First, came Rove:
Rove mocked spending on flu preparednessThen his lapdogs:
Republican Senators killed funding for flu pandemic controlCollins even crowed about it on her web site and all over the media:
$870 million in money to improve the Center for Disease Control's ability to handle a possible flu pandemic was removed from the economic stimulus bill Congress passed in February, largely at the behest of Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Susan Collins (R-ME).
[snip]
Collins and Specter, along with Sen. Ben Nelso (D-NE) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), were at the core of a group of "moderate" Senators arguing that the stimulus bill was too large, and sought out to slash funding for various programs before passage of the final bill. Sen. Specter argued that funding pandemic control through the emergency supplemental package would be "inappropriate."
Even though Reuters reports it's already having an effect on the economy:
Oil prices fell more than 4 percent to below $50 a barrel as investors feared a new blow to an already fragile global economy if trade flows are curbed and manufacturing is hit.And now, who couldn't see this coming?
The MSCI world equity index fell 1 percent, and U.S. stocks were down in choppy trading.
Conservative media baselessly blame swine flu outbreak on immigrants* Yes, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) described the funding as "little porky things" but, he's always been a bit of an asshole and it was the Republicans who led the charge.
Conservative media personalities have baselessly blamed Mexican immigrants for spreading swine flu across the border, despite the fact that several reports have indicated that U.S. swine flu patients had recently traveled to Mexico.
.
2 comments:
In the interest of fairness maybe someone can call for the firing of more women since more men have lost their jobs in the current economic recession.
Or do you can enbrace the double standard like a true feminist.
HTTT;
The link in your second sentence has little or nothing to do with the swine flu.
On the first part, when you say that more men have been laid off due to the recession is that in real numbers or as a percentage?
And by that I mean that if there are more men than women working and an equal percentage of men and women are laid off, then of course more men will be laid off than women.
Or are you asserting that there are an equal number of men and women working but the jobs that men tend to occupy are the ones more vulnerable to the recession and therefore a greater percentage of man are being laid off due to the recession?
Or are you saying that culture wide men are being tossed off the job merely for being men?
If you're going to be arguing with the big kids, you'll have to do better than this.
Might I suggest reading "Who Stole Feminism" by Christina Hoff Sommers? It's a good place to start, if only for knowing how to form an argument in these gender debates. The book is about 15 years old so you should be able to get it from the library.
Post a Comment