posted
Well, this is just common sense. You win elections in the middle, not far right or far left. For the Moveon.org radical group who claims that they now 'own' the Democratic party, this is going to be a Democratic Party civil war for sure.
Or the radicals could just start another Party which I would prefer. For the few radicals on this board, you better get used to not having things your way. Your party doesn't even really support you anymore.
posted
I suppose this would be interesting to those concerned mainly with 'winning and loosing' than those concerned with the State of the Nation and this unconsitutional longtime agenda being enacted by manipulation of fear which has put us in deblt well upwards of 7 trillion.. and has in reality increased our threat of Terror.
All orchestrated by those (all the main pklayers) who have had this agenda (on record) since long before 911.
A matter of priotities..we have much bigger concerns in America.
Mo
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Kara Tyson
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 939
posted
Does the Republican Party need to become more conservative to win?
spend, spend, spend...I guess we are just going to print more money to take care of it.
The Republican Party used to mean conservative financially. No more.
I read today that we are spending $7 Billion a day just in Iraq.
And we just promised Pakistan another $50 million because of their earthquake. The CIA is open that Osama is in Pakistan. It may seem cruel, but NO aid should be given until the gov turns him over.
[ 10. October 2005, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: Kara Tyson ]
-------------------- Kara Tyson Lyme Disease Support Group Of Alabama--MobileChapter Posts: 6022 | From Mobile, AL | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"moving to the middle" is what prevented a victory for the democrats so one-sided that the repugnantans wouldn't have even had any chance of stealing it like they did. Perhaps the democrats' abandonment of working, thinking, Americans was even planned and executed by repugnantan infiltrators in the democratic party; these renegade ...'democrats'.. kept saying things like, "the democratic party must become less "left-wing'..., or we stand to lose the "middle"... Thus they chased too many of the real democrats into the green party (which is really the natural evolution of the democratic party at this time), but also into a few other fringe parties. Despite this, it has been shown by numerous sources, that the democrats almost certainly won both elections, only to be swindled by widespread election fraud. If they had remained true to their principals, and E-volved insted of DE-volved, the democrats would have had a victory decisive enough to preclude any possibility of fraud. (as long as they still managed to keep the fraudulent ...'voting'... procedures from being adopted by any more states!). They need to have some guts! DaveS
PS- the repugnantan party has ever only claimed to be more conservative; they have always cut spending that really helps people, only to spend orders of magnitude more dough on wars 'fighting communism"; or ...'securing'... (i.e. stealing) petroleum resources.
Posts: 4567 | From ithaca, NY, usa | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
Kara Tyson
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 939
posted
Those of us who are true blue fiscal conservatives vote Libertarian.
-------------------- Kara Tyson Lyme Disease Support Group Of Alabama--MobileChapter Posts: 6022 | From Mobile, AL | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Softballmom
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6235
posted
I sence some bitterness.
Many elections I have not been overly thrilled with either candidates.
I think leaning more towards the middle would help them. Who's to say some republicans wouldn't vote for the Democratic candidate. It has happened before.
With what is going on in the world today many americans rose up and voted on morals. That is a key issue these days. Especially protecting the sanctity of marraige.
The Democratic party wants to ajust to not bring as much focus on the moral issues. That hurt them the most in the last election.
I watched the Democratic party discussing this on C-span it was very interesting although their were Dems there that had no appreciation for the thought.
-------------------- It's not the Lyme, I just can't spell! Posts: 1331 | From North Carolina | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mo: I suppose this would be interesting to those concerned mainly with 'winning and loosing' than those concerned with the State of the Nation and this unconsitutional longtime agenda being enacted by manipulation of fear which has put us in deblt well upwards of 7 trillion.. and has in reality increased our threat of Terror.
All orchestrated by those (all the main pklayers) who have had this agenda (on record) since long before 911.
A matter of priotities..we have much bigger concerns in America.
Mo
That's really funny Mo....because if you don't win elections, your views don't turn into reality.
Yes, from your viewpoint I agree that being caught up on winning and losing isn't important, because as a radical, I'm sure you've realized that a radical agenda will never get power. So why worry about winning? You've resigned yourself to just whine and complain. LOL.
Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL, war time is a time to spend and a time to run up deficits. That's what happens and always has.
The Libertarian Party is as strange as they come..... fiscally even more conservative than even conservative Republicans. Talk about the cold blooded that won't spend any money to help their fellow brother in need!! They virtually don't want a government, which of course is pure chaos and insane.
And then on the social issues side of things, the party is morally corrupt like the left wing radicals (pro legalize drugs, prostitution, etc.). Again...chaos...almost anything goes.
Most people don't know what Libertarians stand for, and the ones that do almost always dismiss them as fringe such as the left wing radicals......and that's why they haven't gotten anywhere in all these years and never will. There needs to be party choices for the lesser intelligent folks out there, so I guess it serves its purpose in a strange way. Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Kara Tyson
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 939
posted
Libertarians believe in Gov..but they are strict constitutionalists. Power not specifically given to the Feds is reserved for the state or local governments. This is what conservative USED to mean.
It isnt chaos unless you believe the founding fathers wanted chaos.
It is true that Libertarians are against all foreign aid. For many reasons. The main one being that Americans come first.
It is a misconception that Libertarians are pro illicit drug. Some Libertarians want legalization and some dont.
To a Libertarian, issues are not divided. No matter what the issue, some Libertarians are for legalization and some against it.
But what they all have in common is the belief that it is a state or local issue. The Feds have no right to interfere in regulation of vitamins or antibiotics any more than they have the right to interfere with local educational issues.
But Libertarians are also very personal responsibility. If you do decide to do drugs and are harmed the blame rests with you. And no insurance company or taxpayer should have to pay for your rehab either.
Libertarians are the only ones who acknowledge corruption of officials.
When you give aid to foreign countries it is forwarded to terrorists groups. When the Dept. of Eduction gets your money--- Billions go missing!. When FEMA gives aid to Katrina victims the money is used to buy $800 handbags...
Libertarians havent gotten anywhere because the Dems and Republicans wont allow any other parties or independants in Presidential debates. Why are they so afraid??
I guess it is strange to want less Federal Gov. There was one time in history that Americans were willing to spill their blood for less Gov. **
*sigh* again with the personal attacks...
[ 13. October 2005, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: Kara Tyson ]
-------------------- Kara Tyson Lyme Disease Support Group Of Alabama--MobileChapter Posts: 6022 | From Mobile, AL | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Bush administration is far from the middle.
Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Abrams, and the other key players have operated in major neo-con mode for some time.
Most of the 'middle Rebublicans' are wise to this and very unhappy, especially with the spending..
and now, the nomination of Harriet Miers.. rather than someone with a conservative stance on record..and someone who is another 'personal freind and confidant, worshiper of Wya.'
(quited as saying he is the 'most brilliant man she knows ... )
And she has no record to speak to her qualifications for Supreme Court Justice.
Who knows..she may be everything he says she will be, but that's allot to ask of his own party.. to take his word on it, with no evidance as such.. or any prior record to go on as far as her interpretation of the Constitution.. and especially when there were so many male and female candidates with long records that would have pleased the party.
A tangent..
Point is, Bush admin is in no way acting as a Conservative administration, tho they say they are on paper.
Mo
[ 12. October 2005, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: Mo ]
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Andie333
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 7370
posted
I was impressed by the political stance taken by Paul Hackett in a recent mid-term senate race in Ohio.
Hackett is an Iraq-war vet who, as a Democrat, went up against a 2 or 3-term incumbent republican senator in a historically republican district.
Basically, he told the truth, both as he experienced it as a soldier in Iraq and as he sees it as a returning vet.
He lost in the end, but he only lost by a few thousand votes. Really a remarkable thing.
Whether or not I agreed with his views, what impressed me was the fact that he was willing to stand up and voice them without flinching from the truth as he saw it.
Andie
[ 13. October 2005, 06:21 PM: Message edited by: Andie333 ]
Posts: 2549 | From never never land | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
right on, mo. i totally agree with you.
and don't underestimate the presence of so-called 'radicals' on lymenet. i think a lot of us stay off this board because of all the depressing stuff we read on here. *
the supposed 'war on terror' is illegal, morally wrong, racist, xenophobic, and endless. if you really support our troups, then please, bring them the h*ll home. we don't need young kids, mostly kids of color and/or kids from a poor background, on the front lines killing and getting killed in the name of fear, blood, oil, and greed.
i don't know, everything that's going on in our world right now is so terrible, so disheartening to me. we have a war-mongeror with very little intelligence or capability leading an endless deathmarch for oil. it's just.. i don't even know where to begin. *
look, i was in new york city (lower manhattan, actually) on september 11. i watched in horror as the towers fell and people leapt out of fiery 100-story windows to their deaths. i saw the terror, the tears, the frantic, ash-covered exodus uptown. i was trapped in manhattan all day long, the subways and bridges closed, the whole city wandering the streets in a horrified, ghostly, zombie-like daze. i had nightmares for well over a year. i'm still not over it; i never will be. nyc is my city; brooklyn is my home, it's in my blood.
even with all that, even being there and experiencing it first hand (don't tell me about terrorism unless you were there too, or unless you come from a third world country where terrorism and war are all too familiar experiences), i know in my heart that this war is WRONG. it is and always will be and i will keep protesting it in every way i can, in every way i am able, as loudly as i'm able. *
as for 'radicals,' as you call us (hey, i embrace the term joyfully, but i know many see it as a negative thing), we're really not so radical at all. we believe in justice, peace, and equality for everyone all around the world. we want to see poverty eradicated. we want to see an end to global systems of oppression like neo-colonialism, racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, ableism, etc. we want everyone to have access to nutritious food and clean water and clothing and housing and health care. basic human rights. we don't want to destroy our environment, the very earth upon which we depend for life, for breath. we want people to be able to live their lives in joy and peace, worship whatever gods or goddesses they believe in; or nothing at all. we don't believe in killing innocent people in the name of greed and capitalism. *
i don't think any of these things are radical. instead, i think they are basic, common sense things. i think they are heartfelt, deep beliefs that come from folks who are committed to humanity, to the thriving of our whole planet.
Worthless tests & labs, a dangerous vaccine, insurance companies refuse to pay, undertreatment the norm, all about money. MO. Posts: 281 | From CT | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
as for supposed "moral corruption":
first, please keep your opinions and laws off my body, my uterus, my ovaries. if you're against abortion for whatever reason, that's fine and i respect your opinion. but it's an *individual thing, a personal rights issue, a right to privacy issue, as well as (for me, anyway) a feminist/women's rights issue. i love how the photos of various politicians making abortion restrictions law show a bunch of old white men gathered around president bush, etc. making abortion illegal won't make it go away. instead, it will push women back into back alleyways, giving themselves and friends botched abortions by any means possible (ie, hangers), resulting in untold numbers of deaths.
*similarly, whether or not you agree with prostitution morally, it exists and it has since the beginning of time. it's the oldest profession in history. instead of criminalizing the women who are often forced into prostitution because of poverty, abuse, etc, how about we penalize the pimps who actually make most of the money off such operations, or the johns who too often rape prostitutes? even better, let's legalize and regulate prostitution, have all prostitutes constantly tested for STDs, make condoms mandatory, unionize women and pay them working wages.
*drugs: i'm unsure of my stance on the legalization of hard drugs. having seen manymany friends through near-fatal heroin and cocaine addictions, i know just how horrible these drugs are and can be. however, marijuana?? come on, it's the most innocuous plant ever. it's certainly much less dangerous than alcohol. and, it has proven medicinal properties too. as lyme patients, we should be *advocating for marijuana legalization. it helps my nausea tremendously.
*the so-called 'sanctity of marriage': again, i respect (okay, i *try to respect) your beliefs. it's a little hard when those beliefs negate my very existence and see me as somehow sick, or worse, as a non-person. but whatever. so you think homosexuality is a sin. you think marriage has to stay between a man and a woman forever and ever till the end of time. first off, let's start by saying that the proposed constitutional amendment specifically banning gay marriage is so flagrantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL it hurts. also, if you believe marriage is about love, who are you to say who can and can't love each other, mutually and without coercion? and the "sanctity of marriage"??? please, over half of all marriages end in divorce. how sacred is that? britney spears could get married while trashed in vegas one night and i can't marry a woman to whom i want to dedicate my life and my heart, simply because we're both women? love is love is love. it's all beautiful, no one has the right to legislate it. plus, there are so many privileges that come with legal marriage that should be rights for everyone. i can't visit my partner if she's dying in the hospital because i'm not technically 'family'? if she dies, i have no rights as to what to do with her property/belongings, no say in planning her funeral, even if i'm 95 and have spent the last 70 years by her side, when maybe her biological family rejected her for being a lesbian. these things happen all the time. use your mind. use your heart. look past all the dogma that's been inculcated into you all your life. look at my humanity, and at the humanity of every other person who doesn't fit your definition of "normal" or "right."
posted
LOL, the term 'radical' is thought by most to mean "radically far from mainstream politics, far from common sense and reality......fringe at best". So if that makes you guys proud, I'm happy for you.
What makes people go fringe? That's a tough question, but after careful analysis, it's very obvious.
Far left radicals are people that are very emotional for one. That has to be there. Many radicals are not very intelligent, but some are, and the reason they become radicals is because their extreme emotion takes over and trumps their logical thought process. It's an emotional driven philosophy and movement with one-dimensional logic assigned to it.
Radicals are very over-emotional and they're quick to lose their temper and call people names. For example, just being cut-off on the freeway could cause a radical to think that the offender had to have been a Bush Facist. They're very melodramatic, big on conspiracy theories, in fact they live for them, hence the attraction to un-intelligent and over-emotional types.
Since they view issues one-dimensionally, the problems of the world seem to simple to them. They get frustrated and can't understand why solving these problems are so so hard and difficult. There's no complicated web of 'cause and effect' regarding their policy opinions, just one-dimensional decisions. That's why they get so frustrated or even refuse to answer questions regarding complicated situations regarding their own policy philosophy.
For these radicals, life has to be simple and compartmentalized for them. Some may have been tramatized in their life, and they need simple answers, simple thought.......but unfortunately life and reality is never simple or one-dimensional. Some are born over-emotional and need medication for anxiety and depression. Some are just not very smart.
The excuses, for their viewpoint not catching on with the American public, are many....and get tiresome. But there's nothing you can do or say to these people that will snap them out of their haze.....you can only expose them for what they believe and the consequences of it.
Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Andie333
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 7370
posted
Just wanted to note that radicalism isn't confined to just one party. To the extent that they're valid, 24,the characteristics you describe would have to apply to those on the political right, those on the left and those who have gone in an entirely different direction.
Just my 2 cents...
Andie
Posts: 2549 | From never never land | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
lefty radicals are unintelligent and overemotional? abused as children? depressed and need medication? my god. who's oversimplifying *now?
people you call 'radicals' are the reason you have the rights you have today. they're the "commie" union and labor organizers who fought for the 8-hour work day and minimum wage. they're the suffragists who fought for women's right to vote, anti-slavery activists who brought an end to people as legal chattel, civil rights activists who suffered innumerably beatings and still never gave up.
and i could go on and on. these people are/were brilliant, incredible, revolutionary activists. our world is an infinitely better place because they have lived.
It's the unemotional -- "shoot others down at any cost" -- crew that know what's best for America.
If you're not with them, you're ag'in em.. and if you have anything to say that challanges the ideology, or even poses a question..
you're a far left radical idiot.
So glad we cleared that up..
Heather .. thanks for the refreshing insights .. things are awfully grim looking but I have to believe despite all truth will overcome. It always does, eventually.
So many people are just distraught and worn. They are speaking more and more, and just like our own little "OT"corner here, need to recognize mere sticks and stones and name calling for what they are. Alsom recognizing that there is no address of the issues, just attack of individuals.
I was there on 911, too.. and it's very telling that most who were have been holding this admin accountable for many years for not making true to their promises we all believed in just after that horror.. are deeply upset by this administration's actions.
Then we see 911 replayed at the RNC on big screens and manipulated in speeches at the time as a connection to the Iraq War even after the 911 commission was released. That day exploited to win votes and support for this unjust War.
I often sit in amazement of what is being told America by our White House. If you read outside the "box" AT ALL .. it is very hard to ignore.
I'm frankly dissapointed in ALL parties in Congress for not stepping up sooner and stronger. They are moreso now, tho.. so long as they put elections down and adress the seriousness of the situation appropriately. I think more needs to be done about the public contacting them..again, we are WORN. But there are many campaigns going and they are moving things despote the obstacles.
I have to believe that there are enough Americans speaking, and enough who know to make the stand required to call out these administrators on multiple levels. Even in the so-called "polls" the appproval rating is down to 28%. Says something if it's that low despite the "news" we have mainstream access to here.
First and foremost the War, then there's spending, deficit, economy, environment (!), schools.. healthcare..
.. then there is the concern over the Supreme Court, and all it holds.
There was not nearly enough discernment over "Mr. cannot confirm nor deny" Roberts.. (I mean c'mon, we're talking about the Supreme Court here)..
and I hope all of Congress, after all that has unfolded.. gets a set of 'you know whats' and holds this new nomination to objective light. To accept NO information is cult-like and not what we have ever done before in this. Accepting someone's word is not appropriate when it comes to the highest court which forms our nation.
In addition -- on everything above -- as Doctor Phil (I think?) would say:
"How's that working for ya?"
Uhhmmmm .. "Not good!!"
Mo
-------------------- life shrinks and expands in proportion to one's courage -- anais nin Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
oh, and i forgot one, definitely one of my favorite authors of all time, who also, incidentally, had lyme disease:
Kara Tyson
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 939
posted
If radical is emotional, then Libertarians are not radicals. A Libertarian acknowleges tragic events in other countries...but that still doesnt change their opinion that foreign aid is stealing from the American taxpayer.
and I have been cut off in traffic many times by people with their 'at rapture this vehicle will crash' bumper stickers.
I would never make the assumption that just because someone thought differant than I do that they have a lower iq, stupid, silly, ect. There is absolutly no proof of that. People think differantly is all.
-------------------- Kara Tyson Lyme Disease Support Group Of Alabama--MobileChapter Posts: 6022 | From Mobile, AL | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, well, well, it's nice to see all your excessive emotion as normal.
Now don't try changing the subject or spinning it. Yes, there are radicals on the right and the left. But the radicals on the left have been much more dangerous as of late, so I'm focusing on them.
Protesting something doesn't make you a radical. It's what you beleive that makes you a radical. Comparing people like MLK from the past to today's radicals is absurd. Nazi's were radicals on the right, communists were radicals, etc.
Marx from the 1800's???? What a moron. Thanks for adding that...so you exposed yourself. Being well known in a time when the world was largely uncivilized doesn't make you intelligent. You don't even understand what a radical is for crying out loud. So lets keep it simple for your sake. We're talking about right now and today.
The radicals have no concept of learning from history. Of course, it comes down to the extreme emotion clouding any logic they might have. In WWII the French sat around watching the Nazi build-up and knew that the Nazi's had intentions of imperialism (a definition radicals still haven't learned correctly), real imperialism I might add, to aquire more land and resources to expand his 'master race' and to wipe out 'inferior races' as he put it.
The French didn't want any conflict with Germany as they were very passive at that time and felt that if they left Germany alone, they would leave them alone. So they didn't prepare for the inevitable.
That sounds very much like lefty radicals that think that if we pack up our bags and leave Al Queda alone that they will leave us alone. With that letter intercpeted back in July form Bin Laden to Al Queda in Iraq, their motivations were written in black and white. They have Nazi type goals in the region first just like Hitler felt he needed to aquire Europe first before he could attack the United States on our mainland and conquer America. They have their sites on the world later on like the Nazi's.
Obviously, the Al Queda threat is terrorism with nuclear bombs etc. rather than a massive military invasion, but the threat on our citizens is still similar.
The ironic thing about radicals such as Mo that post comments from the Nazi post war trials regarding the comments about how so many people picked up the Nazi cause like sheep, is that the radicals like her think that fighting terrorism is Nazi-like!! Isn't that funny? LOL.
Actually, she has it backwards. Most people in America are educated enough to remember the lessons learned in WWII and to go on offense to achieve defense against this terror threat and build-up like the Nazi's did. But the radicals are the ones that have their heads in the sands of emotion and can't see the lessons from WWII. And that's why radicals are dangerous.....they're bad for your health.
Now I can just hear a radical yell out, "Bad for your health? Look at all the soldiers dying in Iraq. That's not good for their health!!" or some simple minded cheap shot like that. LOL. Well, just for you I'll give you another analogy to prove how insanely worng you are.
You have a healthy body and feel no pain.....and that's the way you like it of course. One day you go in and have a check-up. A basic chest x-ray spots a tiny spot. Later it's determined to be a malignant cancer, but slow growing. You are now aware of a clear and present threat to your life. But you feel no pain and have no negative symptoms yet.
So now you have a choice of:
1. Agressive chemo and radiation to kill the cancer that will cause you to pay a painful heavy price in the short run, but could save your life in the long run.
2. Pretend it's not there, and hope that if you don't bother it, then it won't bother you. Chemo would mean violence on yourself, and you're against violence, so you decide to choose peace instead.
Obviously, if radicals are consistent with their beliefs, they would choose #2 and would die of cancer. You wouldn't let a radical make a decision for you regarding cancer treatment, so why would you let them make a dangerous decision for you regarding the war on Islamic Jihad??
Again, you can't let excessive emotion cloud your judgement on cancer treatment, and you certainly can't do it for our country's defense. That's why radical ideology is just flat out dangerous and illogical.
Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Kara Tyson
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 939
posted
Libertarians ARE radical because they are differant from the norm. But they arent emotional.
-------------------- Kara Tyson Lyme Disease Support Group Of Alabama--MobileChapter Posts: 6022 | From Mobile, AL | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The US is not fighting the global Terrorism that poses the grave threat to our country and others.
They are fighting Terrorists in Iraq, those involved in the insurgency, borne out of the invasion...
Mo
-------------------- life shrinks and expands in proportion to one's courage -- anais nin Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mo: The US is not fighting the global Terrorism that poses the grave threat to our country and others.
They are fighting Terrorists in Iraq, those involved in the insurgency, borne out of the invasion...
Mo
LOL, so you're saying that the long time Al Queda members fighting in Iraq were born out of the invasion? LOL, you're not making any sense with that one. Al Queda has been around long before the invasion.
Posts: 600 | From Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
I basically said they are not fighting AlQada in Iraq (tho there are new training grounds there..) the majority of what we call 'Terrorists' in Iraq, those bombing our soldiers and Iraqi innocents are insurgents, responding to the invasion.
Understand?
Mo
Posts: 8337 | From the other shore | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[bow]](graemlins/bow.gif)
... ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
)![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[bonk]](graemlins/bonk.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic