@FYISorgestore: "Ireland tops anti-depressant drug usage across EU
Friday, February 06, 2004
Irish people use highly-addictive anti-depression drugs more than
anyone else in Europe, according to evidence presented to the EU in
Brussels yesterday.
There are twice as many prescriptions for them in Ireland each year
than in Portugal, the second highest users, said Mr Haslam.
Figures show that Belgium has the third highest usage with France and
Spain following while Britain has an estimated 1.45 million addicts
and the Netherlands, 700,000 chronic users.
The daily dose being prescribed for patients is also increasing in all
the countries too, he said, while drug detox units in Ireland show an
equal number being treated for addiction to prescription drugs as to
illegal substances.
<url>
They're all drugged up!
That expalins it.
DanlK, FYI Services
<url>
Visit our Commemorative Collectible <url>
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="<url>
</SCRIPT>"
    @fred: "On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:53:15 -0500, "FYIS.org/estore"
<quote>
Sure, but in the Emerald Isle, they call these anti-depression
medication Uisce Beatha.
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @jekat: ""FYIS.org/estore" <FYIS.org/<email_address>> a �crit dans le message de
news:c25d55$1p78gk$<email_address>
| Ireland tops anti-depressant drug usage across EU
| Friday, February 06, 2004
| Irish people use highly-addictive anti-depression drugs more than
| anyone else in Europe, according to evidence presented to the EU in
| Brussels yesterday.
| There are twice as many prescriptions for them in Ireland each year
| than in Portugal, the second highest users, said Mr Haslam.
| Figures show that Belgium has the third highest usage with France and
| Spain following while Britain has an estimated 1.45 million addicts
| and the Netherlands, 700,000 chronic users.
| The daily dose being prescribed for patients is also increasing in all
| the countries too, he said, while drug detox units in Ireland show an
| equal number being treated for addiction to prescription drugs as to
| illegal substances.
| <url>
| They're all drugged up!
| That expalins it.
Get Kerry elected and we won't need the Prozac anymore.
Btw, you STILL haven't told me which European countries you visited and/or did
business with........
Jane"
    @FYISorgestore: "In news:c26tfm$1ocdp2$<email_address>,
Jane posted:
<quote>
and
an
to
In that case, better get your own armed forces retrained for more post
ricin attacks, bombing cleanups & your own war on terrorists, cuz our
troops will be all be disbanded in favor of UN world control.
DanlK, FYI Services
<url>
Visit our Commemorative Collectible <url>
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="<url>
</SCRIPT>"
    @RandomBanana: "On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:38:47 +0100, "Jane" <email_address>
regurgitated:
<quote>
I know you don't want to hear this, but Kerry doesn't have even a
remote chance of being elected president.
Independents and swing voters will not vote for him. They see him as a
Northeast liberal and to that type of voter, he is anathema."
    @jekat: "<Random Banana> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
| On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:38:47 +0100, "Jane" <email_address>
| regurgitated:
|
| >
| >Get Kerry elected and we won't need the Prozac anymore.
| >
| I know you don't want to hear this, but Kerry doesn't have even a
| remote chance of being elected president.
|
| Independents and swing voters will not vote for him. They see him as a
| Northeast liberal and to that type of voter, he is anathema.
Well, that's better than Double You who is an enema ;-)
Seriously, I've been watching some analysts give the same opinion you just did
but I've also been watching other analysts who tend to think that the American
people might just choose the Lesser of Two Evils now that they've seen over the
past four years just exactly what the Greater of Two Evils is capable of doing
(their words not mine).
Also it would appear that there is a lesser percentage of swing voters to
influence this time round  only 10% vs. 20% last time?
Jane"
    @fred: "<quote>
Haven't you forgotten that W will simply order the Supreme Court to
rule him elected?
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @FYISorgestore: "In news:<email_address>,
Ernie B. posted:
<quote>
as
any
sides
<url>
DanlK, FYI Services
<url>
Visit our Commemorative Collectible <url>
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="<url>
</SCRIPT>"
    @RandomBanana: "On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:38:50 GMT, Ernie B.
<email_address> expectorated:
<quote>
This may help as well:
<<url>"
    @jekat: ""Ernie B." <email_address> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
|
| > On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:38:47 +0100, "Jane" <email_address>
| > regurgitated:
| >
| > >
| > >Get Kerry elected and we won't need the Prozac anymore.
| > >
| > I know you don't want to hear this, but Kerry doesn't have even a
| > remote chance of being elected president.
| >
| > Independents and swing voters will not vote for him. They see him as a
| > Northeast liberal and to that type of voter, he is anathema.
| >
| I won't vote for him because I don't trust him.  Not that Bush is any
| prize but everyone knows where he stands, Kerry has been on all sides
| of things.  BTW, does anyone have a link to Kerry's voting record?
Yes  try this  hehehehe ;-)
<url>
Btw  I've got eight months to make you decide to change your mind, trust him
and vote for him <g>.
Jane"
    @jekat: ""Fred" <email_address> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
|
| >Also it would appear that there is a lesser percentage of swing voters to
| >influence this time round  only 10% vs. 20% last time?
|
| Haven't you forgotten that W will simply order the Supreme Court to
| rule him elected?
Or better still, make a Constitutional amendment for all future Presidents'
names to begin with a "B", end with an "H" and have the "US" in the middle.
Jane"
    @fred: "<quote>
But you won't need that long, surely.  With Senator's decades long
Senate record, we can just talk about the many pieces of legislation
that he has authored and passed, expanding our fundamental rights,
protecting the environment, shoring up our diplomatic position in the
world, and providing for an efficient military.
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @fred: "<quote>
Nope, we'd have to outlaw name changes too, or Pretty Boy might be the
first to the courthouse.  We'd wind up with John Bedwusardsh, John
Bkerusryh, and Ralph "Pinto" Bnaduserh all on the ballot.
Why not keep it simple and just have the Supreme Court appoint Mr.
Bush?  Isn't that what happened in 2000?  Why fool with a winning
script?
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @jekat: ""Ernie B." <email_address> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
|
| > Yes  try this  hehehehe ;-)
| >
| ;-�~~~~~hblt!
|
| > <url>
| >
| > Btw  I've got eight months to make you decide to change your mind, trust
him
| > and vote for him <g>.
| >
| Not ruddy likely that I'll change my mind but you're welcome to try.
"Ruddy"  LOL  I haven't heard that one in yonks.   See?   Even the fact that
Kerry wears British shirts is already beginning to brush off on you ;-)
Jane"
    @jekat: ""Fred" <email_address> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
|
| >| Haven't you forgotten that W will simply order the Supreme Court to
| >| rule him elected?
| >
| >Or better still, make a Constitutional amendment for all future Presidents'
| >names to begin with a "B", end with an "H" and have the "US" in the middle.
|
| Nope, we'd have to outlaw name changes too, or Pretty Boy might be the
| first to the courthouse.  We'd wind up with John Bedwusardsh, John
| Bkerusryh, and Ralph "Pinto" Bnaduserh all on the ballot.
I forgot to mention it'd only be a four-letter word ;-)
<Bkerusryh still sounds great to me btw>
| Why not keep it simple and just have the Supreme Court appoint Mr.
| Bush?  Isn't that what happened in 2000?  Why fool with a winning
| script?
You've baited me twice now with this..... so yes, I do think that's what
happened in 2000.  But I don't want to argue or dispute it..... I'd just like to
say that I'll never be able to understand how you can all *accept* your
electoral system, let alone defend it.  Heck, I learned yesterday that not even
all the States are *allowed* to participate in the nomination of the party's
presidential candidate and that for those States who are allowed to vote some of
them hold anonymous elections where others have nominal elections.  It just
sounds so complicated and so totally unfair and that's only the start of the
process.  Having lived in countries where candidates are elected when they
receive a majority of votes FROM the people I'll never be able to fathom out
your acceptance of electoral colleges.......... which means that you don't need
to explain it to me again  it won't help.
Jane"
    @fred: "<quote>
If it happened in 2000, what will stop it from happening in 2004?  I'm
serious.  If I agreed with you about the SC, then I would be worried
it would happen again.  Why do you so casually dismiss it?
That's how our Constitution works.  I do not like everything about the
Constitution, but sometimes you have to take the bitter with the
sweet.  I would not swap our Constitution for any other on the planet.
This is not true.  Every State sends delegates to the Convention.  The
States differ in their method of selecting the delegate list, and of
the legal obligations of the delegates (some States require the
delegate to vote for a specific candidate, some do not).  Let a
thousand flowers bloom.
[...]
Since you were misinformed about the process, I'm not surprised you
think it unfair.
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @jekat: ""Fred" <email_address> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
| If it happened in 2000, what will stop it from happening in 2004?  I'm
| serious.  If I agreed with you about the SC, then I would be worried
| it would happen again.  Why do you so casually dismiss it?
Firstly, because I'm absolutely convinced that Kerry is going to win by a
landslide.
Secondly, because the reasons that led to the SC having to decide will surely be
eliminated in the election this time round, won't they?  People who wanted to
re-cast their vote because they realised they'd interchanged the left page with
the right page will be much more careful this time.  Ballots where names weren't
aligned with the holes to punch won't be re-printed in the same way this time.
Chads that "hung" will be punched out with great force and checked before being
handed in this time.  Won't they?
| Since you were misinformed about the process, I'm not surprised you
| think it unfair.
I must have misunderstood what Walt said then, when he wrote yesterday:  "Once
again, in the state I live in, I'm not given the opportunity to decide who the
democratic candidate will be." ?????
Jane"
    @fred: "<quote>
Heh.  We'll compare notes on Nov. 3.
I was under the impression you thought Mr. Bush to be a mendacious
thug who would stop at nothing to help Big Oil earn an extra dime.  If
he is really that evil, wouldn't another problem be in the wings,
ready for election day and the chance to involve the SC?
Having said that, I do worry about the widespread adoption of
electronic voting since the 2000 elections.  I don't think it is an
organized plan to disrupt our elections, however.
Sure, but none of that had an effect on the 2000 election.
Yes, you misunderstood.  Walt was complaining about the way the
primary process works, and about human nature.  Instead of a
nationwide primary, we have a series of primaries spread over time.
Candidates can be eliminated by the results of early contests (look at
what happened to Mr. Dean), and if a candidate is close to obtaining a
majority of committed delegates, then the results of contests near the
end of the process have much less meaning.  Since Mr. Kerry is close
to locking up a first ballot victory, and has no serious opposition
remaining, all primaries from here on out are more or less perfunctory
affairs.
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @jekat: ""Fred" <email_address> a �crit dans le message de
news:<email_address>
|
| >| If it happened in 2000, what will stop it from happening in 2004?  I'm
| >| serious.  If I agreed with you about the SC, then I would be worried
| >| it would happen again.  Why do you so casually dismiss it?
| >
| >Firstly, because I'm absolutely convinced that Kerry is going to win by a
| >landslide.
|
| Heh.  We'll compare notes on Nov. 3.
No problem :-)
| Having said that, I do worry about the widespread adoption of
| electronic voting since the 2000 elections.  I don't think it is an
| organized plan to disrupt our elections, however.
Why are you worried about it?
| >People who wanted to
| >re-cast their vote because they realised they'd interchanged the left page
with
| >the right page will be much more careful this time.  Ballots where names
weren't
| >aligned with the holes to punch won't be re-printed in the same way this
time.
| >Chads that "hung" will be punched out with great force and checked before
being
| >handed in this time.  Won't they?
|
| Sure, but none of that had an effect on the 2000 election.
????? I may have misunderstood again but I thought that Florida was one of those
"deciding" States and had there been a complete re-vote and re-count then the SC
might never have got involved?
| >I must have misunderstood what Walt said then, when he wrote yesterday:
"Once
| >again, in the state I live in, I'm not given the opportunity to decide who
the
| >democratic candidate will be." ?????
|
| Yes, you misunderstood.  Walt was complaining about the way the
| primary process works, and about human nature.  Instead of a
| nationwide primary, we have a series of primaries spread over time.
| Candidates can be eliminated by the results of early contests (look at
| what happened to Mr. Dean), and if a candidate is close to obtaining a
| majority of committed delegates, then the results of contests near the
| end of the process have much less meaning.  Since Mr. Kerry is close
| to locking up a first ballot victory, and has no serious opposition
| remaining, all primaries from here on out are more or less perfunctory
| affairs.
So?  I reiterate what I said  it's complicated and totally unfair.  Why should
Walt not get his say?  Why should puny little rural States like Iowa <joke>
decide for him?  What's wrong with the idea of having Primary campaigns in all
of the States for six months and then choosing ONE day for everyone who wants to
vote to be able to vote?
Jane"
    @jckc: "news:c2a4ld$1dr4bb$<email_address>
<quote>
Serious people discuss serious probabilites, not remote possibilities.
It's possible that Kerry could win.  Could happen.  It's unlikely, but
possible.
First thing is that Nader would have to keel over, dead.
Every swing state (referred to as "states in play"*), would have to break to
Kerry.  (Russert says Ohio is the state to watch.  I think Missouri deserves
intense attention, too.)
With the success of the new governor, it's now conceiveable that California
is in play.  (Currently, that would have to be classified as one of those
remote possibilities)
In other words, Kerry could win IF everything thing goes exactly right,
(from his perspective).  Bush has more room for unpleasent surprises.  Kerry
has no room.
If Dean were the candidate, the Republicans were looking at the possibility,
(for the first time ever), of a 50 state sweep.  Kerry WILL make it a much
closer election.  (In other words, a Bush landslide is no longer,
reasonable).
But a Kerry, "landslide"?  Sheer fantasy.  Not that the national media won't
try to make it competive.  Contraversy sells newspapers and gets air time.
For gone conclusions, don't.**
*Some states are "out of play".  For instance, Kansas will go to Bush.
Massachusetts will go to Kerry.  However, Ohio, Florida, Missouri, New
Mexico, and a few others are "in play" meaning that they could go either
way.
**It's called, "The Silly Season".  Hundreds of millions of dollars will be
spent in the next eight months.  No poll conducted today means anything.  No
prediction, made today, is anything other than a wild ass guess.  (WAG).
Including mine.
Enjoy the show."
    @FYISorgestore: "In news:dU12c.39121$<email_address>,
James posted:
<quote>
wrote:
win
possibilities.
You've gotta understand where these European Socialists (like in
France)
are coming from with their fantasies.
They, for the most part, still fantasize that their country's economy
and opinion is still worth something on the world stage, and refuse to
admit that it never will again.
Their only hope for any respect are in places like the UN General
Assembly (why in hell France is a permanent UN member is still beyond
me)
where they can pound there fist and whine and moan how the US is not
treating them fairly. As commentator Charles Krauthammer put in a
recent address: "Then there are the liberal internationalists. They
like to dream, and to the extent they are aware of our unipolar power,
they don�t like it. They see its use for anything other than
humanitarianism or reflexive self-defense as an expression of national
selfishness. And they don�t just want us to ignore our unique power,
they want us to yield it piece by piece, by subsuming ourselves in a
new global architecture in which America becomes not the arbiter of
international events, but a good and tame international citizen."
They can only hope and dream (like their Hollywood elite counterparts)
that a "liberal internationalist" will get elected as a US president.
DanlK, FYI Services
<url>
Visit our Commemorative Collectible <url>
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="<url>
</SCRIPT>"
    @fred: "<quote>
Long story.  This is one thing that I believe France has done
correctly.  It's too painful for me to go on.
Every State was a deciding State in 2000.  It was a very, very close
election.  If Mr. Gore had won his home State, or any additional
State, then Kofi Annan would be President today.  Whoops, I mean, Mr.
Gore would be President today, acting on behalf of Mr. Annan.
We don't do revotes in a national election.  I do not believe it would
be constitutional to permit one State to hold a revote.  IANAL, YMMV.
Speaking of revote, remember that the national media had called
Florida for Mr. Gore before the polls closed in western Florida (which
is in a different timezone than most of the State).  This undoubtedly
caused people, Republican and Democratic alike, to skip the polls in
the final hour.  How ironic.
There were recounts.  IIRC, the WJS, NYT, CT, and WP all reported
months later than in virtually every proposed recount, Mr. Bush would
have prevailed.
[...]
So, its the way we have chosen to do things.  Everyones' vote counts.
Mr. Kerry has not locked up the nomination.  I believe he has about
1600 delegates, and needs over 2100 to be the candidate.  But the $$s
have dried up for Pretty Boy and Howlin' Howard, along with
Joe-mentum.  Not to mention the Democratic party itself is
discouraging a lengthy battle for nomination.  Better to concentrate
on attacking the opposition rather than internecine feuding.
Walt can have his say.  He can vote for anyone on the ballot.  The
results of the convention are not completely assured even at this
date.
I think there are advantages to the current setup, although it could
be improved.  For example, the parties could decide to randomly draw
the States that vote on various dates.  But I like the idea of having
a long, arduous, protracted campaign in a mix of States.
Why?  Because being President is a physical and mental ordeal  look
at how our recent Presidents have visibly aged in office.  I want to
see how a candidate holds up to a demanding pace with high stakes, and
how she handles herself when the going is tough and she is weary.
Nothing can create such a sense of stress as having a continual series
of hoops to jump through, all set to different heights and pointed in
different directions, especially when you have missed a few you were
expected to hit.
matthew89@example.net. Kerry.  In January, he was more-or-less written off.  He
mortgaged his (wife's) house to fund his campaign.  But he managed a
comeback, and he is now the presumptive nominee.  That tells me
something about his abilities.
Our primary policy isn't perfect, but it does have some virtues.
regards, Fred
Koffi-boy and the UN Oil for Palaces program make the Enron debacle 
look like a case of stolen memo pads and ball-point pens."
    @FYISorgestore: "In news:<email_address>,
Dave K. posted:
<quote>
wrote:
the
No James, it's more the stupid comments from Dems like James Carvel
that will get the votes for Dubya.
DanlK, FYI Services
<url>
Visit our Commemorative Collectible <url>
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="<url>
</SCRIPT>"
    @jckc: "news:c2aru0$1qvrke$<email_address>
<quote>
LOL...
I see where North Korea seems to be warming to Kerry. Oh, joy.  Now THERE's
an endorsement.  Now, if we could convince Jane to use her influence so that
Chirac would publicaly endorse Kerry, we could just about cancel the next
election and Bush wouldn't have to be bothered with the campaign. <Grin>
Honestly, Jane.  I'm only being somewhat facetious.  I'll bet John Kerry
asked Bush for the launch codes (for North Korea) when he heard that one.
James...."
    @jckc: "news:4048b98b$0$559$<email_address>
<quote>
snip
Just an aside....
Wim.  An American would probably say, "stuck in the same rut", not groove.
A rut presents the image of a muddy road, with dirt and muddy water,
everwhere., confusion and the inability to see a path out of the muck.
In fact, "getting in a groove" is a positive thing.  It means to be cruising
along, getting things done with minimum effort."
    @FYISorgestore: "In news:<email_address>,
Dave K. posted:
<quote>
wrote:
Only his wife, she hasto live with him.
DanlK, FYI Services
<url>
Visit our Commemorative Collectible <url>
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="<url>
</SCRIPT>"
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 25, "forum_name": "alt.cyb-sys.20140816.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-alt.cyb-sys.parquet'}