Ok, one more e-mail from by brother. I love this one.
Subject: DOCTORS VS. GUNS
Statistics
The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year are 120,000.
Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171 ( U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services)
Now think about this:Guns:
The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.
The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.
Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do".
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat.
We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
(Out of concern for the public at large, I withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear the shock
would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.)
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Monday, September 13, 2004
It's All bout the Spin.
My brother David is an avid follower of internet news. He also forwards tons of e-mail. Most of its interesting, some of it leaning a little to the right even for my taste.
I thought this was worth posting though. As with all e-mail claims, I try to do a little research to see if the author is accurate, and for the most part, this thing seems to be sincere. The "actual casualty figures" are from InfoPlease.com, which cites the U.S. Department of Defense and Veteran's Administration for the figures.
****************** e-mail start
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January, 2004..... In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That's just one American city, about as deadly to American's as the entire war torn country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following:
FDR...
-led us into World War II.
-Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
-from 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.
(Actual casualty figures:
Combat: 291,557
Non-combat (theater): - not listed
Non-combat (non-theater): 113,842
Total: 291,557 war theater caualties - still almost 75 ,000 deaths each year)
Truman...
-finished WWII and started a new war in Korea
-North Korea never attacked us.
-From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.
(Actual casualty figures:
Combat: 33,741
Non-combat (theater): 2,827
Non-combat (nontheater):17,730
Total: 37,568 war theater casualties- still over 9,000 deaths each year.)
John F. Kennedy...
-got the USA into the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
-Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
-turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
-Vietnam never attacked us.
-From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.
(Actual casualty figures:
Combat:47,410
Non-combat (theater) 10,789
Non-combat (non-theater) 32,000
Total: 58,199 war theater casualties- 5,800 a year is just about right )
Clinton...
-went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
-Bosnia never attacked us.
-He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
-Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has...
-liberated two countries,
-crushed the Taliban,
-crippled al-Qaida,
-put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot
-and captured a terrorist (Hussein) who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
(In fairness, I have to list Iraq War totals:
March 20, 2003–Aug. 2, 2004:
Combat: 677;
Non-combat (theater): 235;
Total: 912 war theater casualties- about 700 deaths each year)
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
- It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.
- We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find her Rose Law Firm billing records.
- It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick, drowning Mary Jo.
- It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.
PASS IT ON.
(If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.)
************
Food for thought.
It's all about the spin, baby.
I thought this was worth posting though. As with all e-mail claims, I try to do a little research to see if the author is accurate, and for the most part, this thing seems to be sincere. The "actual casualty figures" are from InfoPlease.com, which cites the U.S. Department of Defense and Veteran's Administration for the figures.
****************** e-mail start
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January, 2004..... In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That's just one American city, about as deadly to American's as the entire war torn country of Iraq.
When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following:
FDR...
-led us into World War II.
-Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
-from 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.
(Actual casualty figures:
Combat: 291,557
Non-combat (theater): - not listed
Non-combat (non-theater): 113,842
Total: 291,557 war theater caualties - still almost 75 ,000 deaths each year)
Truman...
-finished WWII and started a new war in Korea
-North Korea never attacked us.
-From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.
(Actual casualty figures:
Combat: 33,741
Non-combat (theater): 2,827
Non-combat (nontheater):17,730
Total: 37,568 war theater casualties- still over 9,000 deaths each year.)
John F. Kennedy...
-got the USA into the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
-Vietnam never attacked us.
Johnson...
-turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
-Vietnam never attacked us.
-From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.
(Actual casualty figures:
Combat:47,410
Non-combat (theater) 10,789
Non-combat (non-theater) 32,000
Total: 58,199 war theater casualties- 5,800 a year is just about right )
Clinton...
-went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
-Bosnia never attacked us.
-He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
-Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has...
-liberated two countries,
-crushed the Taliban,
-crippled al-Qaida,
-put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot
-and captured a terrorist (Hussein) who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
(In fairness, I have to list Iraq War totals:
March 20, 2003–Aug. 2, 2004:
Combat: 677;
Non-combat (theater): 235;
Total: 912 war theater casualties- about 700 deaths each year)
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
- It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.
- We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find her Rose Law Firm billing records.
- It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick, drowning Mary Jo.
- It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.
PASS IT ON.
(If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.)
************
Food for thought.
It's all about the spin, baby.
Sunday, September 12, 2004
Must.... Restraint....Fists....Of.....Death
Boys. Teenage boys to be specific. It's amazing any of them survive to adulthood. Myself being one, I know whereof I speak.
Camie asked if she and her friend Jamie could have a couple of boys from school come visit at my apartment for a few hours this evening.
That in and of itself should be enough to send me over the egde, and it nearly was. Now, I believe I am in full control of my faculties. I don't suffer from alzheimer's, I'm not senile, or drunk. And yet, I still said "yes".
God, help me. Please. And if not ME, help these little boys.
They were normal boys, as boys go. A bit gangly. One was a ruddy red-head loudmouth, about 13; the other a bit taller, longish hair, skater-looking boy, probably 14. (God, was I this awkward at that age? Probably... but I know I was a damn site better behaved.)
For instance: both of these boys live about 2 or 3 miles from me. Both of them arrived on foot, with no parents ever checking with me to see if it was OK if they come over, or even to see if they arrived alive, or anything. I've never even spoken to their parents! What parents let their 13 & 14 year old sons wander the town at 6 or 7pm without even knowing where the hell they are?!?
They were noisy, rude, and just... what's the word... not respectful or civlilized. I don't mean "civilized" as in unable to flush a toilet or brush their teeth, but uncivilized in the things that boys used to be taught.
Like when you go to someone's home, especially someone who's parents you've never met, you always act on your best behavior. These kids were anything BUT on their best behavior. They weren't wild monkeys, but they had no problem being loud, jumping around the room, wandering through the kitchen, plopping down on the couch, etc....
Now, I know it's within my power and purview to stop their behavior immediately in my home. I have no problem with that. But, being the first time I'd met them, I wanted to see how they behaved "au natural", if you will. I could put on a big gruff the very first time I met them, and they'd behave just great from the start, but I wanted to get a feel for who they are naturally.
I must say, I'm not impressed.
Parenting. It's all about parenting, or the lack of it. I'm not a perfect parent, and this evening brought to my attention a few deficiencies in my own daughter that I will need to correct, but at least my eyes are open. Some parents just don't see, or worse, don't think it's a problem. Every time I hear a parent say "boys will be boys" to excuse bad behavior, I feel like punching them.
Anyway, I'd much rather have the boys come to my place to visit Camie, because inevitably, she will have boyfriends, and I'd be just as comfortable keeping things in sight here, where I can throttle them if I need to, than out of sight at the boy's house.
Have I even mentioned I'm really glad I had girls instead of boys?
Camie asked if she and her friend Jamie could have a couple of boys from school come visit at my apartment for a few hours this evening.
That in and of itself should be enough to send me over the egde, and it nearly was. Now, I believe I am in full control of my faculties. I don't suffer from alzheimer's, I'm not senile, or drunk. And yet, I still said "yes".
God, help me. Please. And if not ME, help these little boys.
They were normal boys, as boys go. A bit gangly. One was a ruddy red-head loudmouth, about 13; the other a bit taller, longish hair, skater-looking boy, probably 14. (God, was I this awkward at that age? Probably... but I know I was a damn site better behaved.)
For instance: both of these boys live about 2 or 3 miles from me. Both of them arrived on foot, with no parents ever checking with me to see if it was OK if they come over, or even to see if they arrived alive, or anything. I've never even spoken to their parents! What parents let their 13 & 14 year old sons wander the town at 6 or 7pm without even knowing where the hell they are?!?
They were noisy, rude, and just... what's the word... not respectful or civlilized. I don't mean "civilized" as in unable to flush a toilet or brush their teeth, but uncivilized in the things that boys used to be taught.
Like when you go to someone's home, especially someone who's parents you've never met, you always act on your best behavior. These kids were anything BUT on their best behavior. They weren't wild monkeys, but they had no problem being loud, jumping around the room, wandering through the kitchen, plopping down on the couch, etc....
Now, I know it's within my power and purview to stop their behavior immediately in my home. I have no problem with that. But, being the first time I'd met them, I wanted to see how they behaved "au natural", if you will. I could put on a big gruff the very first time I met them, and they'd behave just great from the start, but I wanted to get a feel for who they are naturally.
I must say, I'm not impressed.
Parenting. It's all about parenting, or the lack of it. I'm not a perfect parent, and this evening brought to my attention a few deficiencies in my own daughter that I will need to correct, but at least my eyes are open. Some parents just don't see, or worse, don't think it's a problem. Every time I hear a parent say "boys will be boys" to excuse bad behavior, I feel like punching them.
Anyway, I'd much rather have the boys come to my place to visit Camie, because inevitably, she will have boyfriends, and I'd be just as comfortable keeping things in sight here, where I can throttle them if I need to, than out of sight at the boy's house.
Have I even mentioned I'm really glad I had girls instead of boys?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)