Yes you will and I think you've found that line between good time and good sense. Here's to a long, happy and fun life.. No more of that clinically dead stuff OK
All good points GB. When one's number is up, it's up and moderation is best. My big vices were cigarettes and food especially since I retired. I just want it to be quality rather than quantity and I could not see a life of medication, blood thinners, hospital visits and limitations as quality. Given my past, I was/am very lucky
Hi all, I've been away for awhile with good reason. Recently, during a physical exam, it was noted I had an irregular heart beat. The doctor did an ECG which didn't look good and then a battery of stress tests, nuclear stress tests, etc and each one indicating I ay have/had a significant problem. I was in shock and denial and then scared out of my shorts over the whole thing. Today, I had the wonderful experiance of having a cardiocathader (Sp) and fortunately the results negated all other tests and I am fine.
However, it did open my eyes up to the way I have eaten over the years, the smoking I used to do, etc.... I came to the realization that even though I work out, do cardio training 4 - 5 times a week, I faced the possibility or reality that I had done some serious damage to my body due to earlier abuses.
The point, do yourself a big favor and take care of the body you got. Hopefully this little note will prevent one or two from having to have the *hit scared out of them later on or worse.
As it stands now I was/am lucky. I get to keep my job in Afghanistan (The whole reason I had the initial exam) and more importantly, I get to keep my life without corrective medication, surgery or other means.
This latest stimulus package was voted on and passed without being read. All this in the name of expediency and politics.
These folks were elected to represent us and act in our best interests. I can't see making an affirmative vote on a bill of such importance which has not been read as representing the best interests of the people and I would be willing to bet that if any of us operated with the same sense of responsibility in our jobs, our asses would be out of a job.
I hope we remember these votes the next time these "representatives" are up for reelection.
Faster than I thought it was going to be. Looks like I am out of here on the 11th of March. I have some training to do in DC for a couple of weeks and then off I go.
Of course there is always the possibility of a delay but at the moment it looks fairly certain.
I like spending Saturdays alone. This one just happens to fall on Valentines Day. No big deal. Better to be alone than with the wrong person for the wrong reason...
Hi Dana, I've been busier than a one legged man in a three legged race. Looks like things are nearing an end though just in time for me to start moving. I'll be so glad when I can get there and start working on something other than preparing for this move.
The real Reagan record on AIDS is different. AIDS funding skyrocketed in the 1980s, almost doubling each year from 1983 – when the media started blaring headlines – from $44 million to $103 million, $205 million, $508 million, $922 million, and then $1.6 billion in 1988. Reagan’s secretary of Health and Human Services in 1983, Margaret Heckler, declared AIDS her department’s "number one priority." While the House of Representatives was Democrat-dominated throughout the 1980s, which Democrats would quickly explain was the source of that skyrocketing AIDS funding, Reagan clearly signed the spending bills that funded the war on AIDS.
It’s also wrong that Reagan didn’t utter the word "AIDS" until 1987. Any reporter who bothered to check facts would find that Reagan discussed AIDS funding in a 1985 press conference, just for starters. But let’s turn that around on the rest of Washington. Does that mean no reporter asked Reagan about AIDS in the 1984 presidential debates? And that every interview President Reagan granted to a national or local media outlet failed to solicit Reagan’s opinions on AIDS until 1985? Using this phony-baloney spin line – that federal policy hinges exclusively on the presidential bully pulpit – is an exercise in liberal hyperbole over hard data.
Reagan had a fairly successful Presidency so I guess it makes sense that Republicans would use him as a standard. He was by no means perfect and the legacy left by him is debatable in and outside of political circles but I don't think calling his accomplishments a myth is accurate.
Michael Phelps smoked some weed. Maybe not the smartest thing he's done but we all do less than bright things at times. I think we have more important things to be concerned about.
I think the bolded area speaks for itself. This is about global climate change. While I do see the recent trend being warming, I also see it as cyclic based on what scientists have proven thru ice core samples and other studies. These cycles were happening a long time before man started using fossil fuels.
You do make some good points about these changes and their affect on people and the severity of some storms but I suspect this has always been the case. Perhaps we are now moving away from a warming trend and back into cooling. I wish I could say for certain but I honestly don't believe anyone can.
I don't agree. I believe global warming to be a theory based on less that honest or unbiased scientific methods. One simply cannot look at the earth over a short period of time and make predictions that can be taken seriously.
Conrad posted one of many reasons why I believe the gw theory should be looked at and questioned. There are plenty of others.
Now I will pose to you a question. Can you provide some data that global warming is actually happening rather than this being another warming period to be followed by yet another cooling period. Not even the computer models proposed by scientists have proven accurate thus far. Yes there have been ice that has melted and other things but then again there was an ic age at one time and it melted off long before industrialization
Honestly, in the 60s/70s it was global cooling and now it's warming. In thirty or 40 years we'll be looking at global cooliing again.
This is not to say we should not be taking care of mother earth, we should but I don't think we need to throw a lot of time, money or effort into something that is not proven to be true.
Not true, no global warming and if there is, it's not because of something mankind has done. The planet has been warming and cooling since its existance and will continue to do so long after we disappear.
Global warming is based on loose science and political agendas. Yes, let's take care of the planet but we don't have to do it via lies.
I got the new job contract finalized and leaving for Afghanistan at the end of this month. Now I'm in the midst of packing, having household goods placed in storage and selling my house and my car. Looks lie I'll be gone for about 2 years and then who knows.
It's exciting and stressful at the same time but it beats the heck out of the slow pace of retirement.
Sparky55 Forum Posts (2,678)
Sometimes we need to have the *hit scared out of us?
Yes you will and I think you've found that line between good time and good sense. Here's to a long, happy and fun life..