birdog1960

so you posted the cartoon knowing it was a deliberate misrepresentation of what the pope said? i'm surprised but glad to hear your agreement with the pope on the death penalty. i'm shocked but very pleased to discover your admiration for dorothy day whom the pope cited as an great american today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Day

you don't like what he said so you misrepresent what he actually said: 'It goes without saying that part of this great effort is the creation and distribution of wealth. The right use of natural resources, the proper application of technology and the harnessing of the spirit of enterprise are essential elements of an economy which seeks to be modern, inclusive and sustainable. "Business is a noble vocation, directed to producing wealth and improving the world. It can be a fruitful source of prosperity for the area in which it operates, especially if it sees the creation of jobs as an essential part of its service to the common good" (Laudato Si’, 129). This common good also includes the earth, a central theme of the encyclical which I recently wrote in order to "enter into dialogue with all people about our common home" (ibid., 3). "We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all" (ibid., 14). this common good thing just keeps coming up....

he's talking about goals. are the goals of australian's and the French all that different?. don't they all want to be happy and secure? don't we all share in common a desire for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? these are common goals for humanity. I believe this is what he was alluding to. it's the editorialist that creates a false equivalence.

already happening. compare the reporting of the speech on msnbc and fox specifically regarding respect for all life. fox leaves out the death penalty which was specifically mentioned and msnbc leaves out condemnation of abortion which was implicit. it doesn't surprise me. it makes me thankful that he champions and speaks out on moral teachings that others dare not discuss because they might be seen as too far from the mainstream. many of his predecessors feared doing that more for positions that coincidentsally align with the left but not so much with those on the right. neither seem to be a consideration to him yet consequently many see him as leftist.

watched the entire speech on cspan stream. it was as great as I expected. there were things that either side of the aisle would like and not like but he stuck to church theology as he has been continuously saying. it's true. he doesn't see left and right. he sees morally correct. he is a great man. the question is "did he change anyones heart today?" i'll wager he did.

In fact, many conservative Catholics adore Pope Francis. Ashley McGuire, a senior fellow with The Catholic Association, has these thoughts about the pontiff. perhaps you should try to convince dante. he seems skeptical. the reporter i read posting from the plane trip between cuba and dc emphasized the pope's insistence that he was following established catholic doctrine in his statements, including those judged "leftist" by so many americans especially american bishops and a particular cardinal (ba bye cardinal burke i fully agree. it's not only catholic doctrine but all encompassing christian doctrine to look after the poor and sick, fight for the disenfranchised and dispossessed, respect the earth and embrace tolerance. call it what you will. he's on the right path.

huh? is this is a serious statement? bubonic plague? the analogous situation would be having doxycycline to treat it cheaply available and then increasing the price 5000%. or even more timely, raising the price of cipro in an anthrax terrorist attack. if we can't agree that the person/corporation that would do that is deserving of severe scorn then we can't agree on anything. oh, and btw, the price of doxycycline has recently increased a great deal through a similar mechanism as this toxo drug.

yes, but he didn't say how much and this move completely undermines his argument defending the original price as explained int he above links. subhuman pos is a psychopath.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/big-price-increase-for-an-old-drug-will-be-rolled-back-turing-chief-says.html?_r=0. this guy is such a peach! can't feel sorry for lehman who he also screwed but sheesh, what a butthole. the natural result of a system that values financial success over anything else, however. a system that by design, financially favors individuals like him over the collective good. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/23/martin-shkreli-lowers-drug-price-is-still-an-!@#$.html. nice piece that includes some perspective from infectious disease experts.

it says nothing of the sort. it says one supremely selfish jerk is capitalizing on the suffering of others. is he unique? unfortunately, no. but letting him appear to win sends the wrong message to society. money is no good if you are unhappy. he will be unhappy and that should be publicized. and rules should be changed.. accepting that human nature is evil is a pretty miserable prospect as well. I don't accept it any more than I accept that perfection can be achieved in anything. it can't. but things can usually be improved.

if i didn't think it was above you (and terribly boring) i'd suggest a discussion of the economic definition of commodity. as it is, the cliff notes and excerpts will have to do: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity The term commodity is specifically used for an economic good or service when the demand for it has no qualitative differentiation across a market.[3] In other words, a commodity good or service has full or partial but substantial fungibility; that is, the market treats its instances as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them. As the saying goes, "From the taste of wheat, it is not possible to tell who produced it, a Russian serf, a French peasant or an Englishcapitalist."[4]Petroleum and copper are other examples of such commodities,[5] their supply and demand being a part of one universal market. Items such as stereo systems, on the other hand, have many aspects of product differentiation, such as the brand, the user interface and the perceived quality. The demand for one type of stereo may be much larger than demand for another. In contrast, one of the characteristics of a commodity good is that its price is determined as a function of its market as a whole. clearly in a gov't run system, the market doesn't determine price at all. there isn't a market. the price is fixed as is the supply. as far as the first condition, it's not met by the current health care system since sit is not fungible but i think most refer to it in a figurative rather than literal sense as a commodity meaning it's bought and sold in much the same way as wheat or ore.

glad you find it funny. i bet you have health insurance. it's not a commodity in a market sense if it's universally provided by the government with fixed prices.

it's a simple choice: sick people versus corporations. we all know who wins here. where are all those outraged at selling fetal tissue? i'm not a fan of that practice but how is this not just as insulting to the value of human life?

sorry if i misinterpreted. i get a bit sharp when people discuss the relative merits of price gouging and profit taking over potentially curing serious diseases with drugs that have no reason but greed to be expensive. perhaps i do live in the wrong country. perhaps a significant portion of the population here is truly beyond redemption.

f*&^^%in hilarious http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8876356 in a study of 19 patients, " Eighteen patients had died at the time of study and the median survival following diagnosis of cerebral toxoplasmosis was 10 months (range 3-38 months)." ha,ha ,ha

i said for starters, numbnuts. the loopholes in the patent laws re drugs need to be removed. it's almost as if drug lobbyists wrote the laws. no more taking a racemic mixture and purifying the active component and calling it a new drug. no more extensions for new indications. no more new patents for new delivery systems of dubious value. no more removing identical competing generic molecules from the market for some ridiculous excuse to make a few people like this scumbag very rich. also, once the gov't negotiates for low prices using their massive buying power, the private insurers will have more leverage to do the same. andd you get some new leadership at the fda exclusive of all .monetary drug industry ties. but yeah, single payer is the ultimate goal.

a national formulary for all gov't insured patients, for starters.

not at all. I wouldn't vote for anyone that wouldn't propose legislation against this kind of exploitation. Clinton has already latched onto the issue. Bernie will very shortly. just watch.

a good moderator would request ideas for a solution...a condemnation would open a very large can of worms.

i'm not sure anyone is. it's just such a stark example. if people don't see a problem with this then they likely lack a conscience. because of that, it would be a very important question to ask prez candidates about. of course, it's already logical to conclude that those supporting trump are immoral.

more importantly, it's why some die young and some live long debauched lives.

it has plenty to do with it. his job is the likely route to his discovering this "opportunity". out of patent doesn't necessarily mean easy to market. for example, colchicine is off patent but all but one manufacturer has yet to prove efficacy and all the other products pulled with resulting price of the remaining drug skyrocketing (even tho the molecule is exactly the same). there are multitudes of similar examples of shyster pharma lawyers gaming patent rules at the expense of patients. I rarely prescribe this drug so I don't know the story behind it but i'll bet it's similar to what I've witnessed.

no one should be surprised. look at the pic of this d-bag. it's like naming tytt the head of eugenics for the world. very bad things will inevitably happen. interesting that the backlash against TB, which pretty much anyone can get, worked while that for a complication of HIV (toxo) didn't. this is exactly why healthcare shouldn't be a commodity. the next repug debate should feature a question on this topic. let's see if there are any candidates with a soul. what odds do you all give? i'll be holding my breath for Huckabee's answer. maybe he'll parrot falwell.

ready or not here he comes! http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/popes-trip-ties-cuba-to-us-following-detente-that-he-aided/ar-AAeANPy?ocid=ansmsnnews11. seems he's not a big fan of communism, particularly Cuban style communism and isn't afraid to say so. I don't think he's afraid of much. The pope avoided making overt political statements in Cuba, as dissidents had hoped he would, but used his homilies to send messages laced in spirituality about the need for change in the one-party Communist country. He urged Cubans to think out of the box and be tolerant of other people's ideas. At a Mass on Monday for tens of thousands of people in the eastern city of Holguin, he urged his listeners "not to be satisfied with appearances or with what is politically correct."

most of the sacks were the o lines fault especially glenn. TT actually did a very nice job of escaping pressure on several big plays.