jenfly00

So, as not to change the subject... show me the cardiac arrests prevented by the availability of portable defibs, and the strokes prevented by availability of syringes of warfarin, since you decided to add that in. Warfarin is a brand of coumadin and is not available in injectable form ...only pills. In addition, it does not disolve clots, it helps prevent the formation of clots. Useful as a preventative for heart attacks, strokes and pulmonary emboli in those with conditions likely to promote clots, it's also quite high on the list of medications responsible for hospitalization and death due to coumadin toxicity. It's therapeutic level is very close to it's toxic level. Thus, coumadin, does, indeed help prevent tens of thousands of non-hemorrhagic strokes, and cardiac arrests caused by an MI (heart attack). Interestingly, it is a primary cause of many hemorragic strokes. What John is referring to is a class of drugs in injectible form (TPA, Alteplase, etc) that dissolve clots after they have formed. In the case of a clot causing an MI, these drugs have prevented many thousands of people from progressing to cardiac arrest and have reversed many thousands of non-hemmorhagic strokes. Can defibrillators prevent cardiac arrest? Absolutely! They are used every day in syncronized cardioversion to stop very rapid heart beats (rapid atrial fibrillation, supraventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia) which, if not promptly treated with drugs or cardioversion, will likely lead to cardiac arrest. So, basically, what we have in the disagreement between John and you is the difference between a good formal education and a google search.

I know you're not, dude. You're merely clinging to something you value greatly. You fear change will take that away from you. It won't ...unless you force it to by refusing to grow. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

So far it seems only 1 has... Wrong!

Hehe, love these! I can pick that door with only one guard.

what if Government A tells you that Government B lies a lot - or even if they admit they lie a lot themselves it's so confusing An archaeologist discovered a temple with three gigantic statues guarding the entrance. To be allowed into the temple, he must identify each of the three gods. The God of Truth always tells the truth. The God of Falsehood always lies. The God of Diplomacy can tell the truth or lie. He asked the god on the left, "Who stands next to you?" "The God of Truth," was the reply. He asked the god in the middle, "Who are you?" "The God of Diplomacy," was the reply. He asked the god on the right, "Who stands next to you?" "The God of Falsehood," was the reply. The archeologist immediately identitied the three gods. Can you? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I suspect you are sincere in your statements, but the fact that most troglodytes (thanks, nerdgirl) would agree does not impress anyone a bit further along the evolutionary scale. It pretty much ranks up there with the troglodyte consensus on walking upright.

That's my opinion. Howev er, this debate has gotten pretty silly. Long gone are the days of "The Front." Warfare just doesn't work like that anymore. There are FEW military forces on the planet that could cause the US Military to even slow down much less stop. That means we can occupy damn near anywhere we want. Which means the notion of front lines and rear areas disappears. Like you have in Iraq. As soon as you leave a gate from the IZ or any FOB you are on the "Front Lines." So women WILL serve there. We just need to keep them in "support" jobs. "WE"??? Dude. Like it or not (and I'm sure 'we' can mark you up for the 'not' category) cultures that create people with such commonly held illusions are slowly and steadily changing. Your years of beating your chest swinging your dick are coming to a close. You can hang with your illusions, or you can grow. The former will lead you to eventually viewed as a sad anachronism. The latter, while difficult, will open doors into a better world for you and all of 'us'. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Right on the money! Seriously, our NYPD Compstat unit is involved with crime statistics. They monitor crime patterns, develop crime tracking methods and what not. Bro, I just hang out in front of the local donut eatery. I sit back, relax with my donut and coffee and watch the greatest show on earth! Seriously, I don't even eat donuts and I don't even drink coffee. I prefer beer and pretzels while I'm on duty. I simply stated: I may have exaggerated on the quick minute or two but kids are snatched right from under their parents' nose a lot of times and yes it does happen regularly and no, a lot of these abductions do not make it to the paper often times. That doesn't quite answer my question about what you do. Aren't something like 84% of all child abductions a non-custodial parent or relative? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Once upon a time, and only once upon a time. Some of us learn from our mistakes. ...and some become thin shells of a human being, filled with bitterness, hatred and a keen desire to denegrate women. It's kind of hard to tell. Which one are you?

uhhhhhh sez me. I'm a NYC cop. Implicit in your statement is that you have accessed abduction data and formed your statement based on the numbers. Is that true? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I didn't see any of that in your posts. My take was that you posted honestly and sincerely based on your experiences. I don't agree with your conclusions but don't see the need to demonize you for sharing your feelings on the issue. ------------------------ Americans sleep soundly in their beds at night because rough men and women stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Howdy, again! ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I know you do, hun. I believe you to be sincere. Within your socialization and belief system, there is no doubt they are. What it really comes down to is this is your belief system is a result of your socialization and greatly reinforced by your military training. You believe yourself (and your team) to be bad mutherfuckers (and perhaps you are). To accept that women can do your job devalues how you see yourself (and perhaps how you view women). The thing is, that senario only exists within a belief system that is archaic in both form and function. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Woah. Learning something new every day - how to back-up crap? LMAO It would appear that backing up crap takes up at least half his time. In this case, I'm guessing he went to Google, in desperation, to try and find something (anything!) that would back up his usual ramblings. He found ...something, and triumphantly posted it. Gay Nigger Association?!?!?!?! BWAHAHAHA! ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

They all have to do with your ego if you accept that your ego development is a product of your socialization. Some people can learn and grow on their own, others (most) just slide by on what they've been fed. The traditional roles of men and women in our society exist for the benefit of some and the control of others. What it comes down to is this: You were socialized to believe and act in certain ways concerning gender difference and (sincerely, I believe) don't want a system familiar and comfortable to you to change. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Sounds good to me. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Perhaps it shows that our parents and grandparents did not have the idiot son of an asshole running the white house. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

There are jobs that require split second, decision making ability to keep other members of the team safe. There's no time to say, "wow man, what are we supposed to do next." Then test them for impairment. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

The OP was a bit manipulative in her initial representation of what happened. You, and a couple of others, were fairly irrational in your responses. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Nature's own most nearly inexhaustable resource.

I have no problem with it. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

In that case why did you bother to write that Bush never claimed himself to be a conservative? You DID write that, www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2542394#2542394 and it IS untrue. Unless someone was impersonating you when you wrote that, I don't think I'm the one having trouble with the truth here.

Do they get better gas milage? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I understand that you sincerely don't get it. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Hell I am thinking they have done litte to really stop that sort of thing.. perhaps so an attack CAN occur.. then they can declare MARTIAL LAW... like they have been planning to do for a while... ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY not just in the place where it will occur.... that gets rid of silly little details like the Bill of Rights that they have fought so hard against since January of 2000 When people rate Lincoln and Roosevelt as great presidents, civil liberties are not mentioned. Wilson, a champion of womens rights was probably worse in civil liberties. All three served in time of war. You only have to read history to compare how President Bush is doing compared to other presidents. I believe the majority of Americans think he is doing fine. A majority of Americans (87%) believe wishes come true. Fifty-five percent believe they will not come true if they tell someone about it. Your point? http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20051016/ai_n15711160 Well, what's your point? I must admit I voted for Bush. Sometimes you get what you wish for and I'm telling. I don't like everything he has done, but when it comes to homeland security, I'm going along with what he's done so far. At least he hasn't brought back the Sedition Act of 1918. If so, Speaker's Corner would be long gone, and we would be getting a knock at the door. Under that act, you could not even critize the flag. The Sediton Act was in addition to the Espionage and Sabotage Act. My point is popularity is not a valid measure of what is right thing to do. When they burned the witches and hung the niggers, who do you think 'they' were? Evil, bad people? For the most part, no. They were people with limited insight and vision who get swept up in the emotions of the moment ...much like our prolific neo-con posters here. That's right! I'm saying the same people who are arguing for a suspension of major portions of the Bill of Rights are the same ones that would have been hanging the niggers and burning the witches. Every society has a good number of such people. It's up to those with a greater capacity for rational thought and ability to see further down the road to stop them before they destroy what you state you want to protect. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".