Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
lgbg, if you are registered to vote, you should have received a sample ballot in the mail within the past week or so.
Pashuteh Yid, not only do they let feminists vote, they even let women vote.
feivel, thanks for clarifying. So would you say it’s possible that in other hospitals there’s a larger proportion of accidental/ self-inflicted gunshot wounds, and that the demographics at these hospitals more accurately reflect the types of communities in which most of the posters here live? (sorry for the run-on)
By the way, five years at County must have been quite an experience. Were you an ER resident then?
feivel, thank you for clarifying. So would you say it’s possible that in other hospitals accidental/ self-inflicted gunshot wounds are more common, and that the demographics of these hospitals are more likely to reflect the types of communities in which the posters on this board live?
feivel, thank you for clarifying. So would you say it’s possible that in other hospitals accidental/ self-inflicted gunshot wounds are more common, and that the demographics of these hospitals are more likely to reflect the types of communities in which the posters on this board live?
Sorry, in my last post, I of course meant Richard M. Daley, the current mayor. Not even the most disingenuous talk show host would refer to the late Richard J. as a “radical liberal”; 1968 wasn’t that long ago, and Abe Ribicoff died only 10 years ago.
illini07, I got my degrees at UIC. It’s actually a very good school despite being the poor stepsister.
Alas, my political career is over before it started, due to my myriad connections to former Weatherman William Ayers: not only did I spend several years at the university where he works, but I also spent worked one summer at the utility that his father had led less than two decades previously. Plus I once spoke to the well-known radical, liberal mayor of Chicago, Richard J. Daley.
feivel, County is an inner-city hospital. Would you say that your experience there would be typical of all hospitals? Would the ER patient load be similar to that seen at, say, Northwestern Memorial or Swedish Covenant?
illini07, are you an student/alum of U of I? I am sorry if this is too personal; I was just curious because of your username.
Joseph, my point is that many (as in, millions of Christians & Muslims throughout the world) consider our existence as Jews–that is, our refusal to recognize their Messiah–as the worst type of perversion possible. Personally I am relieved that in our great country even religiously-motivated hate speech is still recognized as hate speech.
Joseph, I’m not illi07, but why do you think that comment is appropriate? I’d presume from your post that you are not offended by epiphets used towards Jews, correct? And for those who argue that it’s OK to call Christine Quinn a “queer” because her sexual orientation is “perverted” according to our religious beliefs, please be aware that many view our religious beliefs as the worst perversion possible.
Pediatricians ask parents about guns in the home for the same reason they ask whether the child is properly restrained in a car seat or exposed to secondhand smoke, and whether there are working smoke detectors in the home: because these are all factors that affect childhood safety/ mortality.
eliezer, are you really wishing for the “Obama’s SS” to attack those Jews with him you disagree?
SJSinNYC, also note that the Bush administration loosened the definition of what consitutes a significant improvement requiring upgrades in scrubbers & other pollutant controls.
Coal is a major pollutant; many parents worry about mercury in vaccines, but the fact is that all of us breath in much more mercury due to pollution from coal plants. And of course this mercury is present in the earth and water too, and throughout the food chain. This has a much bigger impact, at least in the short term, than carbon dioxide.
That said, 50% of our energy is generated from coal, so there’s no way to just get rid of it now. I agree that solar & wind energy are great “green” sources, but right now only about 1% of our electricity energy comes from wind & much less than that comes directly from the sun. Wind & solar cannot be generated everywhere, and neither is available all the time, so they cannot provide most of our electricity.
Personally I think the answer in the medium term is more nuclear power plants. Currently 20% of our energy comes from nuclear, which produces no pollutants (except waste heat) and no greenhouse gases. Both candidates want to build more nuclear plants; Obama just wants to resolve waste disposal issues first, especially the status of the Yucca Mountain disposal site.
Yanky55, thanks for that post. For those who do own guns, it is of utmost importance that you keep your guns & ammunition locked up. It’s not enough to hide them; research has shown that children often know the hiding places even if their parents think they don’t.
Question for those who own guns: are the parents of the children who visit your home aware that you own a gun?
Nobody, I understand your desire to remain anonymous, but your name doesn’t fit you at all. You are definitely important, and your post said what all of us needed to hear, and what I wish I was articulate enough to say.
jewishfeminist02, this is an old thread; if you continue posting (& I hope you will) in time your name will be added to the list too.
Regarding Henry & Ives, the boys on the track, you are correct in stating that Dr. Fahmy Malak ruled that they overdosed & fell asleep, and that a grand jury concluded he was wrong & the boys were dead before they were place on the tracks. But if you’d carefully read the article on snopes, you’d have seen that Katherine Brightop testified on this matter before a US magistrate, She said that her ex-boyfriend, Paul Criswell, told her that he & three others beat the boys to death & placed the bodies on the track because the boys tried to steal cocaine from them. So their deaths were, indeed, drug-related, just not Clinton-related.
Please read the article carefully & post which deaths, specifically, you still think are suspicious.
feivel, if the child is restricted to certain cereals, then he is not being given whatever he likes. Adding fruit to the cereal will help balance his diet too. Some cereals also contain protein, or he can eat some egg, peanut butter, or fish for protein.
Whether the child in general eats enough is also relevant. I do think that if a child doesn’t eat much he should perhaps be given more latitude in his food choices if that will encourage him to eat more. (I may be projecting here, since my children are all underweight & tend to be picky eaters). Obviously if the child is overweight more restrictions may be appropriate.
jent1150, in my analogy I was pointing out that the 9/11 attacks did not elicit a reaction similar to putting the Japanese in internment camps after the Pearl Harbor attacks. The 9/11 attacks were of course not from a specific country, but most of the attackers were Saudi nationals, and Osama bin Laden himself is from Saudi Arabia. Therefore, if the US gov’t would’ve reacted in a similar way to the 9/11 attacks, they would’ve rounded up Saudis in America. Which, as you know, they didn’t.
Joseph, which situation in Europe are you talking about? Assuming you mean the Holocaust, it’s true that the widespread, systematic extermination of Jews was unexpected. But Europe in general had a rich history of anti-Semitism & attacks against Jews, generally sanctioned by various governments which either participated actively or looked the other way. That’s simply not the case in this country. It’s not for nothing that many Gedolim call this a “medina shel chessed”.
Bowzer, you wrote,
“We should not project our hopes and logics on to the goyim’s mind.”
Neither, though, should we project our fears. I understand you are very worried, but the scenario you are describing seems very unlikely, at best. You are absolutely correct that thousands of US citizens of Japanese extraction were sent to internment camps during WWII. This was unconsitutional; despite the fact that Japan had attacked the US & drawn the country into a war so many wanted to avoid, these American citizens had committed no crime.
But this was not repeated in more recent times. After the 9/11 attacks, the US government did not indisriminately round up Saudi or Afghani nationals, let alone Muslim-Americans. This despite the fact that most of the highjackers were Saudi nationals, Osama bin Laden was from a prominent Saudi family, and bin Laden was then hiding in Afghanistan.
Now the US is at war in Iraq & Afghanistan, yet Americans from these countries have not been indiscriminately rounded up by the government & sent to internment camps. True, Muslims & others have been discriminated against or attacked, but these are individual crimes; the US government does not sanction these crimes but prosecutes the perpetrators as it would any other criminal.
This is very different from the situation in Europe during the times you mentioned.
Please keep in mind as well that although there are many citizens in this country who do not wish Jews well, most of them do not like African-Americans (or Muslims, for that matter, for those who still believe Obama is a Muslim) very much either.
havesomeseichel: by the way, I’m a woman.
Regarding the list posted by mariner, it isn’t accurate. Vince Foster is probably the best known name on the list. Ken Starr led a 3-year-investigation of his death & concluded that he was not intoxicated or drugged, there was no sign of a struggle, and the body had not been moved. He did not leave a suicide note, but did leave a draft resignation letter in his briefcase in which he described the stress he was undergoing due to recent bad press against him. Ken Starr was not exactly a friend of President Clinton, and had no reason to cover up any crime Clinton may have committed; certainly over the course of such a long investigation he would have found any evidence of murder if it existed.
According to Delaware’s top medical examiner, Stanley Huggins died of viral myocarditis & bronchial pneumonia, not suicide. Similarly, Barbara Wise’s death was ruled to be a result of severe health problems, including liver ailments, perhaps resulting from her alcoholism. The bruises were likely a result of bone marrow treatments.
Ron Brown and 34 others died when his airplane crashed into a mountain while landing in Croatia, due to what the Air Force investigators called a “failure of command” and “aircrew errors”. The hole in his skull did not have a corresponding exit wound, and no bullet or bone fragments were found; it was likely the result of the crash.
These are just a few examples; please see http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp for a more thorough analysis of these deaths, including the deaths of the “boys on the track”.
havesomeseichel, if you investigate carefully you’ll see that this list of murders/ suicides is simply not accurate; therefore the number of supposed suicides is much smaller than originally thought. But actually I would expect that the Clintons would have been connected in some way to many more people who’ve been murdered and/ or committed suicide than have you and I, simply because they know so many more people, who in turn know many people, etc. Please keep in mind, too, that many of the people on the list are not directly or not at all connected to the Clintons either, except due to the fact that the Clintons allegedly arranged their deaths.
I think it’s clear from what I’ve explained above that the list cited isn’t accurate. And I am surprised that so many people uncritically believe that it could be true, simply because they hear it from someone or see it on the internet. It simply doesn’t make sense that a couple who have been so thoroughly investigated could have gotten away with so many murders. And anyone who investigates these or similar lists would quickly find out that they aren’t true.
I’ve wondered for some time about why people believe things that just don’t make sense, without thoroughly investigating the facts on their own. Why do people even today believe Jews kill Christian/ Muslim children for their blood, when Jews are not even allowed to consume animal blood? Why do some people believe that the US government covered up the existence of UFOs and alien abductions, or that the moon landing was faked? Why do some people believe that the 9/11 attacks were somehow orchestrated by the Israeli and/ or American governments, when these attacks hurt both of those governments?
I think that people believe ideas that make no sense and actually conflict with provable facts because these ideas somehow resonate with their own deeply held beliefs or prejudices. If someone believes, deep down, that the US government is evil and manipulative, it’s possible for him to also believe that the government would cover up the existence of UFOs and alien abductions in order to avoid frightening the people, or fake the moon landings in order to impress them. And of course we know that anti-Semitism is a “halacha b’yadua”, so it’s not surprising that people hold beliefs about Jews that don’t make sense. And if people believe that the Clintons committed serious financial/ legal crimes for which they haven’t been sufficiently prosecuted, and are evil people who wouldn’t stop at murder, it’s possible for them to uncritically accept the list of names cited in the previous post as “Clinton murders”.
Now, I’m not saying that President Clinton was not a flawed president; no president, no human, is perfect and in some ways he was more flawed than many. Indeed, there are valid criticisms of the Clinton administration. But this list of names isn’t it.
Regarding Senator Obama, I’m not sure how disagreeing with this list of “Clinton murders” makes me a supporter of Obama. Even if I were claiming President Clinton was the greatest president ever, which I’m not, surely you are aware that the Clintons are not close personal friends of the Senator?
Yes, I believe Bill Clinton committed perjury, but I don’t believe he had any of those people killed. I also don’t believe all the Jews working in the WTC got a call to stay home on 9/11, or that the buildings were imploded; or that the diary of Ann Frank was a forgery. But seeing what apparently intelligent, fairly well-educated people on this board believe, I know longer why so many people do believe these things.
Do you really believe the Clintons had all those people killed? Really really? Because if they did, why didn’t they just get rid of Obama the same way? And Ken Starr, for that matter?
Sometimes I wonder how people can believe nutty anti-semitic conspiracy theories, for example that the Jews control the financial markets (as in _The Protocols of the Elders of Zion_) or that the Jews caused the 9/11 attacks. Besides an unhealthy dose of anti-semitism, adhering to these theories requires one to believe the most unlikely, improbable ideas. But when I see the beliefs held by posters to this board, whom I’d expect to have above-average intelligence, I no longer wonder about this.
Thanks for sharing.
mariner, so are you saying that it doesn’t matter whether the president makes good decisions, since it’s the job of the legislature to protect us from the president’s poor decisions? That can sometimes work, if the legislature isn’t controlled by the same party as the president.
mariner, after thinking about what you wrote I wanted to add that although remembering one’s friends is a significant indicator of character, this doesn’t necessarily extend to appointing them for positions for which they may not be qualified. In Chicago, where I grew up, this is known as patronage, and it doesn’t necessarily make for good government.
mariner, you are right that the comment about John Ashcroft was something of a gratuitous swipe. Obviously Ashcroft didn’t lose to a dead man but to his widow, and if the timing of Mel Carnahan’s death would have been different Ashcroft might have won (certainly these events proved to be an object lesson for Norm Coleman later). But don’t you think it’s a little odd to appoint someone to head a Cabinet department that he campaigned to abolish? I for one was disappointed in the Bush administration on the energy issue, because I hoped that with Dick Cheney’s interest in nuclear energy we’d have seen at least one nuclear plant begin construction (not just site permitting, which means nothing); I believe that nuclear energy is one of the best ways for our country to achieve energy independence.
I never said that Ms. Palin actually banned books; she just repeated asked the city librarian if she would. If this was a test of whether she’d say yes or no, then why did she ask more than once? I still think someone who’d ask that question may not be ready to be vice president.
And I still don’t think it’s a good idea to charge crime victims, or their insurance companies, for forensic testing intended to apprehend their attackers. (Especially because many people don’t have good insurance, and even if they do, usuallly pay some costs for tests covered by their insurance companies). I think this is a cost that should be absorbed by the government & paid for through taxes, just as other policing costs are.
It’s true that as senator Mr. Obama neither directly paid staff or balanced a budget. But when running his campaigns he did both of these on a larger scale than Ms. Palin.
I’m not saying that Obama/ Biden is necessarily a better ticket than McCain/ Palin. But I am saying that you should know the facts about whom your voting for. No candidate is perfect; you need to choose which combination of plusses and minuses makes for the better candidate.
mariner, here’s a fun bit of trivia about Spencer Abraham: In 1997, he joined a group of senators in attempting to abolish the Department of Energy, calling it “wasteful and ungainly”, having “no core mission”. Then, after he lost his seat to Debbie Stabenow, President Bush made him Secretary of Energy; when questioned about his earlier efforts to dismantle the DOE, he said he was no longer interested in doing so. (President Bush had a soft spot for losing senators; he even found a position for John Ashcroft, who lost to a dead man).
mariner, are you saying you believe everything Ann Coulter says? Because I don’t think Ann Coulter believes everything she says.
The Beis Medrash is a wonderful Chol HaMoed destination. But unfortunately I’m not allowed to bring my little kids there & I doubt they’d appreciate it anyways. I’m thinking the OP is looking for ideas on outings suitable for young children, and answered appropriately.
I too am concerned that Sarah Palin thinks banning books from a public library is a good idea. And I also don’t think that assault victims, or their insurance companies, should be charged for forensic testing intended to apprehend their attackers. Yet when Ms. Palin was mayor of Wasilla her town was one of only a few in the the state that continued this practice.
Like illini07, I think that those running the country should be smarter & more capable than the rest of us. Obviously this includes knowing basic historical & political facts.
Feivel wrote that he drank around 8 liters; since a liter is about a quart he drank about 2 gallons.
Of course hyponatremia, also called water intoxiaction, is not an urban legend. A woman died of it about two years ago after participating in a contest held by a radio station (contestants were encouraged to drink as much water as possible without using the bathroom).
Thanks for this warning.
Are you interested in cheaper outings? If so, good choices for younger children might be trips to the library, playground (if the weather is nice, bring along snacks & have a picnic), or to pick out one or two items at the dollar store.
So are babies/ toddlers not allowed in the store, or are just strollers banned? Because if it’s the former, I still don’t understand why they don’t leave the strollers outside & bring in the child(ren).
I’ve never shopped on 13th Ave. with a baby so maybe this question is ignorant, but if the store has a no-stroller policy, then why don’t parents leave the empty stroller outside & bring the child in? An infant can be carried in a baby carrier such as a Snugli, while a toddler can walk (on a leash if necessary–may look silly but who cares if it keeps the child safe) or ride in a shopping cart if one is available. When I am in a store or other location where I can’t bring a stroller, I use a baby carrier or let the child walk. Yes, it’s inconvenient, but it’s the safest way. It’s true that an empty stroller could be stolen but no one’s ever lost her kids because she left an empty stroller outside a store.
I subsituted an equal amount of brown rice flour for the regular flour since my daughter can’t eat wheat, and it came out nicely. I did not add any texture aids such as xantham gum.
mariner,
I think you misread my post. I am well aware that klaf is made of shechted animals. But what I said is that there is nothing in the Torah that would require someone living _today_ to actually eat meat. As far as bringing karbonos today, I didn’t know this could be done; can you give a source for this?
intellegent,
You made a good point, in that animals must be killed to produce klaf, so the meat should be eaten rather than go to waste. But because the number of animals killed for klaf is much less than the number killed for meat (by orders of magnitude), even if a large group of frum Jews would stop eating meat none of the meat from animals shechted for klaf would likely go to waste.
As far as the inyan of eating meat on Shabbos & Yom Tov, I always thought that was because of simchas Yom Tov. If eating meat does not enhance a person’s simchah, whether because his doctor proscribed it or he doesn’t like the taste or he’s uncomfortable with the present-day shechting process, why should he eat meat? I have heard stories of gedolim forcing themselves to drink the arba kosos even if it made them ill; is eating meat on shabbos & yom tov in the same category?
I am not saying that there is anything wrong with eating meat because PETA said so. If PETA said it was raining outside I’d stick my hand out the window to check before taking my umbrella, beecause as I mentioned in my original post, their entire philosophy of animal rights is not one I agree with. I am just disagreeing with those who automatically assume someone who doesn’t eat meat is committing an avaira.
I am familiar with one opinion which says that ma’aser is calculated after deducting work-related expenses (such as transportation/ fuel & childcare expenses) from income.
intellegent,
The halachos of karbonos do not apply at this time. Animal skins are needed for parchments of mezuzos & sifrei torah. There is an inyan of eating meat on yom tov, but that is because of simchah, so if someone can’t/ doesn’t want to eat meat then this wouldn’t apply to him. So as far as I can remember I’d say that the torah doesn’t require someone living in present times to actually eat meat, but please correct me if I’m wrong.
Personally, I do eat meat/ poultry/ fish.
GMAB, but that _is_ a pro-choice agenda. If a woman is considering an abortion because she can’t afford the costs of pregnancy/ recovery/ caring for an infant, then by providing the necessary funds EFRAT is giving her the resources she needs to make the choice she may truly prefer. How is that not about choice?
intellegent, you wrote:
“Do you really believe that Hashem would specifically allow us to eat animals but would prefer that we dont?! Do you think that Hashem CH”V does not have the strength to tell us not to do something that He’d prefer we don’t???”
Yes, I believe that Hashem would allow someone to do something even if it would be better for him not to do it, not because Hashem is in any way lacking C”V but because He is well aware that people are. One example is found in Sefer D’Vorim, the inyan of Eishes Y’fas To’ar, in which a man is permitted to marry a captive. The m’forshim explain that this is allowed even though it is not considered the right thing to do, because otherwise the person might marry the captive anyways, so the procedure outlined in the Torah describes how to go about it in the “best” way possible.
Now I don’t know if eating meat falls into this category of something we are allowed to do but really shouldn’t, but I did want to address your point.
GMAB, I think because EFRAT’s mission is to give women financial & other support so that if they are considering an abortion for financial/ logistical reasons they can choose to give birth instead.
GMAB, I saw the ad you mentioned & clicked on it. It’s for EFRAT (I think it may also be called EFRAT-CRIB, but I’m not sure), a tzedaka in E”Y that provides funds, supplies, & other support for Israeli women who are considering abortion for economic reasons, so that they can continue their pregnancies if they choose to do so.
Personally I think this is a great tzedaka. I donated to this tzedaka when I was expecting–I felt the z’chus of helping another Jewish woman have a healthy child would help me have a safe pregnancy & delivery.
I agree that YWN should also show pictures of presidential contendors, even if they are women. But calling this to their attention may just get the photo removed from the ad.
havesomeseichel,
You are right that out-of-town schools can have very high tuition. I lived in a small community in central-US; in the local cheder, over half of the students were the children of klei kodesh (Rabbaim & Kollel members) & paid very little or no tuition. About 25% of the children paid full-tuition with little difficulty. The remaining 20% struggled to pay full- or 90% tuition; some took out federal loans & second mortgages to do so, besides amassing significant credit card debt. Because the school was already giving large breaks to the klei kodesh, they could not afford to give any breaks to the “working middle class”.
Itzik_s, now that Gillette is owned by Proctor & Gamble, a huge American conglomerate (based in Ohio) I’d say its German connection is negligible.
gavra_at_work, now I understand why the school administrators listen to these parents. But I still don’t understand why these parents care whether some other child is attending school with theirs? What is supposed to be wrong with the children they are rejecting? Are they upset because these parents can’t pay full tuition, and they don’t want to subsidize it?
Mrs. Langert, you write that people call the schools & say “If you accept so-and-so, I won’t send my daughter to your school.” I’ve never lived in Lakewood, & never would imagine calling up a school & telling them they shouldn’t accept another child. If I would make such a call, I can’t imagine any principal I’ve met saying anything other than, “sorry, we’ll miss teaching your child then.”
So my question is, on what basis are parents calling schools & telling them not to accept other children? What could possible be wrong with these children? And why would the schools listen to the parents who threaten them?