Thursday, April 13, 2006

But his name sounds all French and stuff.

Retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste bravely asks: War? What is it good for?

And what's even better is when he takes aim at the complacency of the pro-war Right:

And certainly, too many of these families truly understand the meaning of sacrifice. Most Americans only confront this issue by deciding what color of magnet on the back end of their SUV.


It's getting uglier, folks. More and more people who know what they are saying are saying things like this . . .

This guy is calling for Rumsfeld's resignation. It's the old standoff between the Rummy "let's create a nimble (read:understaffed) military!" and the stalwart Military establishment. But it's got a lot more resonance now that support for the war is waning.

I think this gives me hope that DeLay's takedown was, really, only the beginning.

1 comment:

  1. I saw your comment on Eschaton about Evra. I'd like to point out that the problems with Evra being much more unsafe than the Pill are strictly US problems, since the Canadian and EU versions have almost half as much hormone in them (35ug as opposed to a whopping 60ug, with the resultant overdose uptake). I don't think it is a "rush to market" question, because the EU version was on the market and approved before the US version.

    What I wonder is, why have two versions at all? We already know the EU/Can version is perfectly effective and only slightly more risky than regular birth control pills (my doctor said 5%, which is barely above the level of statistical noise). So why is there a separate US version of the patch at all?

    If I were paranoid, I'd suggest that there's a concerted effort to make easy hormonal contraception seem dangerous and unsafe. Then I think, "But wouldn't that cut into Ortho's profits?" Given that the impetus in the US to restrict women's reproductive health choices is almost as strong as the drive to maximise corporate profits regardless of market constraints, I don't quite know what to think.

    I'd suggest then, that yes, something is hinky, it's just not hinky in the way you think it is. (It's maybe hinkier.)

    ReplyDelete