elkpark

Schools offer education, not jobs. Potential students make their own choices about what occupation they want to enter, and, if they make a choice they're unhappy about later, that's not the schools' responsibility, IMO, unless it's a situation of outright fraud. The overall economy, and employment opportunities in different fields, are constantly waxing and waning, and nothing is guaranteed.

I understand that a lot of people get a sense of personal satisfaction/vengeance out of hearing of his death, but our (US) actions since 9/11/01 have created so many thousand more terrorists than bin Laden would ever have been able to recruit on his own that I'm not sure his death really makes any difference at this point (apart from the individuals who have been hoping for vengeance and retribution all this time).

I, too, went to PP offices for birth control (BCPs) for many years, long before I went into nursing and when I didn't have any insurance, starting in college. All the girls at my college who wanted BCPs went to the local PP office because the college's student health services would notify our parents if we showed up requesting contraceptives, but the PP office didn't. They offered pills at a steep discount compared to the drug store prices (same with PAPs and pelvics). I am such a fan that I continued going for a number of years when my income had gotten high enough that I no longer got any kind of discount/bargain (they used a "sliding scale" ladder of fees based on your income), just because I supported the organization and liked the care I got there, until I relocated to a rural area that didn't have a local office. I have continued to donate regularly, though, to show my support. I've been to several different offices (in different states) over the years -- I found them all to be v. clean and pleasant, and always felt I got excellent care (more warm and caring than I've gotten in many physician's offices over the years since then). Based on my own experiences, I would not hesitate to go to them for services or to work there.

I fully support this type of proposal. I am tired of my tax dollars being spent to enable folks' addictions.

Nah .... The True Believers aren't swayed by reasonable arguments like that. As someone else already posted, people were already whipped up about vaccines and autism long before this study was done -- it just added apparent support to their cause. Since it's been debunked, they just question the debunking. Never let the facts get in the way of your personal beliefs and biases! :)

(OP, I think you're overly optimistic ... :uhoh3:)

Exactly.

It's certainly not "just you." I have no problem with the occasional abbreviation (lol, IMHO, IIRC) -- even use them myself sometimes. But I just ignore any posts here in "serious" textspeak -- I assume that anyone who can't be bothered to post in standard English has nothing to say that's worth my time and effort to decipher. I come here to relax and communicate with other professionals, not to solve weird word puzzles (which is what translating textspeak feels like to me).

Agreed.

I like the show v. much (liked?) "HawthoRNe" made my teeth hurt (I couldn't stand any more after the first few episodes), and I'm too cheap to pay for premium channels so I've never seen "Nurse Jackie." I think Mercy is about as good as we're likely to get re: shows about nurses. I'm sure cops and firefighters have the same c/os about cop and firefighter shows as many people here have about "Mercy." It's supposed to be entertainment, not a documentary. I thought "Mercy" was a lot better than it could have been (although I was not v. optimistic when it first started). There was a character who appeared to be maybe the NM for the ED, and she did more than "run around with a clipboard." (Okay, so she is middle-aged and a little overweight -- is that a crime now???? :)) When she appeared, she did seem to be managing the ED and there were a few different scenes (in different episodes) when she sat down in her office with one or another of the main characters and either offered them positive, helpful support in a difficult situation or had a "word of prayer" with them about something wrong or inappropriate they had done (in a good kinda way -- the kind of boss you'd actually like to have :)).

I definitely did not contribute in any way to keeping Shrub in office (shoot, I did everything I could to get him out of office), and I'm sure I'm not the only person who objects to illegal immigrants not because I'm afraid of violence or the "other," but because they're BREAKING THE LAW. I don't care if someone is brown, yellow, white, green, or purple, if s/he is here illegally, s/he is breaking US law every day s/he is here, and I vigorously object to that. I would love for my own state to be doing what AZ is doing (my state has one of the fastest growing illegal populations in the country, although certainly not one of the largest illegal populations). It's been US law since ~1930 that aliens are required to carry at all times their visa/passport/whatever documentation they have about their legal right to be in the US, so why is it unreasonable for law enforcement personel to ask to see that documentation? In European (and, I'm sure, many other) countries, it's a standard expectation that, as a tourist/visitor/whatever, you are expected to be able to show authorities your passport or other documentation of your legal status to be there at any time; I don't understand why this is considered (by many) to be such an outrageous suggestion here.

"All healthcare bill negotiations"? Those were the final negotiations to reconcile the bills already written and passed in the House and Senate, which the Republicans had plenty of opportunity to participate in writing. And it wasn't just "Pelosi, Reid, and Obama" -- the reconciliation "sidecare" bill was written by a committee of Democrats. This is how Congress works, on all bills, not just this one. The Senate and House each pass their own version of a bill, and a conference committee is appointed by the House and Senate leadership to resolve the differences and details and come up with a final, single bill which the President signs into law. It's a waste of my time to be explaining Civics 101 to people who apparently don't understand how the US Congress works. I'm outa here.

How is COBRA insurance coverage "government funded"? All the COBRA insurance rule does is require your former employer to let you maintain your former insurance through your former employer by paying (yourself) the full price of the insurance plus a small administrative fee (limited to 3%, I believe, of the premium).

Ooops, my bad. It didn't occur to me to post sources for something that was widely reported and discussed in the news all summer and fall. But I guess not everyone follows the news. Here ya go (here are a few references; there are lots more available): "For months, much to the consternation of many of his fellow Republicans, Charles Grassley, the ranking minority member on the Senate Finance Committee, had continued to negotiate behind closed doors with chairman Max Baucus and four other members of the panel. No Republican received more TLC from Barack Obama, who has met with Grassley three times at the White House and called him three times more just to keep in touch. White House aides reckoned that if Grassley, with his conservative credentials, could find a health-care deal he liked, a significant number of other Republicans might be persuaded to climb aboard. 'Health care not only is 16% of the gross national product, but it touches the quality of life of every household as few others do,'" Grassley declared back in April. 'I'm doing everything I can to make the reform effort in Congress a bipartisan one.'" http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1920209,00.html "Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) worked for months to find common ground with Republicans on health care reform ..." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27256.html "The bipartisan Gang of Six, which has been meeting for months, could gather for the last time Monday as Baucus said he aims to wrap up the negotiations. The senators could indicate at that point whether they will sign onto the bill, Baucus said. 'We are starting to reach closure,' Baucus said after a rare Friday meeting of the group." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27042.html "Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus could lay out a health care reform plan as early as Saturday, the Montana senator told his colleagues on a Friday afternoon conference call. Baucus (D-Mont.) told the bipartisan group of Senate negotiators that has been working for months to craft a compromise that he will be releasing a plan soon, according to sources familiar with the call. ... The six negotiators on the committee are Baucus, ranking Republican Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.)." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26773.html "This is who is in the room helping Baucus put together his bill. Olympia Snowe, Mike Enzi, Chuck Grassley, Jeff Bingaman and Kent Conrad. In a Senate of 60 Democrats and 40 Republicans, the health-care reform bill is being written by three centrist Democrats, one centrist Republicans, and two conservative Republicans. And until last week, Orrin Hatch was in the room, too." http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/the_max_baucus_committee.html "Bipartisan health care negotiations resumed this morning among members of the Senate Finance Committee. Three Republicans on that committee, ranking member Charles Grasley of Iowa, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Orrin Hatch of Utah have been working hard to find a common ground with Democrats on the committee. All three, currently in the Senate office of Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., agree that progress is being made, but it is unclear when they could emerge with a bipartisan bill. Grassley said this morning that a bipartisan bill could be presented this week if the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) returns an acceptable cost estimate and Grassley, Snowe and Hatch all sign off on the policy proposals." http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/06/can-public-option-survive-negotiations-resume-in-senate.html "The Finance Committee's "Gang of Six," a group of three Democratic and three Republican senators, has been working for months to craft bipartisan health-care legislation." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/category/charles-grassley/?fbid=BAlaS1pKuJc I did misspeak when I said none of the Republicans on the committee voted for the bill -- I forgot that Olympia Snowe did.

Oh, please. Max Baucus wasted the entire summer trying to arrive at a bipartisan bill in the Senate Finance Committee. Grassley and the other Republicans on the committee played footsie with him all summer, insisting that all sorts of things they wanted be put into that committee's bill, and then announced none of them were going to vote for it. The GOP had plenty of opportunities to participate in a constructive way -- they just chose not to. I'll bet you conveniently don't remember that.