do.

When something or someone is suspected, the attitude of officials is rarely to objectively seek the truth and is usually to find evidence that their suspicions are accurate. An interrogation rarely proceeds with the intention of uncovering objective truth. When someone enters a room or a home with suspicions, their intent is often "to get a confession".

Read some of the accounts of people who had noting to hide who had some little inconsistency in their memory turned into greater suspicion and eventually found themselves agreeing with officers that they must be guilty. We don't want to accept that the human mind works that way because it's scary! It does however and it is a great credit to our founders that they had awareness enough to give us protection against the tendencies of people in power and of our own minds to bend to subtle pressures.

If ICE came to your house they would be coming to "confirm their suspicions". The most innocent object, letter, email left up on a screen might be the thing that they interpret as the confirmation they expected to find when they entered. It all goes downhill from there. I don't think anyone who's been through this process can believe that all the "real" couples get visas/green cards and all the "fake" couples are prevented from obtaining them. Plenty of good people here haven't gotten visas or had trouble with officials along the way.

The belief that nothing bad happens to innocent people persists despite tons of evidence against it and it is every officers best friend because ultimately he feels good when he convicts/deports the person HE BELIEVES to be guilty/illegal and is rewarded for racking up numbers in that regard whether he is objectively correct or not. So it is a great thing to do some research into the neurobiology and psychology of these situations and the history of wrongful convictions/deportations to know that we are more vulnerable than we tend to believe and our protections are not just for the guilty. They protect against our urge to scapegoat and our tendency to "find" the evidence we seek. We underestimate their importance to the innocent because we don't want to face how vulnerable we are, but it's a fact.

Just my 2.5 cents.

Hell no you don't ban it, people have a right to smoke if they want too, if you don't like it, don't smoke.

For every logical reason you can suggest for why WE SHOULD BAN IT, I can insist you ban other foods or products first as they are harming even more people.

I think someone is seriously "cookin the books" on those number to begin with.

I have known a lot of smokers in my family and friends, I don't know one that has died from smoking.

Common sense would tell you smoking can't be good for you but I have seen a lot more people way-laid from being fat or drinking to much.

That is great logic. Because you know a smoker who didn't die from a smoking related illness, therefore no (or fewer than reported) smoker(s) die(s) from smoking related illness. I don't think that anyone has ever claimed that all smokers die from smoking related illness but, do tell, what are your qualifications to diagnose smoking related illness? Did you personally perform the autopsies on these friends and relatives or did they just not die of smoking related illness because that's what you want to be true? Was it emotionally trying to perform all those autopsies on people you knew?

The statistics on obesity and alcohol related illnesses are available for you to compare, have you? Obviously not or you wouldn't have made that false statement about the relative morbidity and mortality compared to smoking. Is your block so representative of America that you can extrapolate your tiny experience to the entire country/world. Why do you suppose your tiny, uncontrolled, casual observations are so much more valid than controlled data collection form a huge part of the population? If you can tell us the secret it could save a lot of research dollars. Then again, your technique is great for coming up with the answer you decide ahead of time but pretty poor at discovering truth. If the truth doesn't matter to you it is a very valuable way of thinking.

And what would be even one food more dangerous than smoking tobacco? You might note an important distinction between food, essential to life but, like everything else, capable of being misused and tobacco, not in any way essential to life and useful for 3 purposes, calming the cravings of those addicted, causing disease, and creating a class of rich drug pushers who manipulate their product for the greatest addictive potential, even when that makes the product more dangerous. Beyond that, it is really useless.

I'm personally not in favor of a ban. Smoking should be allowed in settings where only smokers will receive a significant dose of the toxin. You can bathe in toxic waste if you want but if you bathe the neighbors or the kids, then you crossed a line. Then cigarette taxes should reflect the true cost to society of allowing people to smoke. It would price out many users and those who still chose to smoke would no longer be a burden on society in monetary terms as they are now. Cigarettes would be expensive but life and health insurance would be cheaper because the huge additional costs from smokers would be fully covered by the taxes on cigarettes. Another option is to keep cigarette prices lower but exclude all smokers from life/health insurance and only offer them health services for which they pay in full.

Back when big bad Bush was POTUS, the Left was all about States' Rights and reducing Federal authority over the States, and even talk of secession, but now that there's a Blue Man in the Big House, secession is treason and anarchy according to the Left.

I think secession isn't really a bad idea. The People would have a nice hedge against the dominant "majority rules"-- the Right could do their thing, and the Left theirs, and the people would cast their vote by choosing which governance to reside under.

Most interesting, it would create a sort of "market" for government. The better government would obviously attract more constituents, while the more hegemonic government would lose constituents, and therefore tax dollars. This would compel the governments to act in the best interest of their denizens.

Sure there are disadvantages to this, but what are your guys' thoughts?

Your kidding, right?

Gardasil vaccine ingredients include amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, sodium chloride, L-histidine, polysorbate 80, sodium borate, (roach killer), and water for injection.

Safe ingredients eh?

And a question for myself.

Since my hubbie and I have applied for the CR1, can I get away with only the first of three shots or will they want all 3? I want to avoid the entire 3 if I can. >_<

Oh my god! Sodium Chloride? How can they? Those evil pharmaceutical companies! Trying to kill us all with minute amounts of table salt! They are so crafty! And L-Histidine, a common amino acid essential to life that everyone who ingests protein is loaded with! How shameful!

I'm irate about the sodium borate. It is lethal 50% of the time at a dose of only 2,660 mg/kg. Oh, and it kills by inhibiting bacterial action in the stomach of roaches but since us mammals don't keep bacteria in our stomach for digestion it kills when the dose is high enough to irritate the stomach and cause vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration and shock. Since each vaccine dose has about 0.0007 mg of borate in it, that means if we assume you are about 50 kg that you only have to be forced to DRINK 190 million doses of Gardisil and your life is in serious danger. There is no doubt that Gardisil is routinely administered as 190 million oral doses. They just want you to think they're injecting it. The current allowable limit for borate according to the WHO is 0.5 mg/liter. So it is likely that you may ingest much more borate than this every day from your drinking water, by the route that it actually causes toxicity! That shouldn't be a problem but taking 0.14 percent of the amount allowable in a liter of drinking water

And Water for injection! Oh the humanity! I heard that they sometimes use Dihydrogen Monoxide in place of the water because it's cheaper.

So yes, if big chemical names scare you into making silly decisions, you have a point. If you cared to actually research what you are talking about then fear wouldn't need to be making decisions for you. Nothing in the list you wrote is harmful to humans, especially not in the dose you would receive, even from a lifetime of vaccines. Possibly, you would expound on why you felt that salt, water and protein ought to strike fear into our hearts?

If you are, in fact, a small invertebrate insect, you could be in serious trouble. I assume that the readers of VJ are vertebrate mammals but that may be my own prejudice shining through.

And all of this just to prevent just 15,000 slow agonizing deaths from cervical cancer each year (that is from 2005 and the incidence and mortality has risen every year prior so the number is very likely higher now).

And why does it have to be making money and not about the 15,000 women who die every year. It's obvious...because the NVIC, funded by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, established and funded by the Church of Scientology tells us so. And who wouldn't believe the Church of Scientology. It's not like they have an agenda against western medicine to make money for their own "treatments", right?.......Sorry I gagged after that last statement. They were kind enough to tell us about all those evil spirits clinging to volcanoes! And just because their founder expressly stated that the way to make real money was to start one's own religion, we wouldn't have any reason to suspect that they're in it for the money!

So Scientology videos not withstanding, and they do make some darn good propaganda flicks, take a look at the reality of Gardisil before you do Scientology's work for them. I'm sure many of you have your own religions and are unaware that you are spreading Scientology propaganda because you haven't looked into the claims or where they are coming from. Spreading Scientology's beliefs may not be consistent with the religion you practice so you should check into what you are repeating.

If you feel that 15,000 painful deaths a year is not enough to do something about, OK, we can disagree about that. Please don't pretend that preventing those deaths is worthless, however, and the only possible motive is cash.

All of that notwithstanding...cervical cancer is not contagious so it is not a public health risk to others. If 15,000 per year die from it because they choose not to get an easily available vaccine...so be it. Were I a woman, I would DEMAND my right to refuse the injection and DIE of cervical cancer. To quote the often stated liberal rant..."Keep your hands off my uterus (cervix)!!!!!!!!!" Funny that those same people want the government hands all over their healthcare, injections, etc.

We are adults, give us the information (such as you did) and let us decide for ourselves and our children. I do not need (or want) the government to decide for me. And I do not believe the "government knows best" and really don't care if they do, you do, or not. I do not need others making choices for me.

As I've stated, you're position that this vaccine is not for a contagious disease is just blatantly wrong.

You've also resorted here to creating false moral equivalences by subtly introducing abortion & national health insurance into the discussion when it is irrelevant to this discussion. One might note that this is a frequent non-liberal response to not having facts on one's side.

Your idea assumes that:

A) People make rational decisions

B ) Vaccination works when applied individually and not systemically.

Much of the good health we have today results from other people making decisions about people's health. Do you think polio was eradicated from the Western Hemisphere because some people decided to be vaccinated? That could not have been accomplished in that fashion. Now you may be eager to take your chances with polio too, but you could also try to imagine that many of us were happy not to have to worry that our child would never walk or die from respiratory paralysis because of polio.

You want to reduce the debate to the government shouldn't make any decisions, while creating the straw man that my argument is that the government should make all the decisions. That is up to you but takes away from the real discussion which is about Gardasil.

You can argue to that straw man if you wish but my position would be nothing of the sort. There is no sense to arguing that the government should always or never make decisions that effect your life. Whether it is government or private companies, someone is always making decisions for you as to what you can or can't or must have. The government should make decisions when that would result in a clearly better outcome. That decision making process should always be transparent and open to factually based debate but not to appeals to emotion or other arguments that are factually or logically flawed. In that debate everyone should disclose their financial ties. If your arguments are backed up by good science that has been carried out in a transparent, reproducible fashion, your financial ties become less important. If your science is sloppy, not transparent or not reproducible then your financial ties take your voice away. However, your science doesn't become bad because some religious nuts say it is. I think that is a really important distinction to make in this discussion.

I'm not an ideologue and I don't wish to have an ideological battle with you. I hope you can return to discussing Gardasil factually and not with reference to ideologies, abortion or strange ideas about Gardasil not being an HPV vaccine.

Interesting-

I can understand getting vaccinations for diseases that the US does not want to spread... but Gardisal? That isn't a contagious disease. That should TOTALLY be your choice whether or not to have it. What is their reasoning on that??

Gardasil is the vaccine not the disease. The disease is HPV and it is highly contagious.

No, wrong.

HPV is the virus, cervical cancer is the disease. Cervical cancer, is NOT contagious and the Gardisil injection does NOT prevent the spread of the HPV virus, it prevents the virus from causing cervical cancer in the recipient of the injection. The injection provides NO benefit or protection to anyone, except the recipient, and there is no claim that it does anything else. Unlike vaccines for contagious diseases which protect others, the gardisil vaccine does not protect ME from YOU, therefore it is nothing but a forced government intrusion on your life.

OK, now you are going from the ridiculous to the sublime. Gardasil is an HPV vaccine. It protects against infection with Human Pappiloma Virus types 6, 11, 16, & 18. The disease this vaccine prevents is only Human Papilloma Virus infection. If you read the indications for the vaccine it clearly states that it offers NO protection against cervical cancer in a women who has already previously acquired HPV through sexual activity. It also prevents other manifestations of HPV, such as genital warts caused by types 6 & 11, BY STOPPING THE SPREAD OF THE HP VIRUS. It does nothing to prevent cancer that isn't caused by acquiring these types of HP viruses.

One of the consequences of infection with the HP virus is that some women will develop cervical cancer. This vaccine is absolutely without any doubt a vaccine that prevents acquisition of 4 types of HPV and has no effect on cervical cancer risk for a women who already has acquired HPV. It only prevents cancer by stopping the spread of the contagious STD - HPV.

http://www.nvic.org/_borders/images/nvic_logo.gif

http://www.nvic.org/Diseases/HPV/HPVrpt.htm

National Vaccine Information Center

www.NVIC.org (http://www.nvic.org/)

Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine Safety

Analysis of Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System Reports:

Adverse Reactions, Concerns and Implications

On June 8th 2006, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the approval of GARDASIL, and on June 29th the Advisory Committee on Immunizations Practices (ACIP) voted to recommend adding GARDASIL human papilloma virus vaccine to the Centers for Disease Control's national childhood recommended immunization schedule. On July 14th the first report of a serious reaction to the vaccine was filed with the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

A 16-year-old Illinois girl was vaccinated July 7th and 13 days later developed symptoms eventually diagnosed as Guillian-Barre Syndrome. A 14-year-old girl in the District of Columbia was vaccinated on July 11th and complained of severe pain immediately following the injection, fell off the examining table and experienced a 10 to 15 second fainting spell ending up in the emergency room with a headache and speech problems. The report of this reaction, the first in the nation, was filed on July 14th, 15 days after the ACIP vote.

Six months later, 82 reports of GARDASIL reactions have been submitted to VAERS on behalf of at least 84 young girls and 2 boys.[1] Reaction reports have come in from 21 states and the District of Columbia.[2] Reactions were reported for children and young adults ranging in age from 11 to 27. Of the reports indicating what day the vaccine was given and the reaction occurred, 63 percent stated that the reaction occurred the same day the vaccine was given. All but three of the reports were for reactions that occurred within one week of vaccination.

This document is divided into three sections. The first section describes reaction reports for a number of reported adverse events: neurological symptoms including syncopal episodes and seizures, arthralgia and joint pain, Guillian-Barre Syndrome, and other immunological reactions. The second section addresses concerns related to vaccinating individuals already infected with HPV. The last section discusses issues that need to be addressed by government regulators and the manufacturer and considerations for clinicians and consumers.

Reported Adverse Events

Presumably, the reactions described below occurred after the first dose of GARDASIL. GARDASIL is given in a three-dose series. None of the reports stated that the children and adults experiencing problems had previously been vaccinated with GARDASIL.

Syncopal Episodes and Seizures. One-quarter of all reports filed after GARDASIL vaccination were for neurologic adverse events including loss of consciousness, syncope, syncopal events and seizures. An additional five reports included symptoms of dizziness and feeling faint.

Syncope is defined as a temporary suspension of consciousness due to generalized cerebral ischemia (inadequate blood flow and lack of oxygen). The reports of syncopal episodes and their descriptions are remarkable. A physician from Washington State reported that in one morning, three patients experienced syncopal episodes. On August 8th another physician's office reported that two patients experienced syncopal episodes on the same day.

Although these reports did not detail what happened to the individuals experiencing these syncopal episodes, other reports did. The 14-year-old DC girl mentioned earlier experienced a syncopal episode combined with amblyopia (poor vision in one eye), abnormal speech, vomiting, and headache. Also experiencing vision problems, a 17-year-old New York girl reported feeling dizzy and her vision went "black for a few seconds" and she turned pale and lips turned purple and she also had fever and chills. Similar to the DC girl, on July 18th immediately after being vaccinated, a 22-year-old Kentucky woman experienced slurred speech accompanied by pallor and shock. On August 29th, two hours after being vaccinated, a 15-year-old New York girl who had a history of asthma and was on four asthma medications experienced difficulty swallowing prompting a visit to the emergency room. On August 17th, 15 minutes after being vaccinated, a 14-year-old Pennsylvania girl passed out in the car on the way home.

Most of the reports do not describe what happened as a result of the syncopal episode but a few do. One 11-year-old Florida girl fell from the examining table and two Washington girls fell - a 16-year-old girl fell and hit her head on a carpeted concrete surface and a 14-year-old girl fell down and broke her nose.

Whether the 22 girls who experienced syncopal episodes actually experienced atonic seizures cannot be determined from these reports. Four girls, however, displayed observable seizure activity. The 11-year-old Florida girl who fell from the table also displayed "tonic posturing." Tonic posturing is a type of seizure where sustained contraction of muscles in the legs and arms occurs and consciousness is impaired. The 16-year-old Washington girl who fell and hit her head on the floor lost consciousness for one minute and displayed tonic posturing of her right hand. Additionally, a 15-year-old girl from Virginia was described as having "a mild seizure." In California, a 13-year-old girl was walking down the hall after her vaccination, fell and had a 15-second tonic/clonic seizure. Tonic/clonic seizures are also known as "grand mal" seizures.

Additionally, there were reports of dyskinesia (difficulty or distortion in performing voluntary movements) and hypokinesia (slow or diminished movement of the body musculature) both of which have neurological implications.

Arthralgia, Joint Pain and Fever. Arthralgia is defined as pain in the joints. Concerns about arthritis were raised during the GARDASIL clinical trials. Reports of arthralgia in one or more joints accompanied by fever were noted in five instances from four young girls and women in Wisconsin, Texas and New York, and one 18-year-old New York male.

Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Reports state that two recently vaccinated 16-year-old girls - one from Illinois and the other from Mississippi - were diagnosed with Guillian-Barre Syndrome (GBS) following vaccination with GARDASIL. In both cases, the onset of symptoms occurred 13 days after vaccination. According to the National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke: GBS is a serious disorder in which the body's immune system attacks part of the peripheral nervous system. The first symptoms of this disorder include varying degrees of weakness or tingling sensations in the legs. In many instances, the weakness and abnormal sensations spread to the arms and upper body. These symptoms can increase in intensity until certain muscles cannot be used at all and, when severe, the patient is almost totally paralyzed. … Vaccinations can trigger onset of GBS.[3]

The Illinois girl described earlier was vaccinated on July 7th and symptoms were evident by July 20th. The girl also experienced gait abnormalities (trouble walking properly), asthenia (weakness without loss of strength), paresthesia (burning, prickling, tingling or numbness sensation usually felt in the hands, arms, feet and legs), and hyperkinesia (abnormal increase in muscle movement). The Mississippi girl was vaccinated on July 31st and by August 13th she had increasing numbness and tingling in her feet and hands and was subsequently evaluated by a neurologist and diagnosed with GBS. The current health status of these girls is not known.

In both of these cases, the girls were also vaccinated with Aventis Pasteur's Menactra, a vaccine for meningococcal infections. Menactra has previously been associated with Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and the FDA and others have issued alerts.

Other Adverse Reactions. Additionally, a number of other reactions to GARDASIL are noted in VAERS reports and they include: urticaria (hives); pruritus (itching); macular and papular rashes; blisters and vesicles near the injection site; swollen arms; lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes); red, hot swollen knots at injection site; burning, stabbing, severe and radiating pain at the injection site and in the affected limb during and after injection; nausea and vomiting; infections and skin ulcers, and other allergic reactions.

Other Considerations

GARDASIL is marketed as a "cervical cancer vaccine" and intended to prevent infection with specific HPVs - common viruses among sexually active women. It isn't clear what benefits or potential harms could arise from vaccinating sexually active women who have already contracted HPV. Of the 86 reaction reports filed with VAERS so far, 12 reports were generated by young women 18 and older who were taking hormonal contraceptives and presumably sexually active.

With respect to concerns related to vaccinating women with known HPV infections, adverse reaction reports were filed on behalf of a 17-year-old Texas girl who was already diagnosed with HPV and genital warts. Similarly, the 22 year-old Kentucky woman who experienced slurred speech following vaccination already had an abnormal pap smear with evidence of cervical dysplasia.

Implications

The early reports of potential safety problems with GARDASIL raise concerns and questions that need to be addressed by government regulators, manufacturers and prescribing physicians. Specifically, the following concerns need to be addressed:

Syncope, seizures and Guillian-Barre Syndrome have now been reported with hours to a week after GARDASIL vaccination. GARDASIL manufacturer, Merck, should add these serious adverse events to the product manufacturer insert.

Considering that over 20 girls have experienced syncopal episodes sometimes combined with seizures and serious injuries, physicians should consider only giving GARDASIL when the patient is safely laying down on the examining table. Because there seems to be syncopal reactions up until 15 minutes after vaccination, patients should be asked to lie down for 15 minutes after receipt of GARDASIL.

The information provided by Merck indicates that it is safe to administer GARDASIL with Hepatitis B vaccine. The prescribing information states, "Results for clinical studies indicate that GARDASIL may be administered concomitantly (at a separate injection site) with hepatitis B vaccine (recombinant). Co-administration of GARDASIL with other vaccines has not been studied." [4] Due to the small number of girls aged 9 to 15 who appear to have been evaluated for GARDASIL safety in Merck clinical trials (fewer than 2,000) and lack of publicly available information about how many of these girls were given GARDASIL and hepatitis B vaccine simultaneously, the safety of administering GARDASIL and hepatitis B vaccine to all pre-adolescent girls is uncertain.[5]

Aside from Hepatitis B, Merck does not state that it is safe to simultaneously administer GARDASIL with any other vaccine. Considering that there are ongoing evaluations of a reported association between Menactra (meningococcal vaccine) and Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and Merck does not explicitly indicate that it is safe to administer to administer GARDASIL and Menactra simultaneously, consumers and clinicians should question whether administering both GARDASIL and Menactra at the same time is safe.

Similarly, adverse reactions were reported when GARDASIL was administered with eight other vaccines: Hepatitis A, MNQ (?), MEN (Menactra), TD (Tetanus and Diptheria Toxoids), DPP (Diptheria/Pertussis/Polio), PNC Prevnar (Heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate), DTaP (Diphtheria And Tetanus Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis Vaccine), and TDAP (Tetanus, Diptheria and Pertussis). Because Merck does not state that it is safe to administer simultaneously GARDASIL with any vaccine other than Hepatitis B, consumers and clinicians should question whether co-administration of GARDASIL and other vaccines is safe.

Most, if not all, of the reactions reported to VAERS were in response to the first of the three doses of GARDASIL. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Vaccine Information Sheet (VIS) developed for HPV vaccine states that severe reactions include "any unusual condition, such as a high fever or behavior changes. Signs of a serious allergic reaction can include difficulty breathing, hoarseness or wheezing, hives, paleness, weakness, a fast heart beat or dizziness." [6] The CDC also states that "anyone who has ever had a life-threatening allergic reaction to yeast, to any other component of HPV vaccine, or to a previous dose of HPV vaccine should not get the vaccine." Which of the reactions reported to VAERS constitute a "life-threatening allergic reaction" and which, if any, of the children and young adults who experienced reactions should receive additional doses of vaccine? At the October 2006 ACIP meeting, CDC staff stated that only "three serious reports were reported to VAERS after HPV vaccination in females 14 and 16 years of age. One of these patients had vasovagal syncope and was hospitalized overnight for observation." [7]CDC's summary of the first 76 VAERS reports suggests that CDC doesn't regard the remaining reports as "serious." CDC needs to clarify which of the reactions reported to VAERS constitute contraindications to further vaccination with GARDASIL and make this information available to the public and to prescribing physicians.

What were the short and longer-term outcomes for the individuals who experienced the reactions reported to VAERS? Is there information available that would help to predict the characteristics that predispose one to be at greatest risk of experiencing a serious reaction?

The CDC's Vaccine Information Sheet indicates that allergy to yeast is a reason to avoid taking GARDASIL. Merck notes that contraindications to the vaccine include "hypersensitivity to the active substances or to any of the excipients of the vaccine. Individuals who develop symptoms indicative of hypersensitivity after receiving a dose of GARDASIL should not receive further doses of GARDASIL." The prescribing information provided by Merck does not specifically note that yeast allergy is a contraindication to taking GARDASIL. Government regulators and the manufacturer need to address the discrepancy between these documents and clarify the issues related to yeast allergy and make this information readily available to the public and prescribing physicians.

Additionally, Merck notes that vaccine ingredients include 225 mcg of aluminum (as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate adjuvant), 0.78 mg of L-histidine, 50 mcg of polysorbate 80, and 35 mcg of sodium borate. These ingredients are not listed on the CDC's VIS sheet. The public needs this information so that they can identify whether they have "hypersensitivities" to any of the ingredients and whether they are at risk of experiencing a serious allergic reaction. Hypersensitivities and known allergic reactions are critical pieces of information that need to be communicated to prescribing physicians in order to make the safest possible vaccination decisions.

Government regulators including the CDC and FDA, in combination with Merck, should address the above safety concerns as soon as possible. Medical groups advocating use of GARDASIL should effectively communicate to physicians and patients the potential risks of using GARDASIL along with precautions to improve the safety of patient care.

Just so you're aware, all the dizziness, pre-syncope, syncope, tonic posturing and other brief seizure activity is a common reaction to being stuck by a needle and all occur frequently when blood is being drawn with absolutely nothing being injected into the body. It sometimes occurs immediately after a blood draw, it sometimes occurs after the patient returns to the waiting room and occasionally happens when they have already left the building. Anyone who has stuck someone for a blood draw sees this all the time. I once had a mother yell at me not to put a band-aid at the needlestick site because her child was allergic to them and would have seizures. I stopped to listen to mom and the child had her seizure about the time I would have been getting the Band-aid on her. Anyone want to make the case that this proves that band-aids cause neurologic problems?

All of the "episodes" described are consistent with post needle stick syncopes and seizures. In children studies have shown that these are true anoxic (no oxygen in the brain) seizures precipitated by breath holding. They have a name, "venipuncture fits". They are not associated with a higher risk of seizure disorder or other neurologic diseases, but when NVIC adds a statement about "neurologic implications" without the context that these are needle-stick related for the most part, it sure sounds scarey, eh?

Does the anti-vaccine crowd have some ideas about what toxic substance is causing this when we only take blood out?

Gardasil vaccine ingredients include amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, sodium chloride, L-histidine, polysorbate 80, sodium borate, (roach killer), and water for injection.

Safe ingredients eh?

And a question for myself.

Since my hubbie and I have applied for the CR1, can I get away with only the first of three shots or will they want all 3? I want to avoid the entire 3 if I can. >_<

Oh my god! Sodium Chloride? How can they? Those evil pharmaceutical companies! Trying to kill us all with minute amounts of table salt! They are so crafty! And L-Histidine, a common amino acid essential to life that everyone who ingests protein is loaded with! How shameful!

I'm irate about the sodium borate. It is lethal 50% of the time at a dose of only 2,660 mg/kg. Oh, and it kills by inhibiting bacterial action in the stomach of roaches but since us mammals don't keep bacteria in our stomach for digestion it kills when the dose is high enough to irritate the stomach and cause vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration and shock. Since each vaccine dose has about 0.0007 mg of borate in it, that means if we assume you are about 50 kg that you only have to be forced to DRINK 190 million doses of Gardisil and your life is in serious danger. There is no doubt that Gardisil is routinely administered as 190 million oral doses. They just want you to think they're injecting it. The current allowable limit for borate according to the WHO is 0.5 mg/liter. So it is likely that you may ingest much more borate than this every day from your drinking water, by the route that it actually causes toxicity! That shouldn't be a problem but taking 0.14 percent of the amount allowable in a liter of drinking water

And Water for injection! Oh the humanity! I heard that they sometimes use Dihydrogen Monoxide in place of the water because it's cheaper.

So yes, if big chemical names scare you into making silly decisions, you have a point. If you cared to actually research what you are talking about then fear wouldn't need to be making decisions for you. Nothing in the list you wrote is harmful to humans, especially not in the dose you would receive, even from a lifetime of vaccines. Possibly, you would expound on why you felt that salt, water and protein ought to strike fear into our hearts?

If you are, in fact, a small invertebrate insect, you could be in serious trouble. I assume that the readers of VJ are vertebrate mammals but that may be my own prejudice shining through.

And all of this just to prevent just 15,000 slow agonizing deaths from cervical cancer each year (that is from 2005 and the incidence and mortality has risen every year prior so the number is very likely higher now).

And why does it have to be making money and not about the 15,000 women who die every year. It's obvious...because the NVIC, funded by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, established and funded by the Church of Scientology tells us so. And who wouldn't believe the Church of Scientology. It's not like they have an agenda against western medicine to make money for their own "treatments", right?.......Sorry I gagged after that last statement. They were kind enough to tell us about all those evil spirits clinging to volcanoes! And just because their founder expressly stated that the way to make real money was to start one's own religion, we wouldn't have any reason to suspect that they're in it for the money!

So Scientology videos not withstanding, and they do make some darn good propaganda flicks, take a look at the reality of Gardisil before you do Scientology's work for them. I'm sure many of you have your own religions and are unaware that you are spreading Scientology propaganda because you haven't looked into the claims or where they are coming from. Spreading Scientology's beliefs may not be consistent with the religion you practice so you should check into what you are repeating.

If you feel that 15,000 painful deaths a year is not enough to do something about, OK, we can disagree about that. Please don't pretend that preventing those deaths is worthless, however, and the only possible motive is cash.

Hi people, I need some help, my fiance has a son that is 20 years old and will be coming to the usa with her. question #1 will she need to get a sign statement from the boys father saying it is ok for the boy to go to the USA with his mother? Question #2, My fiance has ask her doctors for any records of vaccination she and the boy has had, they seem not to have them or didn't keep a good record. Can she and the boy get all vaccinations needed at the same time as the medical exam that will be done ? Question #3 Is there anything else that anyone can tell me she might need before the interview, so she can start now on getting? She has already received the police report on her and her son, all is ok on that. Any help would be greatly appreciated

1. Guangzhou only requires a 'quit claim' or proof of custody if the child is under 18.

2. They should be able to get any vaccinations they need at the Quarantine Bureau Office when they go to get their international vaccination records. Just bring evidence of any vaccinations they already have.

3. Check the list for K1/K2 applicants. Be sure to read the letters that are included with the packets.

http://guangzhou.usembassy-china.org.cn/fo...and_packets.htm

Important: Make sure you file for AOS for the boy BEFORE he turns 21. CSPA does not cover K2's.

The boy is 20 years old, so we will need nothing? they live in China, is there certain kind of vaccines they will need, it doesn't seem like anyone will give them there records or don't have them, i'm not sure, i have hit a road block here on this one with her. All of her birth cert, police records and everything has been translated into english.

K1s can get there immunizations after arrival so I wouldn't worry about it. If they want to get some at the medical exam they can. After they arrive you can draw titers for Hep B, MMR, if they're immune they won't need the shots. Your wife is past 26 so she won't need a Gardisil. The civil surgeon can note the positive titers on the vaccine supplement that you'll need to submit with their AOS packages in lieu of the shot history.

Shouldn't have to involve the father because of his age but Guangzhou is sometimes very picky about being sure it is really her son. They sometimes ask for pictures showing them together at various ages. Some people get blue with a request for DNA testing. There are only a few labs they accept the DNA testing from and I'm not sure if it is something you can do proactively and hand them at the interview or even send with the P3 package.

Can anyone tell me what some people are talking about -going to a ACH Session. Is it something I need to look into?

Hi Silverfox

You'll find lots of info on that over at Candle for Love but ACH is American Citizens Hour and ACS is American Citizen Services. You can go to either one.

The advantage at a difficult embassy like Guangzhou is that you get to speak to a VO and they will note your conversation in your wife/fiancee's file.

I'll tell you my personal experience. There was no ACH the week of my wife's (then fiancee) interview so I went to ACS for the purpose of having an Evolution of Relationship letter notarized for my wife to take with her in case she was asked. I handed it in at one window and was sent off to pay for the service then came back and waited a bit after handing in my receipt. I was called up to the window and had a very good talk with a VO. He brought up my wife's file on his computer and was kind enough to look through the letter. He noted some areas that they sometimes have questions about and I was able to give him further info relating to those questions while he typed into my wife's file. At the end he told me everything looked good.

Now some have been told everything looks good at Guangzhou only to get Blue at the interview, but being able to tell my wife he said that really calmed her down and made her more confident going into the interview. She had a very smooth interview and I can't tell you for sure that my conversation at ACS was directly responsible for that result, I don't think it hurt us. I suspect the entire letter was scanned into her file and I was able to provide specific answers to possible questions.

I would recommend you make an online appt if you go to ACS as it seemed to save some time over people who just showed up and took a number, which is the other option.

Let me know if you have other questions about that.

Joe

The main problem is that the person has shown immigration intent by marrying a LPR or a US citizen and the B2 visa is tourist visa. This is why she was turned back and tourist visa revoked. I think the only option that remains is to do consular processing from the home country.

and all this time i thought that B2 visas were for entering the US to give birth so that you can have US citizenship for your child. boy was i wrong.

I discovered something that really blew me away a few weeks ago. I know that most people are aware that a child born in the US can acquire US citizenship by birth, but I was amazed to find out that a very large number of people in California actually thought that child automatically conveyed US citizenship or other legal immigration status to their parents. Apparently, they heard the term "anchor baby", and just presumed this meant having a baby in the US gave rights to the parents. What was just as interesting was that immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, knew that this wasn't true. It was mostly native born citizens who thought it was true.

Propaganda works. Not a big surprise. We reluctant to accept how much propaganda is distributed in our own country. That has been a big thrust of the right wing propaganda machine and the anti-foreigner propaganda is everywhere these days. It only surprises me that it is expressed so often here by people who are presumably married and/or engaged to foreigners.

Dear everyone,

my American fiance and I are deciding to apply a visa for me to get back to America to start our beautiful life together. We don't really wanna hire an attorny, because we are able to handle the process on our own.

But one thing is really really confusing, which is whether to apply for K1 or K3, whether we should get married in China or in America.

which visa will be faster to obtain/approve, K1 or K3?

Please offer me some your experience and suggestion.

really really appreciate.

All the best,

Hua

Hi Hua,

You can look at our timeline for a recent K1 from China. One reason I chose K1 was that guangzhou is a tough embassy and I felt like if they refused the K1, we could get married and apply for the CR1. Everyone's situation is different and you might take many things into consideration including where you are from in China, the marriage history of the 2 of you, etc.

You may want to ask your question on 001 (Chinese) or CandleforLove (English). Good luck.

Joe

Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed? Results

Q. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released just before the start of the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation hearings, 47 percent of people questioned would like to see the Senate vote in favor, with 40 percent opposed and 13 percent unsure.

Where do you stand? Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed?

Yes. Sotomayor would be a strong addition to the court. 28%

No. Sotomayor would be a detrimental addition to the court. 70%

Not sure/No opinion. 2%

66,534 votes

http://js.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quiziframe.php?poll_id=46856

note that the poll is headed with the suggestion that people wanted this racist at the beginning of the hearings. funny how the libtards continue to ignore the truth. they prolly buy grenades by the case at gunshows and sell them to mexicans, too.

You have many interesting posts that are heavy on the name-calling and light on facts. Like any religion, the conservative religion tends to run this way. It's important for all of us to remember that these fantasies are your religious beliefs and to try to be as respectful as possible but your lack of respect makes it difficult. You are entitled to non-reality based beliefs but that doesn't make those of us based in reality stupid. If it did then we'd all be stupid for not believing we could get a bevy of virgins if we blew ourselves up, right?

So try to keep in mind that you can really only get 2 kinds of responses to these posts. Other members of your religion will affirm that they share the same non-reality based beliefs and cheer you on. You may have an emotional need for that recognition but there may be more appropriate places for you to get that buzz.

Some reality based people will attempt to check your claims against reality, not realizing that your belief system renders the reality we share meaningless, and will wonder how your perceptions can be so far off from reality. We all have to remember there are people out there whose religion allows them to perceive the reality of those 72 virgins or disembodied souls wandering aimlessly around volcanos waiting for Lord Xeno. Those claims are no more or less fanciful than yours and we're able to just chuckle and move on but those people don't come to an immigration based web site to proselytize for their religions and I suspect if they did, they might get banned. It seems the fantasies of conservatism hold a special place in America, even above the other religions.

So some might point out (as someone has) how utterly insane it is to hold up a yahoo poll as somehow more valid than a scientifically executed survey but they'd miss the point; That your ideology is much more important than any facts or sane logic.

Some might point out to you that 3 judges, not all liberal, unanimously supported the ruling on which the claim of racism is so carelessly lobbed at Judge Sotomayor. Existing law and previous case rulings left no other choice. But to the religious mind, it is still possible for the conservative judges who made that ruling to have been bound to upholding the law, while Judge Sotomayor alone was racist for concurring with that decision. Reality based people would have to see them all as racist or none as racist. Not being bound by reality leaves you more options.

Some might note that conservatives call judges who disregard law and instead rule on the basis of their ideology "activist judges". Yet, to prove she wasn't a racist, she would have had to have been an "activist" judge and made new law from the bench. So not being bound by reality really gives you a lot of leeway in making your preconceived prejudice stick. Either way, you've got her! Reality based folks can't think that way.

Some might point out the little bit of an issue that Mr. Ricci who brought the suit in New Haven has but it doesn't seem to bother the conservative brethren. Mr Ricci got his job after not qualifying on the same test and suing under the Americans with Disabilities Act due to having dyslexia. He was actually hired in the same "unfair" way that he objected to in this suit. I hope that his testimony will shed some light on the differences between dyslexia and race that qualifies one for special treatment and not the other.

That brings up one of the most important points. I hope you can grasp it. reality based folks just can't understand the hypocrisy because they have this attachment to truth and reality. We can see from this post that you have no such connection. Ideology trumps all and if it takes lies to support it, so be it. Ideology trumps all, so if it takes refuting good evidence with a yahoo poll, so be it. I must tell you that you did brighten my day because it took me quite some time to stop laughing when I read that you were suggesting that an uncontrolled Yahoo Poll was proof that a scientifically conducted poll was wrong. (How many times did you vote? 63,000? LOL) But without any connection to reality such things are possible. So I hope that everyone can see that "truth" is a very different animal for reality based and ideologically based people. For the former "truth" means "conforming to reality" and for ideologically based people it means "supports the ideology, even if it must invoke supernatural forces, lies or faulty logic" Understanding this we can see how the OP believes what he wrote is true, despite the fact that it doesn't conform to reality. We can also rest assured that, like any true believer, references to reality will have no effect on the OP's perception of reality.

The saddest hypocrisy is that OP, not having the resources of reality checking to call on, will never understand that his religious thinking is no different than that of religious fanatics of any faith who demonize and depersonalize those who disagree with them, with hateful speech that incites the "faithful" to eventually take action against those who would put reality above faith.

So to the OP, the hateful religious speech directed against the non-believers in the fantasy that you're selling is neither respectful nor productive. It is speech best saved for gatherings of the "faithful", where you can commiserate with other true believers and denigrate the non-believers for the stupid reality seekers that they are. You would be so much better received among the "faithful" at Red State or StormFront. If you do insist on proselytizing and calling those who aren't members of your cult names like "**" and accusing them without evidence of actions like selling grenades, I for one would be inclined to report that as a violation of TOS and ask that you be removed or placed on read only status. As much as grenade tossing Mexicans may be a reality in your life, we haven't seen much of it out here in the actual reality, in case you're interested. As far as I can tell from a quick google search no "libtards" have yet to be charged with grenade selling to any of them thar foreigners who is trying to steal up our country.

So why are you trying to sell your religion here? Did they kick you off Red State?

Hi,

So awhile back, my fiancee got the K visa instruction packet (Packet 3). After a delay in trying to get everything together, she sent in whatever forms were required. Now we are waiting to hear back from the Guangzhou, China consulate (for Packet 4 I guess).

I'm not exactly sure how this works. Do they at that time send you a date and time for your interview? Or do you actually call up some number and setup a date that works for you? I'm just wondering, because in August/September I will be in China and so it will be great if the interview is at that time and I can go with her to Guangzhou.

Thank you very much for all the help thus far. Happy Fourth of July!

They will send your fiance an appt letter but if you don't want to wait you can call DOS and ask about the status. If an interview is scheduled they will tell you when it is. You need to have your GUZ # and her full name, your full name. After you give them all that they will either tell you it is still pending or "I'm happy to be able to tell you that your fiance's interview is scheduled for..."

Good luck to you.

Joe

I want to have medical exam in Beijing. The Consulate recommended 3 hospitals: Beijing International SOS Clinic, Beijing International Travel Healthcare Center and Beijing United Family Health &Wellness Center. I dont know which one to choose. I have no idea how to choose-what are the criteria? the price? or some special services?

My wife, then fiancee, went to United Family Hospitals in Chaoyang District and she had a good experience there, no problems. I think the fee is the same everywhere, about 900 RMB if I remember correctly.

1. The story is more than 2 years old, having been created and disseminated by various right wing noise machines in late 2006, early 2007.

2. The central suppositions of the story are false and were debunked over 2 years ago.

3. In 2002, Judicial Watch received $1.1 million from The Carthage Foundation[26] and a further $400,000 from the Sarah Scaife Foundation. Both foundations are managed by Richard Mellon Scaife. [26] The year before the Scaife Foundation gave $1.35 million and Carthage $500,000.[26]

In all, between 1997 and 2002 Judicial Watch received $7,069,500 (unadjusted for inflation) in 19 grants from a handful of foundations. The bulk of this funding came from just three foundations – the Sarah Scaife Foundation, The Carthage Foundation and the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.[26] According to MediaTransparency, "Judicial Watch is essentially a tool of Richard Mellon Scaife, who provides almost all its funding."[26]

4. It is a central characteristic of those with emotional arguments with no basis in fact that they try to peddle recycled falsehoods rather than address any real and pertinent issues. Have you heard that JFK was quite a ladies man? That could be your next scoop!

Whatever fault you may find with Speaker Pelosi, I hope you'll also think about the harm that lazy citizens who are willing to peddle lies for people like Mr Scaife, without bothering to check the facts, do to our country.

5. Thanks for sharing.

No...that's not what I said. I'm just saying that many posts here are merely snippets thrown out there to bolster ones own view without painting the bigger picture. Often times they are snippets read from other sources that are extremely biased because they lack the historical background or important facts are omited. If you didn't live through it...you only get to opine from what you have read. It's not a cut down...it's a fact.

A lot of what is billed as "change" in this election is really just a return to failed policies of the past (from the Left and Right). And the older you get...the more past you actually have seen. Yes...a lot of programs were dismantled because they were not relevant anymore and needed to be eliminated. There are programs that exist today that should be eliminated too. When people are dependent on the perpetual largesse of government they also fear "change".

Also too, a lot of what I see from youth today is just rehashed rhetoric from my peers of the 1960's and 70's. It was exagerated back then and exagerated now. A lot of this talk about living in a "police state" is the same old sh*t I listened to 35 to 40 years ago. A lot of kids (then and now) delude themselves by playing the victim. Victimization is a high religion in liberal circles. There is a lot of self important delusion that the government is monitoring what you have to say about the power structure when they really could care less. There are bigger fish to fry than pursuing pseudo-revolutionaries talking sh*t in e-mails, phone conversations to their girlfriend, or on forums like VJ.

What is the bigger picture?

Under this current health care system, less and less people are getting insured. More people, less healthcare, less people affording it, more taxpayers eat the tab. If no taxes are raised, this makes it less likely to pay back foreign debts. How is this not like universal healthcare already? This is the issue at hand, not "change". I don't care to discuss simplistic slogans. More unhealthy people means spreading their illness means the healthy also pay more because they'll end up getting sick too. Is this logic not correct? Universal healthcare means more people with access to health care means more healthy people meaning more contributors to the workforce and more taxpayers.

You wonder why this is done in every other first world nation? Because hard-line stances on things like this aren't exactly smart.

Regarding police state, I don't care about another simplistic slogan, because I don't use it. What I do use is the fact that AT&T was given immunity for illegally wiretapping millions of Americans in collusion with the NSA. FISA had a set way of dealing with terrorism regarding international phone calls. NOWHERE did this imply that citizens can be tapped 24/7 in both domestic AND international calls. Protest has always been a common theme as a right of speech, a right of petition, and a right of expression for people to protest things, including protesting the government. Yet here we are, throwing people into protest cages because why? Some find offensive or annoying people protesting? Grow some balls.

This is indeed giving up rights for some pseudo-sense of comfortableness and security.

It makes no sense whatsoever to be for government intrusion on your phone calls (your rights of privacy and not to be snooped on without being directly suspected of something) yet against universal health care, which stands to make fiscally responsible the current health care crisis in being able to actually put a direct tab on the costs that we're paying anyways for those who cannot afford their healthcare.

Yes, and 19 Democrats sided with the administration to grant immunity in a Democratic controlled congress.. Whether you agree with the wiretaps or not, it was debated in congress and the issue was addressed. Hardly what I would consider a police state or anything near it.

Protest cages? What are you talking about? I'm lost here.

As far as healthcare goes...yeah the system is broken. I'm not sure the American public wants another huge government run entitement program to go with the others that are already killing the budget. Seeing that HillaryCare got the axe by a Democratic congress in Democrat Clinton's 1st term as president I don't see a consensus for universal.

I'm not so sure radical surgery is necessary or desirable with healthcare when some triage might be more appropriate considering the state of our country's finances.

I love when, rather than deal with the issues in healthcare, people throw around talking points like "government run entitlement programs" intended to substitute prejudices for real discussion of the issues. In fact, as far as govt run programs go (I'll leave out entitlement since this word is only included to bring up the spector of the scary dark-skinned people who want our money) Medicare is one of the most efficient and quality minded bureaucracies going. A few tweaks to things like funding, which would have to be different in a universal system, would make it a fine model for a single payor.

The healthcare system is badly broken and somehow, I'm thinking Fox News slogans aren't the fix. Fixing healthcare and gaining the enormous benefits that fixing healthcare will bring all of us, will require a little deeper thought. You cite as evidence, facts that are evidence of nothing. Intelligence has been replaced with this recitation of irrelevant facts heard on Fox. If you have a comment on how to fix healthcare make it. As someone who has been in healthcare over 25 years I can tell you the system needs more than triage and I suspect you have no basis for your conclusion that it needs "triage" other than you heard it somewhere.

Triage means making an initial evaluation and directing a patient to the appropriate provider. If you are doing triage it suggests that you do no treatment or fixes yourself but merely direct the patient to someone else to fix the problem. Who exactly are you suggesting we should send our healthcare system to for treatment? Or was that just in there because it sounds like a medical word?

The overhead of a multiple private payor system is enormous. The best estimates are that moving to universal coverage can provide better care while saving about 3 trillion dollars over the next 10 years. If you could complete this sentence, I feel that saving 3 trillion dollars over the next 10 years will be bad for our troubled economy because...

The losers in universal coverage (which neither candidate has proposed) are the CEOs and CFOs who are a large part of the current overhead. Once again, by screaming socialist, they recruit people to support their wealth at the supporter's expense.

If I go out and earn $100, and the government decides it wants to take half of that money and redistribute it to people who did not go out and earn their own money for whatever reason, my incentive to go out and earn money is much less. Eventually, I may just decide to become one of the people who has someone else's wealth redistributed to me via the government.

I think this totally illogical non sequiter is one of the greatest bits of slight of hand ever undertaken. I especially like how you pretend that the tax rate on $100 is 50%! And then you threaten to go on welfare just to spite all of us who'd like to see a strong and prosperous middle class again. Please, be my guest. While the middle class prospers again you can enjoy the wealth you'll be accumulating from your $250/ month. That will show us! A few months on welfare might help you re-evaluate your belief that people are just dying to get on the rolls. This whole argument of yours is smoke and mirrors. Like every magic trick, your attention must be diverted at just the right moment.

First came the reframing of income tax as "redistributing wealth." Simple enough and some people will fall for it but left at that , the republican plan to redistribute wealth upwards is exposed. The reframing must be immediately followed by screaming "socialist!", pointing left and telling stories of welfare queens and lazy bums at the bottom raking in your cash.

Only if you are susceptible to having an emotional reaction to the word socialist do you reflexively buy into the stories of Reagan's welfare queens that no one could ever locate. Only then is your attention diverted long enough to miss the fact that the lazy bums raking in your money are actually at the top, the very wealthy - most of whom inherited their wealth and did not, as the right wing myth goes, work hard to earn their money.

If you are susceptible to the right wing mythmaking, you go on reciting their false illogical story that the middle class keeping their money is bad and that building a strong middle class (which includes lifting up and reducing the drag from the lower class) is a bad thing. You go right on telling people that that govt got to stop sending your money to the po' people, while you gladly hand it over to the rich. And they chuckle all the way to the bank. Joe the plumber has made it clear how much the republican party relies on the "Ralph Kramden" voters. Yes, I may be in the lower middle class now and yes, their may be a much greater chance of moving down under the present system but golly gee, Alice, someday I'm gonna buy this bus company and when I do, I don't want my taxes going up! Bang Zoom!

Like any good religion:

You hear the myths again and again, and it seems they must be real.

If you question the myth, you are shamed and shouted down by the true believers.

When reality confronts you with the ridiculous nature of the myth, you are told to close your eyes and plug your ears. God and the republican party work in strange ways and you must have faith. For one, you must await your reward in heaven. For the other, you must await the "trickle down". No one has seen either one, but they must be out their because our leaders tell us so. The promised land is just over the horizen so empty your pockets and follow me! We will soon be there in trickle down heaven.

Yet, trickle down heaven feels like hell. No problem. Close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and yell socialist! Empty your pockets for the lazy rich while you commiserate with them about those awful lazy poor people who are always looking for your money. Anyone with eyes can see that it's the poor people who hold all the cards in this society. Right?