Pfizer to End Tests of Viagra for Women
Excerpt: Experts agree that female sexuality is more complex than male sexuality, involving psychological and physical factors.
Well, duh. I always thought it unlikely that Viagara would do much for female sexuality. The biology and psychology of a female is quite different from that of a male. Guess Pfizer will have to settle for it's current male market share, LOL.
Ever have trouble waking up because you still feel exhausted and then you realize you've been doing nothing but running in each of the dreams you've had that night? That's my problem this morning. *yawn*
Finalized plans to go to Miami in March...it took a lot of searching, but found affordable airline tickets woohoo! 3 days of fun in the sun, mixed with relaxation. Just what the doctor ordered.
Now I just gotta find a new bikini.
I just viewed this lovely flash montage of Dean images set to Mama Cass' Make Your Own Kind of Music. Definitely put a smile on my face. :) Whoever put it together did an incredible job. Many of the pictures I had never seen. I just wish the resolution of the pics was better on my puter.
Since I live close to DC, you know I'll be there.
I can feel it. Spring is on its way. The days are getting warmer. And they are getting longer. There is still light out when I leave work now. And flocks of geese are arriving at my lake each morning, honking to their hearts content.
I can't wait! I so look forward to working in my garden. One of the first things I need to do is replace the one azalea bush that died last year.
I anxiously look forward to my bulbs coming up and seeing the new irises, narcissi and lily tulips I planted last fall. Though I'm not sure what the narcissi will do, since they sprouted last fall. I'm not sure if that will have killed them or stunted them for this year.
Since Christmas, I finished reading the Da Vinci Code and Remember When.
Dan Brown's the Da Vinci Code was so good, I can't wait for Sue to mail me her paperback coppy of Angels and Demons. In return, I'm going to send her my copy of the Da Vinci Code. I would classify this book as a smart person's page turner. (Easy read/suspense) Then again, I love suspense mixed with historical/biblical relevance, LOL. In a way it reminds me of the Prophetess that I read in 1999. Both books deal with women's role in religious history.
Nora Roberts/JD Robb book Remember When was a nice mixture of her two genres, though I must admit I thought the Nora Roberts half of the book was stronger. But maybe that's because it introduced new characters. The great thing about finishing this book is I believe the next In Death book hits shelves next week. I'm all set to start reading the next installment. (Without saying, easy read)
However I have started reading a book called A Catch of Consequence. I think the fact that it takes place in Boston around the time of the Boston Tea Party interested me at the time when I bought it. In just the first few pages I have decided this is not "an easy read," but have not decided whether I like it or not. Too soon to tell. (easy read = simple straightforward writing you can whip through. hard read = must read slower to absorb more complex writing and imagery)
My feeling about easy versus hard reads. Easy reads are nice for picking up for 10 minutes at a time here and there. Harder reads require more uninterrupted reading time. Simply put, I enjoy both, depending on time and place. LOL.
Spent the early afternoon cleaning out my home office. The whir of the shredder hummed in my ears as thin strips of white and colored paper streamed out.
After three bags of shredded paper and two bags of assorted trash, my office still isn't what I'd consider clean. Granted the bags I used were plastic grocery bags, not terribly large. But I still have so much shit in this room. *sigh*
What I did accomplish was:
shredding recepts for car repairs on a car I haven't owned in over 6 months
filing bills
shredding addresses and other dean related documents
removing old medical bills/documents from my file cabinet
put away assorted items
etc.....
You may have noticed the Washington Post is now requiring users to register to read their articles. Today I looked at the form and found they are asking for far more information than I'm willing to give. Name, address, phone number are typical, and while I'm not thrilled to give those out, they are fair game. But job title, primary responsibility, job industry, and company size I find very intrusive. Yet these are required fields, not optional.
I guess I won't be reading the WaPo online anymore. I'm not thrilled with it's slant these days anyhow.
About time. I heard rumors about Kerry's infidelity a good two weeks ago. I was beginning to think the mainstream press was gonna sit on the info or that the rumors didn't have substance. Actually, they still may not have substance. But at least the press may not be sitting on it much longer. LOL.
The one set of rumors I heard dealt with an affair prior to the annullment of his first marriage. The rumor Drudge is reporting deals with more recent infidelity. Granted I think Drudge is scum, but he is right on occasion. We'll see about this one.
Again, no link, so here's the whole story. Are Dean and Edwards brokering a deal??? Sounds like a plan to me. As I said before I'd prefer Dean OR Edwards over Kerry.
Stay tuned. ;)
Dean Says He Favors Edwards Over Kerry
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - It's not surprising that John Edwards (news - web sites) says
he would be a tougher opponent for President Bush (news - web sites) than
Democratic front-runner John Kerry (news - web sites). It raises eyebrows
when Howard Dean (news - web sites) says the same thing.
With the race's fourth major candidate, Wesley Clark (news - web sites), out
of the race, Edwards and Dean are ganging up on Kerry, winner of 12 of the
14 nominating contests so far.
Dean told CBS News in an interview that will air Wednesday night that he
believes Edwards would be the better candidate in the general election, even
though Kerry has the advantage right now.
"My fear is that he actually won't be the strongest Democratic candidate,"
Dean told the network.
Asked about Dean's comment, Edwards told reporters: "I agree with that. I
think that he is a very wise man. ... The truth is that this campaign to
bring about change is working with independents and voters that we will have
to get in order to win the general election."
In his exit from the race Wednesday in him hometown of Little Rock, Ark.,
Clark called on Democrats to continue fighting against Bush's "fatally
flawed" foreign policy.
"We must challenge George W. Bush on that foreign policy," Clark said.
Kerry is speeding toward the nomination, and Dean and Edwards are hoping to
stop him after a showdown in Wisconsin on Tuesday.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Dean urged voters in Wisconsin's
primary to stand up against Kerry and other Washington insiders who he said
are trying to derail his candidacy. He said he would support the Democratic
nominee, but Kerry would be the "lesser of two evils" in a race against
President Bush.
Dean, once the race's high-flying front-runner, has gone winless while Kerry
has captured 12 victories, including Virginia and Tennessee on Tuesday.
Clark decided to quit the race after dismal third-place showings, while
runner-up Edwards forged ahead with a busy campaign day in Wisconsin.
Edwards said he has not entertained the thought of dropping out and not one
Democratic official has asked him to. He is planning to focus his campaign
on trade and job losses in Wisconsin, hoping the contest will force Dean
from the race and leave him as the alternative to Kerry.
"I'm going to be the nominee," Edwards told The Associated Press in an
interview aboard his plane. "I'm definitely staying in."
Edwards' advisers also said he would remain positive and refused to
criticize Kerry. Dean, on the other hand, sought to portray Kerry as part of
the Washington machine working against him.
"What we now see is that John Kerry is part of the corrupt political culture
in Washington," Dean said in an interview. He said he came to that
conclusion after learning that former New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli
contributed to an independent group that ran ads that used images of Osama
bin Laden (news - web sites) to question Dean's ability to combat terrorism
if elected president.
Torricelli, who was forced out of office over ethical lapses, is now raising
money for Kerry's presidential campaign. Dean said disclosures that money
was also raised by backers of Dick Gephardt (news - web sites) show
Washington insiders are trying to derail his candidacy.
"The link is unassailable," Dean said. "The same fund-raiser who was
ethically challenged and had to step aside from a Senate race because of
that raised money from the same donors to support both Senator Kerry and his
... political action group.
"I intend to support the Democratic nominee under any circumstances," Dean
said. "I'm just deeply disappointed that once again we may have to settle
for the lesser of two evils."
Kerry spokesman David Wade called it "another day, another Dean act of
desperation." Wade said Kerry has a record of fighting special interests in
Washington and that voters across the country have said they want his
leadership in the White House.
Dean finished in single digits in Virginia and Tennessee, having skipped
both states to campaign in Wisconsin. He's hoping to revive his candidacy
there, but some of his supporters have been questioning whether it is
possible.
"I think there comes a point when you have to recognize reality," said Iowa
Sen. Tom Harkin, one of Dean's high-profile endorsers. "I understand he made
the commitment to go to Wisconsin, but I think at some point there's going
to have to be a reckoning here."
Meanwhile, Kerry campaign officials said he picked up more congressional
endorsements with New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman and Maine Rep. Tom Allen and
several lawmakers who had endorsed Clark. Rep. Marion Berry, who had
organized support for Clark in Congress, said he and the two other Arkansas
Democrats in the House were backing Kerry and he expected most of Clark's
other supporters would, too.
"At some point you have to close ranks, pick a leader and get behind him
fully," Berry said.
Kerry retreated to his home in Georgetown, nursing a cough and making phone
calls. He returns to the campaign trail Friday with stops in Wisconsin and
Nevada, which holds its caucuses Saturday.
The Bush campaign is increasingly convinced that Kerry will be the opponent
in the November elections. They are planning to portray Kerry as a tax
raiser who wants to roll back efforts in Iraq (news - web sites) and has
changed from a war supporter early last year to an opponent when his
position started to hurt him in the Democratic primary.
"Certainly Senator Kerry looks to be the front-runner," said Bush spokesman
Scott Stanzel. "Democrats are supporting his campaign and we are anxious for
the time when we'll have a chance to highlight the clear contrast that
voters will have in this election between George Bush's positive leadership
and the negativity and pessimism that's being offered by the Democratic
candidate."
___
Associated Press writers Ross Sneyd and Liz Sidoti contributed to this
report from Wisconsin.
The Club for Growth was a group that put out terrible ads against Howard Dean in Iowa. One of these ads pictured Osama bin Laden. Now it appears one or more of the contributors also is a major Kerry donor. (surprise, surprise, surprise.) Read about the connect over at the daily Kos
Why, if I want Bush out so much do I bring this up?
Clearly I wanted Howard Dean to be the nominee. But that seems almost impossible at this point. I would have even rather had Edwards or even Clark as the nominee, before having Kerry.
Why?
Because Kerry is just as controllable as Bush.
You think Bush is calling all the shots?
I sure don't. And I don't think Kerry will be either. With all the special interest money he's taken over the years....
Yeah, we may not have preemptive wars under Kerry, but capitalism will still be out of control.
I don't have the link handy, but you may want to note several media giants have also contributed heavily to Kerry's campaign. No wonder he's getting a free ride, while Howard (who called for media re-regulation) got pounded.
And Kerry will probably win the general election, in spite of the RNC's efforts to derail him. God, knows people are really unhappy with Bush. (except for the die hard Bushies)
But will things be any better? I honestly don't know.
Will we have health care, jobs brought back to America, civil rights advances, better foreign relations, etc? Will America be financially and emotionally better off?
That's the question I have. Status quo is not good enough, because Bush has brought us down so much. Does Kerry have the leadership necessary to bring improvements for the middle class? Or will we continue to make more but have less to show for it?
Stay tuned.
Update: Just so no one misunderstands, I will vote for Kerry should he be the nominee. Actually, more acurately I will vote against Bush. For once, I actually wanted to vote "for" someone instead of the lesser of two evils. But with Kerry and Bush, it'll be back to the lesser of two evils. Bush must go.
Don't have a link for this, got it via email. But this is the sort of stuff that John Kerry is vulnerable on:
Kerry, Too, Needs to Clear the Air
By Scott Ritter
Scott Ritter, former UN chief inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, is the
author of "Frontier Justice: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the
Bushwhacking of America."
February 9, 2004
On April 23, 1971, a 27-year-old Navy veteran named John Kerry sat
before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and chided members on
their leadership failures regarding the war in Vietnam.
"Where is the leadership?" Kerry, a decorated hero who had proved
his courage under fire, demanded of the senators. "Where are they now
that we, the men they sent off to war, have returned?" Kerry lambasted
those who had pushed so strongly for war in Vietnam. "These men have
left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public
rectitude."
Today, on the issue of the war in Iraq, it is John Kerry who is all
pious rectitude.
"I think the administration owes the entire country a full
explanation on this war - not just their exaggerations but on the
failure of American intelligence," Kerry said following the stunning
announcement by David Kay, the Bush administration's former lead
investigator in Iraq, that "we were all wrong" about the existence of
weapons of mass destruction in that country. The problem for Sen.
Kerry, of course, is that he, too, is culpable in the massive breach
of public trust that has come to light regarding Iraq, WMD and the
rush to war.
Almost 30 years after his appearance before the Senate, Sen. Kerry
was given the opportunity to make good on his promises that he had
learned the lessons of Vietnam. During a visit to Washington in April
2000, when I lobbied senators and representatives for a full review of
American policy regarding Iraq, I spoke with John Kerry about what I
held to be the hyped-up intelligence regarding the threat posed by
Iraq's WMD. "Put it in writing," Kerry told me, "and send it to me so
I can review what you're saying in detail."
I did just that, penning a comprehensive article for Arms Control
Today, the journal of the Arms Control Association, on the "Case for
the Qualitative Disarmament of Iraq." This article, published in June
2000, provided a detailed breakdown of Iraq's WMD capability and made
a comprehensive case that Iraq did not pose an imminent threat. I
asked the Arms Control Association to send several copies to Sen.
Kerry's office but, just to make sure, I sent him one myself. I never
heard back from the senator.
Two years later, in the buildup toward war that took place in the
summer of 2002, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on which Kerry
sits, convened a hearing on Iraq. At that hearing a parade of
witnesses appeared, testifying to the existence of WMD in Iraq.
Featured prominently was Khidir Hamza, the self-proclaimed "bombmaker
to Saddam," who gave stirring first-hand testimony to the existence of
not only nuclear weapons capability, but also chemical and biological
weapons as well. Every word of Hamza's testimony has since been proved
false. Despite receiving thousands of phone calls, letters and e-mails
demanding that dissenting expert opinion, including my own, be aired
at the hearing, Sen. Kerry apparently did nothing, allowing a sham
hearing to conclude with the finding that there was "no doubt" Saddam
Hussein had WMD.
Sen. Kerry followed up this performance in October 2002 by voting
for the war in Iraq. Today he justifies that vote by noting that he
only approved the "threat of war," and that the blame for Iraq rests
with President George W. Bush, who failed to assemble adequate
international support for the war. But this explanation rings hollow
in the face of David Kay's findings that there are no WMD in Iraq.
With the stated casus belli shown to be false, John Kerry needs to
better explain his role not only in propelling our nation into a war
that is rapidly devolving into a quagmire, but more importantly, his
perpetuation of the falsehoods that got us there to begin with.
President Bush should rightly be held accountable for what
increasingly appears to be deliberately misleading statements made by
him and members of his administration regarding the threat posed by
Iraq's WMD. If such deception took place, then Bush no longer deserves
the trust and confidence of the American people.
But John Kerry seems to share in this culpability, and if he wants
to be the next president of the United States, he must first convince
the American people that his actions somehow differ from those of the
man he seeks to replace.
"Where is the leadership?" John Kerry asked more than 30 years ago,
questioning a war that consumed life, money and national honor. Today
this question still hangs in the air, haunting a former Navy combat
veteran who needs to convince a skeptical nation that he not only has
a plan to get America out of Iraq, but also possesses the leadership
skills needed to avoid future ill-advised adventures.
Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.
My blogging frequency has been pretty shitty lately. I haven't had too much to say. But I find that to be the trend with me--that December and January are very skimpy blogging wise. Hopefully it'll start picking up in February or after the weather starts getting better.
God, I need a vacation. Someplace warm and sunny.
Unless some major scandal gets exposed, it looks like John Kerry will be getting the nomination. How depressing.
I'm at the point where I'd take John Edwards over John Kerry. All the dirty politicking the Kerry campaign did to the Dean campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire--some proven, some alledged--really soured my opinion of John Kerry. Not that the Edwards campaign is squeaky clean, but I just find Edwards likeable and he can actually pull off the "I'm not beholden to special interests" mantra.
Kerry just looks like a complete hypocrite saying it. Oh yeah, that's because he is a complete hypocrite. LOL.
I think Clark should drop out. And if Dean gets nothing in the win column this weekend, he should too. It saddens me to say that, but Edwards is in a much better position to take out Kerry at this point. And Trippi's right. Kerry is more vulnerable in a two man race rather than a 4-man race.
As for the Deaniacs, we'll keep the movement going in a new format. There are already plans in the works for what to do next.
And as for Howard Dean, what I'd like to see him do is head up the liberal radio/TV network that Al Gore and Al Franken have talked about creating. I think Howard is still the party's best voice against Bush, so I don't believe he should --or will--go skulking away in defeat.
Howard's goal was to change this country, and he at the very least changed the Democratic party for the better, and that's no small feat. Maybe through other means such as liberal talk radio, he can have an even bigger influence than he would have had as president.