You are absolutely correct. To play with peoples lives like that is disturbing and inexcusable.

David's Mom - It's you that has no credibility. Actually Beaver spoke the truth and the so called "Reverend" Wright lied again. I suggest that you read the CDC report and timeline on the CDC website before you continue your usual racist ranting and attacks.

www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm

While what happened was wrong in regard to the treatment of these men, the government and specifically the CDC, did not infect anyone. "Slick Willy" Clinton, our first black president, was correct in apologizing to the survivors even though the apology was a quarter century past due.

In 1932, the Public Health Service, working with the Tuskegee Institute, began a study to record the natural history of syphilis in hopes of justifying treatment programs for blacks. It was called the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male."

The study initially involved 600 black men – 399 with syphilis, 201 who did not have the disease.

Good job Beaver! Keep it up!

Small wonder that most Americans are a more than a bit skeptical when black racists like Wright speak.

In 1932, the Public Health Service, working with the Tuskegee Institute, began a study to record the natural history of syphilis in hopes of justifying treatment programs for blacks. It was called the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male."

Major Mike; The Public Health Service is a government agency. Clinton apologized because a government agency was involved in this experiment. Wright did not 'lie'.

David's Mom - What have you been smoking?! Of course the PHS is a government agency, that is not in question here. Do you hope to make an argument by merely throwing random quotes and meaningless conjecture out to see who salutes? One more time - READ WHAT YOU RESPOND TO!! And..... quit focusing on defending another black racist to the exclusion of all reason.

"Wright says the U.S. government “purposely infected African-American men with syphilis.”

Even Tuskegee University had a fair treatise on the subject.

www.tuskegee.edu/Global/Story.asp?s=1207586

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis.

Under the glare of publicity, the government ended their experiment, and for the first time provided the men with effective medical treatment for syphilis. Fred Gray, a lawyer who had previously defended Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, filed a class action suit that provided a $10 million out-of-court settlement for the men and their families. Gray, however, named only whites and white organizations as defendants in the suit, portraying Tuskegee as a black and white case when it was in fact more complex than that —black doctors and institutions had been involved from beginning to end.

Do you get it yet?? The PHS chose subjects who were not only already infected but in the advanced stages of infection.

YES!! Wright lied (yet again)! I understand that you "claim" to have been a school teacher. Where? Clayton County? How sad.

However, there was no evidence that researchers had informed them of the study or its real purpose. In fact, the men had been misled and had not been given all the facts required to provide informed consent.

Do you guys read the articles you post? I do not rant. I only deal with facts vs. opinions. The above is from the article that you referenced. This was a tragedy inflicted on human beings. . . don't you agree?

David's Mom - What is this - a watch my right hand trick? I would most certainly agree that this was a human tragedy!

But.... I fail to see where J. Wright's despicably false claim that the U.S. government deliberately infected these men has any basis in fact after reading the CDC report and several other historical accounts. These 399 men had preexisting conditions that were not treated with the available medicines of the day - that in itself was criminal yet no one, including "Slick Willy", sought criminal prosecution against the surviving researchers. Please note that penicillin became the drug of choice for syphilis in 1947.

Yes, I read the articles I post, I would suggest you do the same. Did you even read Beavers post or the CDC report/timeline or the excerpt YOU just posted??!!

You do rant and I agree that you deal with facts vs. opinions. Indeed, your opinions are rarely fact. Your continuing racial bias is really both disgusting and tiring.

Are you both deaf, dumb and illiterate?

The point is, that the govenment did not infect the men in the Tuskagee experiment as Barak's mentor, friend, and spiritual advisor of 20 years claims they did.

He plays the typical liberal, racist game of setting up a straw man to rile up the masses against the white man.

You both really need to get a clue.

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

See Locke. Sorry Mr. Charley. I won't rile up the masses against white people again.

Don't even try to tell me you don't know the urban code definition of "Mr Charley"

Definition of Mr. Charley from the Urban Dictionary

I don't have to look it up.

Why don't you look up "Uncle Tom" while you're at it?

You can always tell when a liberal has lost the debate; they cease trying to wear you down with endless politically correct irrelevancies and resort to sarcasm and innuendo.

The modern equivalent of the white robe and pointy hat is baggy pants with a "hoodie". You want to talk about racism - OK.

NAACP = the Klan With A Tan

More violence, more hate, and more deceit that the KKK could have ever possibly have conceived of - even in the churches.

And that folks, is where this thread started! Yep, J. Wright did lie (again).

Exactly what have I done to oppress people of color? Please be specific, and present only facts, not your opinion.

No answer from Dave's Mom. She's so upset that Barack's campaign is in the toilet that the best she can do is spew out "Mr. Charley"

Lies and name calling - the last refuge of a scoundrel.

------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

The democrats have set their 'talking points' - and Bush/McCain are dust! Hillary or Obama represent the will of the people. Good night Mr. Charley - a new America is here! (OK Locke - you're right - Peace out!)

Typical of David's Mom when she gets flustered.

Can't answer the question or gets caught lying, and resorts to calling people "Mr. Charley" or "Ms. Charley". She doesn't even know what it means. She uses it to imply racism insted of oppression.

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

Or she says that you're friends with David Duke.

And to think that she was a "diversity" training instructor!

I wonder if she called her captive audience "Mr. Charley" to help re-educate them if they dared question her facts and methods.

And David's mom accused "scary" Richard Hobbs (who can't use logic ) of seeing all black women as looking alike when Richard was talking to Jeff & did not mention race at all or David's mom.

"I know in your world 'we' all look alike. The Congresswomen who is married to an Ambassador of the Bahamas is Maxine Waters - not Sheila Jackson Lee. As usual, you spout a lot based on misinformation." (She's an expert on "misinformation" -- such as calling Obama's long-time friend and political backer his real estate agent -- and jumping to the wrong conclusions all right.)

I wonder if she called on Cynthia McKinney to help re-educate the logically impaired while enforcing "diversity."

Where have you been? I have been looking for you everywhere?

I am up way too early, even for Sunday, I love my sleep.

I don't think there are not enough conservatives on here, my friends won't dare get on here after they read some thing. I tell them hey if I can take it you can. They agree, it's hard at times but we do it.

I must say that my dad was a Republican for years, then changed to Democrat when someone I honestly think is the worst President won. Well, my Dad has changed his mind, and did tell me he was wrong in voting for that person because of his actions. This year he's voting Republican. My mom always Republican. Alot of her issues, were she could not stand abortion, she always looked to see if she thought they had integrity.

I know politics can be dog eat dog world, but in the end, I believe in integrity is what counts.

I'm voting this year, I wasn't, then I thought I will not let them take that away from me. I am glad to live in the land of the free. It's one of the two. As, I have said before I would vote Democrat if they presented something to me. I have never been in this position before. I am not fond of any of them, but I have narrowed it down to two. I have a few months to make up my mind.

I am up this morning one of my 3 cats keep meowing in my face for it's treat.

Missed you being here, are you feeling better? If you have been reading I have had some days.

I love to sleep so I didn't make it to the coffee meeting, I wanted to meet Main and Sniffles and Nuk_1. Maybe next time.

Keep in touch.

_____________________________
We Will Stand

Can you further explain your meaning on these statements:

"I have been looking for you everywhere."
(did you mean on the blog or downtown?)

"I don't think there are not enough conservatives on here."
(you do, or you don't?)

"My friends won't dare get on here after they read some thing."
(what "something" is that?)

"If you have been reading I have had some days."
(didn't we all have some days?)

I'm up but I love to sleep with my cat licking for treats so I didn't make it to coffee!

"They agree its hard at times but we do it."
(do they dare or don't they?)

"I am glad to live in the land of the free. "It is one of the two."
(two what?)

You have alot of friends on here, they will help you.:-0

_______________________________
We Will Stand

Review your blogs. I rest my case.

Seem to think they somehow merit a response to whatever ludicrous challenge they issue....they don't. It is not worth responding to someone like that. No need to "prove" they are racist, hypocritical, lo que sea.

You're not getting off that easy. Prove that my blogs are oppressing people of color.

One definition of oppression is "the negative outcome experienced by people targeted by the cruel exercise of power in a society or social group. It is particularly closely associated with nationalism and derived social systems, wherein identity is built by antagonism to the other."

I'm all ears.

wherein identity is built by antagonism to the other.

Common usage of 'Mr. Charley' - identifies any 'white' man who exhibits attitudes of superiority towards people of color. The 'woman' is called 'Miss Ann'. These attitudes were oppressive to those who had to endure this oppressive attitude. You may not call it oppressive - but you may never have experienced it.

"Common usage of 'Mr. Charley' - identifies any 'white' man who exhibits attitudes of superiority towards people of color. The 'woman' is called 'Miss Ann'."

Says you. I have never exhibited an attitude of superiority to anyone in any of my posts. If you have feelings of inferiority towards white people, that's your problem. It's no excuse to call people Mr. Charley or Ms. Charley - like you did in this post:
David's Mom refers to Old Beach Bear as 'Ms. Charley'

-----------------------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

There is a whole world of difference in infecting people outright as opposed to using them as lab animals and allowing them to infect others by not treating them. Yer both a bunch'a RACIST if you cain't see the difference. Just 'cause the white doctors were letting them die of a curable infection is no reason for you to be dragging out that librul straw man to be rilin' up the masses with.

Y'all's not only racists fer thinkin' that ways y'all's probably bigots too!

I'm amazed and purely Shocked that you cain't see the plain difference right there under yer noses.

Now where's my white robe and my pointy hat?

If you took the time to read the article before responding with your ridiculous, irrelevant rant, you would have read the following:

"The doctors infected no one. In fact, the patients were selected in the first place because they were tertiary-stage syphilitics who were no longer contagious. The researchers studied the progress of the disease, without treating it, for 40 years. Prior to the availability of penicillin in the 1940s and 1950s, the researchers couldn’t have treated the men even if they wanted to. Even after standardized penicillin treatments were available, it wasn’t clear that the patients could have been helped. Some of the doctors believed that treating the decades-long infections would kill the men."

Barack Obama is the personification of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The Perverse Worship of a man

It takes a certain kind of person to stand up for the doctors who watched people suffer with syphilis without treating them so that they could study the scientific effects of their disease. Dr. Josef Mengele's heart would swell with pride for you beaver.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

What is it with you anyway Locke? Are all liberal's brain dead? No one in this or any other thread defended the researchers or doctors in the Tuskegee Study. I've always known that the coin of the liberal is the lie, it's sad to see you yet again validate that truth.

Why don't you at least read about what happened so your fabrications and insults would have some degree of self justified validity? Nah, I know that you would much rather cling to your "Kill The Messenger" tactic that has worked so well for so many years.

www.tuskegee.edu/Global/Story.asp?s=1207586

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis.

Under the glare of publicity, the government ended their experiment, and for the first time provided the men with effective medical treatment for syphilis. Fred Gray, a lawyer who had previously defended Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, filed a class action suit that provided a $10 million out-of-court settlement for the men and their families. Gray, however, named only whites and white organizations as defendants in the suit, portraying Tuskegee as a black and white case when it was in fact more complex than that —black doctors and institutions had been involved from beginning to end.

Boy oh boy, now that's a rude surprise isn't it?

____________________________________________________________

You can always tell when a liberal has lost the debate; they cease trying to wear you down with endless politically correct irrelevancies and resort to sarcasm, insult, and innuendo.

This might help you find the answer to your question & ease the frustration that happens when trying to reason with a brick wall.

"The Socialist Brain of a Liberal Democrat"

Liberalism: A "normal" state of a healthy person whose brain developed under the caring guidance of the progressive establishment.

As opposed to the rigid and bigoted Republican/Capitalist/Conservative brain, a Liberal/Socialist/Democrat brain is hard to map because it undergoes perpetual reshuffling of its centers and synapses [which renders logical thinking virtually impossible].

Generally it can be characterized by a compassionate concern for not taxing the rich enough, combined with generosity in spending other people's money. A liberal brain is known to have a well-developed "blame-America" synapse, a benign "Smarter Than Thou" tumor, a Global Warming Panic Center, the Entitlement Synapse, Moral Relativity Gray Area, and a "P.C. Lobe" responsible for speech codes, multiculturalism, racial quotas, and alternative lifestyles.

The underdeveloped areas of a Liberal Brain usually include those that handle common sense, personal responsibility, sense of humor, patriotism, and work ethics. The eternal motivational force that keeps a liberal going is typically a daily doze of Starbucks coffee [as well as weekly Go-Obama rallies for The Faithful] combined with the dialectical struggle of the opposites -- the feeling of being a victim of oppression and the feeling of guilt for oppressing the others at the same time [but drinking Starbucks coffee and shouting "Go Obama!" with The Faithful will dull any overly sensitive conscience, especially when reiterating the many wrongs suffered since the beginning of time].

"Psychiatrist Explores the Psychological Causes of Modern Liberalism"

"Why are some drawn like a magnet to such classic liberal tenets as moral relativism, dependence on government, redistribution of wealth, and a philosophy of victim-hood?"

For the answers, see The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness by renowned forensic psychiatrist Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr.

The Liberal Mind analyzes the psychopathology of liberalism, explaining how the liberal agenda:

*Creates and reinforces perceptions of victimization

*Satisfies infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence, and compensation

*Augments primitive feelings of envy and inferiority

*Rejects the sovereignty of the common man and subordinates him to the will of the government

"The roots of liberalism –- and its associated madness –- can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood, and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind" notes Rossiter.

"When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains, and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

So very painfully obvious!
_____________________________

8-week baby (fetus = "young one") -- Only 30-32 more weeks to go!

“Women who are experiencing an unplanned pregnancy also deserve unplanned joy.” (Feminists for Life)

The article we are discussing says: “By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis.”

Here is the question I’ve been trying over and over to get MajorMike to answer:

Do you not think that by not treating the patients which resulted in 40 of their wives being infected and 19 of their children being born with congenital syphilis, that the government was not complicit in infecting these people?

So, prove my brain deadness by sharing the wisdom of your answer with us if you will.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

From holding your breath?

The article states, "The doctors [or FDR's government] infected no one [Wright's lie]. In fact, the patients were selected in the first place because they were tertiary-stage syphilitics who were no longer contagious." Therefore, any spread of the disease occurred BEFORE these men were enrolled in the study.

Now for some cut & paste to try to revive you!

Syphilis is highly contagious during the primary and secondary stages. After the person has recovered from the secondary stage, the disease enters a latent stage, in which the infection persists but no symptoms occur. This stage may last for years to decades — or for the rest of the person's life. Syphilis is generally not contagious in the latent stage.

During the tertiary (third) stage, syphilis is also not contagious but produces symptoms that range from mild to devastating. The prognosis is poor for tertiary-stage syphilis of the brain or heart, because existing damage usually cannot be reversed. (Merck) [The prognosis was even more dire in the 1930s & 40s.]

“Clearing the Myths of Time: Tuskegee Revisited” (The Lancet, Infectious Diseases 2005; 5:127)

A pervasive myth that must be dispelled is that patients were deliberately infected with syphilis. The truth is that the infected men had had syphilis for several years at the time they were recruited.

It is debatable whether the study was racist. All the patients and controls were black (as was 82% of the population of Macon County in 1930), but this was because the study has its origins in earlier work supported by the philanthropic Rosenwald Fund, with the motivation of promoting the welfare of African Americans. [The doctors believed that the study “should forever dispel the rather general belief that syphilis is a disease of small consequence to the negro.”]

Although the Rosenwald Fund decided not to support the Tuskegee study of untreated syphilis [due to insufficient funds resulting from the Stock Market Crash of 1929], it was endorsed by the Tuskegee Institute — an entirely African-American organization — and black health-care professionals were involved at all stages of the study. Indeed, as late as 1969, the Macon County Medical Society, consisting mostly of black doctors, agreed to assist the USPHS in continuing the study.

[The Tuskegee study followed the 1928 Oslo Study, which had reported on the pathologic manifestations of untreated syphilis in several hundred white males.]

To describe the Tuskegee study as unethical requires an element of what Richard A Shweder describes as “presentism” (ie, judging past actions on the basis of the standards of today). When the study began, the only treatment for syphilis was the poorly efficacious arsphenamine compounds, and there was no medical consensus on the usefulness of these drugs in latent syphilis. [There was nothing the investigators could do therapeutically in the 30s & 40s.] And debate over whether treatment of latent syphilis did more harm than good continued into the early 1950s, well into the era of penicillin availability.

[The decision to withhold penicillin was made based on several factors, including the quiescent state of the disease, assumptions about the participants, and fear related to the danger of lethal reactions if the men were to receive penicillin. Some physicians felt that repair of existing damage would be minimal, and others felt that the damage that could result from reactions to the penicillin therapy, including fever, angina, and ruptured blood vessels, would outweigh its benefits. At the time of the Tuskegee Study, no data was available on the efficiency of penicillin treatment in late syphilis, and short- and long-term toxic effects of drugs had not been well documented. In short, when the study was evaluated periodically, researchers judged that the benefits of nontreatment outweighed the benefits of treatment. However, the subjects were never given a choice about continuing in the study once penicillin had become available; in fact, they were prevented from getting treatment.]

We should also bear in mind that in the 1930s there were no written standards for experimentation with human beings, and the paternalistic attitude that pervaded medical practice at the time [as well as FDR's New Deal] meant that the norms for informing patients about their illness were very different from now. Therefore, it is hard to imagine that a hypothetical institutional review board of the 1930s would have judged the Tuskegee study unethical at its inception. However, principles for research with human beings were adopted by the American Medical Association in 1946, and by the 1950s programmes for penicillin treatment of syphilis were widespread across the USA. Thus, by its 20th anniversary the Tuskegee study had become unethical by the standards of the time — patients should have been informed of their diagnosis and given the option of treatment.

[The CDC sought and gained support for the continuation of the study from the local chapters of the National Medical Association (representing African-American physicians) and the American Medical Association. (Wiki)]

[The study was reported in medical journals for nearly 40 years without protest from anyone in the medical community. The investigating doctors never questioned the morality of the study.]

................

Phil Wilson, executive director of the Black AIDS Institute in Los Angeles, CA: "Conspiracy theories [believing the bogeyman government is 'out to get them' no matter what they do] create an environment of fatalism, disempower people, and allow them to not take personal responsibility." "It's not my fault if I get infected with HIV/AIDS, so I don't need to worry about making responsible choices." (The Lancet)

_______________________________

Why are so many Americans, especially those who vote for Democratic candidates, so anxious for government-controlled healthcare?

Is how you automatically gravitate to the wrong side of almost every argument. Now you are joining in on the apologia for the syphilis experiment for reasons that completely baffle me except possibly that it seemed a funny way for you to inject your silly little “liberal brain” commentary into the discussion.

Since you went to the trouble to highlight the “not contagious” sections I suppose this misinformation is key to your argument. However, if you will read what you cut and pasted from the Merck article, “Syphilis is generally not contagious in the latent stage” the key in the sentence is not the “not contagious” part but the “generally” part.

Here is information from the CDC’s website: “For infectiousness, however, late latent syphilis is not considered as contagious as early latent syphilis.”

Not “as contagious” but still can be contagious.

The CDC has a website about the Tuskegee experiment. You can find the frequently asked questions here:

Syphilis Study at Tuskegee

Q. Were women involved in the study?
A. The study was limited to Black men 25 years of age or older. Some women contracted syphilis from their husbands who participated in the study’s syphilitic group.

Q. What benefits do the study participants’ wives, ex-wives, widows, and offspring receive?
A. Infected wives, ex-wives, widows, and offspring receive lifetime medical and health benefits.

Back to my question to you; and the only reason I keep asking is because you jumped in to belittle my position.

Do you not think that by not treating the patients which resulted in 40 of their wives being infected and 19 of their children being born with congenital syphilis, that the government was not complicit in infecting these people?

As I said before, it’s not a hard question to answer. Write back if you still need help with it.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

Locke, you and Hack are sooooo complimentary!

What can I say? Gravity naturally pulls me to the RIGHT side of an argument!

I "cut & paste" information (knowing how that drives you libs nuts – quite an irrational reaction ) to add to the discussion, to gain historical and medical PERSPECTIVE. There's no "apologia" from me. I present the FACTS & informed opinions and let the readers decide for themselves.

Since "Tall Tales About Tuskegee" & other posts point out the unethical and inhumane treatment of these people, I see no need to reiterate what's already been said. I in no way excuse the callous disregard for these people, but fostering lies is harmful.

The MAIN POINT of "Tall Tales About Tuskegee" (the original post) is that many people perpetuate lies and the media do not challenge the lies / misinformation (or if you're Hillary, "mis-speaking").

From the link that you posted:

Q. Were the men purposely infected with the disease? [Wright's lie]

A. No, the 399 men in the syphilitic group were initially recruited because they already had late latent syphilis. [The infected men had already had syphilis for several years at the time they were recruited.]

Early latent (resting) syphilis is defined as having syphilis for two years or less from the time of initial infection without signs or symptoms of disease [rash, lesions (chancres that are highly infectious), and enlarged lymph nodes, which indicates that a person is most contagious]. This is the period when most syphilis infections are spread to other people because it is possible, after a period of being asymptomatic, to relapse to secondary syphilis with highly infectious lesions.

Late latent syphilis is infection for greater than two years but without clinical evidence of disease. For infectiousness (contagion), late latent syphilis is essentially non-communicable and contact tracing [alerting sexual partners] is not indicated. However, a pregnant woman (none of which were part of the study) can pass the syphilis infection to her developing fetus during this stage. This stage may last for many years and may or may not progress to the third (tertiary) stage.

Some sources indicate that the men were in the tertiary (third) stage and were not contagious. This stage usually occurs 1-10 years after the initial infection, though in some cases it can take up to 50 years, and is characterized by the formation of gummas which are soft, tumor-like growths that cause local destruction (which is clinical evidence of disease). (Tertiary syphilis usually becomes clinically manifest only after a period of 15-30 years of untreated infection.)

From the source that you quoted, it is impossible to determine if the women and their children contracted syphilis BEFORE or DURING the time the men were enrolled in the study. There were 15 years between 1932 when the study began and 1947 when penicillin was widely available and the standard of care for primary and secondary syphilis. (The first successful treatment of a patient with penicillin was in 1942, and its availability for civilian use was severely limited until after WWII. As production was increased, the price dropped from nearly priceless in 1940, to $20 per dose in July 1943, to $0.55 per dose by 1946.) At that point no man could have been contagious and responsible for infecting women and children, and penicillin would have been beneficial to the men only.

If women and their children were infected after the study began and doctors knew that that was very likely to occur and did not inform them, then you're correct that the government AND THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY were "complicit in infecting these people." (There is no indication that the women and children were denied penicillin and medical treatment because the men were part of this study.) However, women and children are not the ones that Wright and many others are talking about -- the original point of this discussion.

Without the original documents, I cannot possibly determine complicity relating to women and children. Notice the following language (which may be political posturing rather than scientifically correct):

"Due to a lax study protocol, we cannot be sure that all the men had latent syphilis [i.e., were non-contagious]. It is therefore entirely possible that the infected men passed syphilis to their sexual partners and to their children in utero. Thus the physical harm may not be limited just to the men enrolled in the Study."
("A Presidential Apology for the Tuskegee Syphilis Study")

We're using terms that are much more precisely defined in 2008 than in the 1930s, and the disease is much more understood now than then. Perhaps, since your source says that the men were 25 YOA or older and were considered non-contagious by the medical knowledge available in the 1930s & 40s, the effects on women and children were not considered in relation to this study. Such consideration, as well as many other aspects of the study, was deficient and harmful to people who should not have been treated like lab animals.

From your source: "In 1932, the Public Health Service, working with the Tuskegee Institute ["black" administration, doctors, nurses], began a study to record the natural history of syphilis in hopes of justifying treatment programs [taxpayer-funded] for blacks."

Therefore, I doubt that there was any intent to allow disease to spread. There may have been ignorance or unintentional neglect, but I cannot discern malicious intent at the beginning and within the first years of the study when possibly syphilis could have been spread to women and children -- certainly nothing that would justify Wright's rants.

"Blacks 'Injected' With Syphilis? Never Happened" Excerpts (HuffPo)

One peculiar footnote of the Jeremiah Wright controversy has been the repetition -- by educated black men on national television -- of a stubborn myth. That the U.S. government "injected black men with syphilis."

Wright is wrong. That's not what the Tuskegee experiment was…. The government did not infect black men with syphilis.

To invoke the Tuskegee experiment to suggest that the government invented AIDS to kill black people, as Rev. Wright did... that dishonors the truth. There is no excuse for it. It must stop.

..............

How did I "belittle [your] position"? (I didn't say that you "automatically gravitate to the wrong side of almost every argument" and call you "silly." Nor did I associate your argument with a “white robe and pointy hat,” bigotry, & racism.Nor did I lay all of the blame on “white doctors” to “be rilin' up the masses” when there were “blacks” culpable also.) Originally, I made no comment to you; my post was to Major Mike, and then I responded to your question with FACTS from medical sources. Your accusation that we “stand up for the doctors who watched people suffer” is baseless.

I’ll continue present FACTS to shed light on "blame-America" Wright & others who perpetuate LIES to foster perceptions of victimization and to empower themselves, thereby harming their parishioners and followers. Call it “the wrong side” all you want.

_____________________________

It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. ~ John Locke

The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. ~ Winston Churchill

MajorHeadWoundMike, you've been an apologist for the Tuskegee experiment from the very beginning.

Let me give you another scenario that hopefully will show you the inate stupidity of your position:

Suppose one of your loved ones was being sexually assaulted. She yells and screams for the police, and wonder of wonders, they show up and catch the dirty thug in the act.

Instead of arresting the thug molesting your loved one, they stand around and take pictures, laughing and joking the whole time.

Now, using YOUR specious logic, the police, as agents of the government, have done nothing wrong by their non-involvement, since they were only standing by idly and not physically participating in the sexual assault.

*I*, on the other hand, feel that the police have abrogated their professional responsibility to the community by NOT arresting the bad guy. The expectation is that they are there to do a job and by not doing their job have made a bad situation worse.

That's the difference between the two of us.

Now go and try and spin that.
___________
Diagnosing Denise

You’ve been defending the syphilis experiment from the first post, lamenting the accusation that the government purposefully infected African-Americans with syphilis. Every one of your postings has been some type of whitewashing and sick apologia of the motives of the doctors who conducted the experiment. It really wasn’t that bad after all, was it?

When nobody here bought into your ridiculously stupid interpretation (except perhaps your fellow traveler beaver), you were reduced to banal name calling as happens so often here.

Read the article that you originally posted and so carefully quoted to leave out the pertinent information.

The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment

Here is the relevant part: “By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis. How had these men been induced to endure a fatal disease in the name of science?”

By not treating the patients, 40 of their wives had been infected and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis.

If you don’t think that makes the government complicit in infecting those people then in my opinion you are… what was that phrase you used that was so apt.. oh, yeah there it is… brain dead.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

True to form - both of you. No one in here is an apologist for that study / experiment but true to standard liberal form you trot out that lie to see who will accept it.

I posted the link to the article so everyone could read the entire article and I posted the excerpt to show that the racist J. Wright's lie was not only a lie but he forgot to add that a black institution and black professionals were complicit in the crime. I still question why no one was indicted - probably for the aforementioned reason.

"Slick Willy" Clinton, the first black president, apologized to the black community (obviously he wanted those votes) but failed to address the criminal aspects of the case. Again, probably for the aforementioned reason.

Locke, you really really need to reconsider your byline. You would not know the truth if it slapped you in you face. And... you remain the typical brain dead liberal living the lie.

___________________________________________________

'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.'
Sir Edmund Burke.

To let the people here read the entire blog here and to decide for themselves which of us is representing the facts more accurately

I notice that you changed your byline. I guess you finally realized that the previous one described your own writing to well. It’s ironic that you chose the Burke quote. In the Tuskegee experiment, good men did nothing and evil triumphed. The side you’re making excuses for was the evil side.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

I'm perfectly content to allow others to weigh the relative merits of my argument vs. that of MajorHeadWoundMike.

At the rate he's going he'll be "proving" to us shortly that the Holocaust was actually those pesky Jews' own fault.

Aren't those revisionists something?
___________
Diagnosing Denise

The Burke byline was aimed at you since you just can't seem to give up that liberal trait of floating the lie to see who salutes.

One more time for the intellectually impaired; NO ONE in here, including me, has or will defend those criminals. You just can't seem to abide someone critisizing a black "leader" like Wright so you fabricate any issue you can to detract from the truth. Do you really think other people in here can't read or think. Most of them would prefer and indeed choose to ignore you and several of the other racists and racebaiters in here.

FYI - I have four bylines that I use. Here they are - learn something.

_______________________________________________________________

“You just can't seem to abide someone critisizing a black "leader" like Wright so you fabricate any issue you can to detract from the truth.”

Au Contraire! I think Wright is a stupid goon who supports Hillary and is out to destroy Obama because he thinks Obama dissed him. He is a liar and a buffoon.

I invite anyone interested to review the blog here and decide for themselves which of us is apologizing for the Tuskegee doctors. The whole thrust of yours and the beaver’s blogs has been to minimize and mitigate the damage done by the experiment.

The cute little intemperate rants you write like:

“Do you get it yet?? The PHS chose subjects who were not only already infected but in the advanced stages of infection.”

And: “The modern equivalent of the white robe and pointy hat is baggy pants with a "hoodie"

And: “NAACP = the Klan With A Tan”

Don’t, in my mind, support your contention that I am the racist or race baiter here.

Once again, here is the pertinent fact from the article you posted: “By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis.”

And once again I’m asking (with little hope for a direct response), do you not think that by not treating the patients which resulted in 40 of their wives being infected and 19 of their children being born with congenital syphilis, that the government was complicit in infecting these people?

It’s a simple question. Write back if you still need help with the answer.

BTW – You left out your fifth byline: “You can always tell when a liberal has lost the debate; they cease trying to wear you down with endless politically correct irrelevancies and resort to sarcasm, insult, and innuendo.”

That’s the one I was referring to as describing your own words to well. Perhaps you didn’t know you were using it. Page up if you don’t believe me.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

That wasn't a byline Locke - it was an emplasized comment aimed at you. But thanks for pointing that out. I think that I will add that to the other four. Glad you like it.

You do indeed have a point about government complicity in the case of the wives and children although we do not know if they were or were not infected at the beginning of the study. I would imagine that in depth research would answer that question. I still question why criminal charges were not filed.

All of that said, it still does not justify Wright's lie that these men were deliberately infected by the PHS - That is the pertinent point. And.. that is still the central question that you have worked so hard to avoid.

_______________________________________________________________

“You can always tell when a liberal has lost the debate; they cease trying to wear you down with endless politically correct irrelevancies and resort to sarcasm, insult, and innuendo.”

You know Locke, your debating style reminds me of a Ron White monologue where he describes his high school debating experience. And I paraphrase:

"toward the end I yelled **** you at the opposing team. I thought I had won. Everyone was silent"

Have a good day - I gotta go to Home De-pot.

And let us review your debating style:

“David's Mom - It's you that has no credibility. “

“David's Mom - What have you been smoking?”

"Slick Willy" Clinton, our first black president”

“Do you get it yet??”

“David's Mom - What is this - a watch my right hand trick?”

“Indeed, your opinions are rarely fact. Your continuing racial bias is really both disgusting and tiring.”

“Why don't you look up "Uncle Tom" while you're at it?”

“The modern equivalent of the white robe and pointy hat is baggy pants with a "hoodie".”

“NAACP = the Klan With A Tan”

“Are all liberal's brain dead?”

“Why don't you at least read about what happened so your fabrications and insults would have some degree of self justified validity?”

In retrospect, I’m awed at the sophistication of your factual arguments. I guess you, like Ron White, thinks you won.

However, you did finally concede: “You do indeed have a point about government complicity in the case of the wives and children..”

I accept your apology.

Still waiting for Denise’s contribution.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

"Still waiting for Denise’s contribution."

I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you, Locke.

I asked Pegleg Pete's Prevaricating Pusillanimous Progeny on four separate occasions last week to document her baseless allegations that Barack Obama personally supported reparations for slavery.

To date, I have yet to receive a reply from her.

___________
Diagnosing Denise

Prevaricating again, $hifty?

I never "alleged" that "Barack Obama personally supported reparations for slavery." QUOTE ME!

But Obama does have close associations with those who are working toward that goal, such as Rep. John Conyers and Gov. Bill Richardson and last, but not least, Ir-rev Wrong. It seems that affirmative action and welfare haven't been payment enough.

Re-read “Obama and the Drive for Slavery Reparations” and try to comprehend the meaning this time. My answer continues to be "$hifty, learn to read."

If you're so overly anxious (Forgot your meds?) to find out Obama's position on Conyers' slavery reparations bill H.R. 40 (the last that I heard Obama won't comment, other than to say "present"), then you can research his various positions on the topic yourself. My rates for Google tips might be affordable, especially since my instruction could qualify as job training skills. Notice the correct spelling for your resumé, or do you only submit job applications?

You promised dinner for my boyfriend and me at Ruth's Chris, not Pegleg Pauly’s. You must be having a senior moment, or your brain hasn't been getting enough oxygen lately. Holding your breath might be dangerous at your age, especially with your anxiety disorder! But don't worry! Obama can always call for some water if you faint.

__________________________________

8-week BABY (fetus = "young one"): Only 30-32 more weeks before my début!

"I'm not a lesser person because of my lesser size!"

“Women who are experiencing an unplanned pregnancy also deserve unplanned joy.” (Feminists for Life)

I recognize that your Narcisstic Personality Syndrome is occasionally superceded by your Parataxic Distortion Syndrome (an innate need to assign unpopular positions to people you disagree with, then criticize them for the unpopular beliefs you've assigned them).

Simply put, you are once again lying through your teeth.

You continue your sleazy campaign to smear Barack Obama with "guilt by association" innuendo. You imply that Obama supports reparations because his church might, his pastor might, some Congressman might.

You chose to totally disregard PROOF to the contrary that I provided. Back in the Senate race of 2004, Obama was asked about how he felt about reparations. His opponent, carpetbagging Alan Keyes (a man that you've often expressed admiration for) indicated his (KEYES) support for reparations. Obama did NOT support reparations and went on record as saying so. (LINK)

That didn't stop you from continuing your campaign of drive-by character assasination. The fact that you continue to spread lies and innuendo in the face of facts to the contrary shows a distinct flaw in your character and a cowardly disregard for the facts.

In your defense, though, I suspect such character flaws and cowardice may be genetic and/or hereditary in nature...After all, didn't you once tell us your daddy shot himself in the foot to avoid combat?
___________
Diagnosing Denise

I knew when I posed the question to her that it would be a hard one to cut and paste the answer to.

BTW, as you know Obama does not support reparations and when last asked said that instead of reparations we should "fix the schools"; itself a radical proposal. However, I have it from good sources that the little old lady who runs the corner grocery store near where Obama lives has a cousin twice removed whose daughter-in-law supports reparations. Thats close enough to qualify as "Obama personally" to some people. Possibly that could be Denise's source.

---------
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth. John Locke

The most recent Liberal-in Chief is still searching for the meaning of "is" and you expect these lessor liberal to understand whole paragraphs?

I must take issue with your comment. Far from being a "lessor liberal", I can assure you sir that I have never leased anything in my life. I pay cash up front always, sir, and I resent your implications to the contrary!

As to the rest of your pithy remark, I can assure you that the next sensible point that MajorRevisionist makes will be his first.
___________
Diagnosing Denise

A sizable security deposit is always required "up front" for pets, and cash is the preferable method of payment! You do have a muzzle, don't you?

Are you lesser, lessor, or lessee? One or all three?

The lessor is the person who rents or leases land or property, i.e., the landlord -- the owner, the CAPITALIST -- to a lessee, i.e., the tenant or renter. Some landlords will not accept a Section 8 tenant because low-income lessees often will not properly maintain the premises and are much more difficult to evict.

Obama's long-time friend Tony Rezko is a lessor, more aptly called a slumlord of dilapidated government-subsidized, low-income Section 8 housing projects. But Obama does not consider him a lesser friend than Bill Ayers or J. Wright. David's mom tried to make Rezko of lesser importance to Obama by calling him only a real estate agent, a position of much lesser influence than the corrupt real estate developer and political "fixer" that he actually is. At the moment, Rezko is the lesser of three evils for Obama, but that could change as more information surfaces during the trial.

____________________________

8-week BABY (fetus = "young one"): Only 30-32 more weeks before my début!

"I'm not a lesser person because of my lesser size!"

“Women who are experiencing an unplanned pregnancy also deserve unplanned joy.” (Feminists for Life)

Funny you should mention Rezco and "more information" surfacing. It seems republicans have a knack for working their way into every controversy, be it homosexual trysts, prostitution stings, Abramof type lobbyist fraud, or..... The Tony Rezco case. As I didn't want to lose consciousness waiting for you to provide both sides of "guilt by association" gate, here are some interesting tidbits that fact finders like you never seem to bring forward:

From CBS News in Chicago:

"Rezko Pal, Rove Named In Plan To Fire Fitzgerald
(CBS) A government witness claims in 2004, Antoin "Tony Rezko" -- then the target of an investigation that would lead to his indictment and trial -- tried to grease the political skids to get his chief tormentor, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald fired.

Rezko discussed efforts among high-ranking Republicans, including Karl Rove, to have Chicago's U.S. attorney fired, a federal prosecutor said Wednesday.

Rove, then-White House political director, and Republican national committeeman Robert Kjellander were among those mentioned in the alleged 2004 conversations as being involved in the effort, prosecutor Carrie E. Hamilton said.

The witness, Hamilton said, is former Illinois Finance Authority executive director Ali Ata, who on Tuesday pleaded guilty to tax fraud and lying to an FBI agent about Rezko's role in getting him his state job.

The feds say Ata is prepared to testify about the scheme at the Rezko trial.

On Wednesday, Hamilton told Judge Amy J. St. Eve that Ata "had conversations with Mr. Rezko about the fact that Mr. Kjellander was working with Karl Rove to have (U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald) removed."

Tony Rezco and Karl Rove Connected; the story

Getting all sides of the story out of you is a 24/7 job, Conners.

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

I didn't know that Karl Rove is running for president! This race has just become exciting!

As for "all sides of the story," did you notice that little phrase "Illinois' endemic corruption"? That describes Obama's roots, all right!

What a Presidential Race we are going to have. Reverend Wright against Karl Rove...what a matchup. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

The elderly often have trouble spelling while typing.

The not so elderly at heart often have that problem as well. At times when I am rereading things I've already posted, I am horrified to see some one has responded to me, locking my horribly misspelled words in for eternity.

MajorMike, I learned a valuable skill from Gitreal; the art of hanging back and watching the furballs fly. In pilot speak, it's hawking the fight. Two planes are wrapped up with each other (well, in this case, 2 V 2), and the guys with fuel to spare just circle above, enjoying the front row seats. Of course, in the air to air world, those hawking would eventually pitch into it when the advantage is theirs to steal the air to air victory from the guy who had been fighting so long, with all he had, to score the kill himself. Hope that makes sense the way I worded it. At any rate, I ain't never pitching in to this one. Both sides are holding their own quite well, and even acknowledging good points when made. For the record, I've never heard of "Mr. Charley," and hope it was not meant as a slur. David's momma tends to avoid the true gutter politics that sometimes result here.

Major mike dude, hope to meet you at one of our get-togethers. You remind me of alot of my "sick of liberals" friends that I work with.

Cheers,

Kevin "Hack" King
(anyone want two dogs???)

BTW you are talking to not only Sniffles but Sniffles Main friends.

Also, I am leading a contest that Sniffles started, I am ahead of you in post about Obama.

Davids Mom thinks I'm not a good teacher because I post the truth about Obama. (I care about the kids future)

It won't stop me, I can't believe I would ever say this but I would vote for Hillary before Obama. At least she does not have the ties that Obama does, nor his value system.

I'm voting for sure now. Just not telling who.

_______________________________
We Will Stand