No Joe. It's interesting...his tome on his idealism.

In 1993 APLA took me to meet Waxman in his office to "discuss" technical matters
that he didn't seen to understand about complementary medicine for HIV. He was
actively roadblocking things related to this.

He was duplicitous. As soon as APLA's committee head signaled me to ask the real
questions, he ducked and dodged and almost lost his sheepskin to show the wolf
under it. He's married into the medical/pharma/insurance industry, lock, stock
and $$ and that's why he is NOT supporting Obama's public health care option.

I engaged him one more time at a public meeting in Santa Monica. Same MO.

He may think he's working to protect Americans, but his means to that end
includes deception and acting with a lack of the kind of moral code I think our
President has.

All Democrats who oppose the public health care option should be forced to
consider that they might be voted out of office.

Michael Mooney
www.michaelmooney.net
www.medibolics.com

--- In PozHealth@yahoogroups.com, "Sanford Gross" <SGross@...> wrote:
>
> Hey Guys;
>
> I don't suppose this is a good time to make the announcement about Henry
Waxman's new book in which he details his life-long crusade to protect the
American public.
>
> At least, it was news to me. I nearly fell over in the bookstore.
>
> Ironic or just downright funny?
>
> Sanford
>
> Sanford M. Gross, OD, FAAO
> Associate Professor
> Illinois College of Optometry
> 3241 South Michigan Ave
> Chicago, Illinois 60616
>
> >>> Brian Mailman <bmailman@...> 7/6/2009 1:01 AM >>>
> Michael wrote:
> > I agree,
>
> No, I don't think you do, since you continue to misclassify. My point
> is that classing someone(s) that disagree with you as "the other" is
> simply the same dynamic as the conservatives you are bashing employ and
> you should know which is which, anyway.
>
> > however, my "conservative-bashing" includes wolves-in-sheeps-clothing
> > like Henry Waxman, who never say a paternalistic law to control your
> > behavior because you're-too-stupid-to-do-it-yourself that he didn't
> > champion.
>
> Which is a trad "liberal" position. To have an agency or bureau
> control, (e.g., expanded governmental control) things that individuals
> in a Jeffersonian model can and should control for themselves.
>
> > Waxman's Answers Drugs/steroids in sports! - Ban steroids from all
> > uses. Michael Jackson dies of painkillers. -Ban painkillers. Vitamins
> > compete with drugs, according to FDA in the federal register. -Make
> > vitamins into prescription-only items.
>
> Those are not trad conservative positions, as I said. You're describing
> aspects of the nanny state. What the conservatives wish is a smaller
> government with less regulation (Bush, Rove, and Co. are an extreme
> aberration). As you seem to do.
>
> B/
>