Republicans Stripped Pandemic Flu Preparedness From Stimulus
Like I get it you need a vaccine vs a flu. Its the cheapest and the easiest way to fight a flu. The problem is that u need to store it in large amounts because it normally takes 4 or 6 weeks to generate it. So, its past the point now to use a vaccine because if u got infected and u use a vaccine it may have hazardous consequences to your health if u "add" it to the special agent. So u need strong antibiotics. But equally, strong antibiotics need also 4-6 weeks to be released in masses. Thus, I suggest, the US is dead. Bad luck. I guess the 900 mio would have been very helpful to produce a vaccine.Like I get it you need a vaccine vs a flu. Its the cheapest and the easiest way to fight a flu. The problem is that u need to store it in large amounts because it normally takes 4 or 6 weeks to generate it. So, its past the point now to use a vaccine because if u got infected and u use a vaccine it may have hazardous consequences to your health if u "add" it to the special agent. So u need strong antibiotics. But equally, strong antibiotics need also 4-6 weeks to be released in masses. Thus, I suggest, the US is dead. Bad luck
Privacy issues
- as a third party google uses cookies to switch commercials
- Double Dart cookies are being used
- Als Drittanbieter verwendet Google Cookies zur Anzeigenschaltung auf Ihrer Website.
- Durch Verwendung des DART-Cookies wird die Anzeigenschaltung anhand der Besuche der Nutzer auf Ihren Websites und anderen Websites im Internet für Google ermöglicht.
Bush citation 1
DUBYA: So what state is Wales in? CHURCH: It's a separate country next to England. DUBYA: Oh, okay.
Mr.Putin from Canada
bush cite3
At this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly outta Ronald Reagan Airport.
McCain Evergreens
1 Kommentare:
You really don't check your sources, do you?
You say that Republicans stripped money for pandemic flu preparedness.
That's not what the source that your "source" cited.
"The House of Representatives had included $900 million in pandemic preparedness funds in its version of the massive stimulus package, but it appeared that all but $50 million was removed by the conference committee that ironed out differences between the House and Senate versions, said Richard Hamburg, government relations director for the nonpartisan, nonprofit group Trust for America's Health (TFAH).
The House passed the $787 billion compromise bill this afternoon by a vote of 246-183, with no Republican support, the New York Times reported. The story said the Senate was expected to approve the measure this evening.The Republicans voted against the "stimulus" because it is a terrible package.
It had absolutely nothing to do with any preparedness (or any particular) provisions.
The package didn't contain one dime to encourage private investment. It did absolutely nothing but reward Obama's union hacks, and his ACORN thugs.
All we'll have to show for it are drastically over-priced, union-manned infrastructure projects, and future tax burdens that will be unconstitutionally collected on the state level
Republicans would prefer tax cuts....which would actually increase federal revenue.
Then you have all kind of revenue for flue preparedeness, infrastructure, and anything else we need.
Or if you want to waste money (like Obama or Bush) you can do that, too. You'll have the funding for it.
Common sense should tell you that if you have the highest corporate tax rate in the world (which we do) businesses aren't going to want to come here and invest.
In fact, the corporations here are going to take their operations somewhere where they don't have to give up 39-40% of their money so the government can use it to attack private industry.
Lower the tax rates...increase the revenue.
It has happened every time.
I have a question. I wouldn't mind getting a liberal opinion on this:
Why won't Obama take back any of the bail-out money that banks are trying to give him?
Is it because the government has a better idea than them whether or not they need it?
If that is the case.... then isn't it better that these banks go under anyway?
or
Is it that they really want to nationalize (politicize) future lending in this country?
Post a Comment