The Hollywood legend, known for her beauty and multiple marriages, dies from heart failure.
Actress Elizabeth Taylor passes away
- Thread starter Rodger Tellefson
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
Last edited by a moderator:
TrainTrac
Well-Known Member
??? Other than becoming an advocate for AIDS-related research after her friend Rock Hudson died in the '80's I don't recall her being all that vocal on political subjects.
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
I might have to swallow a half dozen Vicodin with a fifth of bourbon in her honor. :rofl:
Last edited by a moderator:
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
Last edited by a moderator:
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Eddie,
Please read this and recognize the very respectful tone in which it was written.
What does Aids research and Aids support have to do with politics? That sounds like a humanitarian thing to me.
Also, you note that Aids is preventable, then you complain about the comparative funding of diabetes research...which in its most prevalent form (Type II) is also largely preventable and reversable (I know, I am living proof). In most cases Type II is prevantable and reversable with diet and exercise, and no real research needs to go into proving that.
Also, maybe I should bring up the principles of scarcity and abundance, as I have in the past on these threads, as I feel it might not be well received or understood. No offense intended there. What I mean is that complaining about research money spent on Aids, and arguing that not enough is spent on other diseases, is like the discussion several months ago about breast cancer awareness. There this naive notion that somehow funding one takes away from another. That is a scarcity principle mentality. There is enough money to go around for the things that are important, and for the causes that are managed well and that people feel motivated to fund. Don't hate Aids, or breast cancer (for example), or whatever, because they do a better job of getting funding. It is simply not necessarily the case that every additional dollar that goes Aids research is one less for diabetes research.
There is an abundance of funding for such things, it is not scarce, it creates its own supply if the campaigns are run appropriately. We fund and give to what we feel is important. If the funding isn't as you think it should be that is a statement of the overall emphasis placed on things, not much more. I think your complaint should be with the CDC, American Diabetes Association, etc., and their possible LACK of focusing on and placing in the forefront diabetes, not in those organizations that ARE focusing on Aids.
P.S. I think there is MAJOR movement afoot on the diabetes front. But then again, maybe that is just because I have a recent, heightened awareness.
Oh, and back to topic...
R.I.P., Liz. You were most definately a looker in your day.
TJR
Please read this and recognize the very respectful tone in which it was written.
What does Aids research and Aids support have to do with politics? That sounds like a humanitarian thing to me.
Also, you note that Aids is preventable, then you complain about the comparative funding of diabetes research...which in its most prevalent form (Type II) is also largely preventable and reversable (I know, I am living proof). In most cases Type II is prevantable and reversable with diet and exercise, and no real research needs to go into proving that.
Also, maybe I should bring up the principles of scarcity and abundance, as I have in the past on these threads, as I feel it might not be well received or understood. No offense intended there. What I mean is that complaining about research money spent on Aids, and arguing that not enough is spent on other diseases, is like the discussion several months ago about breast cancer awareness. There this naive notion that somehow funding one takes away from another. That is a scarcity principle mentality. There is enough money to go around for the things that are important, and for the causes that are managed well and that people feel motivated to fund. Don't hate Aids, or breast cancer (for example), or whatever, because they do a better job of getting funding. It is simply not necessarily the case that every additional dollar that goes Aids research is one less for diabetes research.
There is an abundance of funding for such things, it is not scarce, it creates its own supply if the campaigns are run appropriately. We fund and give to what we feel is important. If the funding isn't as you think it should be that is a statement of the overall emphasis placed on things, not much more. I think your complaint should be with the CDC, American Diabetes Association, etc., and their possible LACK of focusing on and placing in the forefront diabetes, not in those organizations that ARE focusing on Aids.
P.S. I think there is MAJOR movement afoot on the diabetes front. But then again, maybe that is just because I have a recent, heightened awareness.
Oh, and back to topic...
R.I.P., Liz. You were most definately a looker in your day.
TJR
Last edited by a moderator:
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Seeing as how getting AIDS puts you on the express train to an early grave, I'd prioritize that over diabetes, which medicine has comparatively tamed.
AIDS can also be contracted accidentally. Diabetes can't be, as far as I know.
If I ended up with uncurable AIDS due to a blood transfusion, I'd be pissed off. People with AIDS can also decide to be malicious and try to spread AIDS to other people by any means they can.
(And not just by promiscuity; a few drops of AIDS-infested blood is all it takes to spread it)
Diabetes can't spread like that. Working off of that, I'm prioritizing anti-AIDS research IMO.
AIDS "terrorists", for lack of a more appropriate term, took out a fair number of people, including Issac Asimov. Arthur Ashe was taken out too, but his method of contracting AIDS has been contested.
Not by the headlining picture in the linked article. JMO. Interesting that the article talks about her eye color and then shows a black-and-white picture.
AIDS can also be contracted accidentally. Diabetes can't be, as far as I know.
If I ended up with uncurable AIDS due to a blood transfusion, I'd be pissed off. People with AIDS can also decide to be malicious and try to spread AIDS to other people by any means they can.
(And not just by promiscuity; a few drops of AIDS-infested blood is all it takes to spread it)
Diabetes can't spread like that. Working off of that, I'm prioritizing anti-AIDS research IMO.
AIDS "terrorists", for lack of a more appropriate term, took out a fair number of people, including Issac Asimov. Arthur Ashe was taken out too, but his method of contracting AIDS has been contested.
Not by the headlining picture in the linked article. JMO. Interesting that the article talks about her eye color and then shows a black-and-white picture.
Bud Williams
Well-Known Member
Arthur Ashe contracted AIDS through a blood transfusion, so I read....
Pres. Bush did more for AIDS and Marlaria in Africa than anyone else I believe, although the liberals will call him a racists because he is a Republican...
What about Audie Murphy?!? He was a hero...but that was a different hollywood era.
The stars of today would not sign up for the military if another world war started...
That era had tons of actors that served the military in one form or another....
Jimmy Stewart
Glen Ford
Ernest Borgnine
Lee Marvin
James Garner
Glen Miller
Lucille Ball?
Elvis Pressley lol
can you name others?
I prefer Liz Taylor, as weird as she became, to say Jane Fonda....Now she can be hated for her politics.....Liz, just plain weird at times...
Pres. Bush did more for AIDS and Marlaria in Africa than anyone else I believe, although the liberals will call him a racists because he is a Republican...
What about Audie Murphy?!? He was a hero...but that was a different hollywood era.
The stars of today would not sign up for the military if another world war started...
That era had tons of actors that served the military in one form or another....
Jimmy Stewart
Glen Ford
Ernest Borgnine
Lee Marvin
James Garner
Glen Miller
Lucille Ball?
Elvis Pressley lol
can you name others?
I prefer Liz Taylor, as weird as she became, to say Jane Fonda....Now she can be hated for her politics.....Liz, just plain weird at times...
Last edited by a moderator:
TomT
Well-Known Member
"Sexually she was every man's dream . . . She had the face of an angel and the morals of a truck driver."
Time Magazine
Time Magazine
Bill V
Well-Known Member
TJR, well said.
One other thing to note regarding Taylor and the fight against AIDS--She became active in that movement before AIDS was fully understood, before it was fully known how to prevent it, or to treat it, or for most people to not have irrational fear about it. I don't personally know whether Eddie's info re: AIDS comparison to diabetes is currently correct--but even if I stipulate that it is, I know that at the time she became involved, that wasn't the case. With the fear/paranoia/etc. going on at that time regarding the disease, what she did was extremely noteworthy.
Actually, I remember hearing recently that in the medical community, AIDS is no longer considered a terminal or even life-shortening disease, thanks to all the progress which has been made in treatment programs and methods. I don't have a reference readily available to confirm that, but I suspect that if you wanted to look it up, it wouldn't take too much to find it. I may have heard it on TV--but I couldn't tell you if it was a news program, Oprah, or what...
*EDIT* One article talking about the terminality of AIDS is linked below. Granted, it's not a definitive source, but it does have some good info...
:back2topic:
Maybe I'm just too young to remember her in her prime, but I have never understood the appeal or fascination people had with her. During my lifetime (or at least the portion which I was old enough at the time to remember), she's not done anything in the entertainment world of note, and during that same time frame she hasn't been anything too appealing to look at either. Don't know if I've ever seen one of her films. I guess I'm just not old enough. Still, mostly for her charitable works, I'm saddened to hear of her passing.
One other thing to note regarding Taylor and the fight against AIDS--She became active in that movement before AIDS was fully understood, before it was fully known how to prevent it, or to treat it, or for most people to not have irrational fear about it. I don't personally know whether Eddie's info re: AIDS comparison to diabetes is currently correct--but even if I stipulate that it is, I know that at the time she became involved, that wasn't the case. With the fear/paranoia/etc. going on at that time regarding the disease, what she did was extremely noteworthy.
Actually, I remember hearing recently that in the medical community, AIDS is no longer considered a terminal or even life-shortening disease, thanks to all the progress which has been made in treatment programs and methods. I don't have a reference readily available to confirm that, but I suspect that if you wanted to look it up, it wouldn't take too much to find it. I may have heard it on TV--but I couldn't tell you if it was a news program, Oprah, or what...
*EDIT* One article talking about the terminality of AIDS is linked below. Granted, it's not a definitive source, but it does have some good info...
:back2topic:
Maybe I'm just too young to remember her in her prime, but I have never understood the appeal or fascination people had with her. During my lifetime (or at least the portion which I was old enough at the time to remember), she's not done anything in the entertainment world of note, and during that same time frame she hasn't been anything too appealing to look at either. Don't know if I've ever seen one of her films. I guess I'm just not old enough. Still, mostly for her charitable works, I'm saddened to hear of her passing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Even if it you survive it, you're still a social pariah once you have it. The medical bills will make you wish you were dead, this reminds me of the South Park episode explaining that Magic Johnson's longevity with AIDS was due to his vast riches. "continuous medication and treatment" doesn't come cheap.
That article is just going to fuel a certain fire about AIDS. Sentence 3 in paragraph one, and Sentence 1 in paragraph two. The implications about only a certain "demographic" getting AIDS does not garner support from people outside of that "demographic".
I would think that if a cause wished to get truly objective support against AIDS, it wouldn't mention all the reasons that AIDS support should not be given at the beginning of the discussion. :banghead:
Again, I have to agree that the attraction to the actress is a mystery.
Jane Fonda's picture with the North Vietnamese anti-aircraft guns shooting at American Planes....:throwup: That should have been grounds for an automatic citizenship revocation IMO.
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
Last edited by a moderator:
Les
Well-Known Member
Eddie, no question regarding this, but as TJR pointed out, most is caused by obesity and can be controlled.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Eddie,
Okay then, who exactly slammed you? What is a "slam", anyway, so I know not to inadvertently do one? And, last but not least, what "politics" of Taylors were you referring to if not her stance on Aids?
I don't want to slam, just discuss.
Also, when you say:
When you say "do the research", it is as is you are trying to say that I or others somehow are ill-informed or disagree with you that diabetes is in fact a very big issue in this country and around the world, today. I didn't say that it wasn't. It is putting folks on the fast track to exactly what you said. But, like Aids, it too is preventable. Unlike Aids, through diet and exercise it is controlled and even reversable for many people in its most prevalent form.
But, preventable, not preventable; being funded as much as Aids, or not...it really doesn't matter, as that were not my reasons for posting.
Again, my point for replying was to show the error in bemoaning the notion that BECAUSE Aids is so well funded it somehow takes away focus and money from funding diabetes research. It is like saying: "If we didn't go to the moon again, we'd have money to fix roads!" That sounds good, but it simply isn't that easy. One is not strictly related to the other, and if BOTH are deemed important both will occurr.
Peace!
TJR
Okay then, who exactly slammed you? What is a "slam", anyway, so I know not to inadvertently do one? And, last but not least, what "politics" of Taylors were you referring to if not her stance on Aids?
I don't want to slam, just discuss.
Also, when you say:
When you say "do the research", it is as is you are trying to say that I or others somehow are ill-informed or disagree with you that diabetes is in fact a very big issue in this country and around the world, today. I didn't say that it wasn't. It is putting folks on the fast track to exactly what you said. But, like Aids, it too is preventable. Unlike Aids, through diet and exercise it is controlled and even reversable for many people in its most prevalent form.
But, preventable, not preventable; being funded as much as Aids, or not...it really doesn't matter, as that were not my reasons for posting.
Again, my point for replying was to show the error in bemoaning the notion that BECAUSE Aids is so well funded it somehow takes away focus and money from funding diabetes research. It is like saying: "If we didn't go to the moon again, we'd have money to fix roads!" That sounds good, but it simply isn't that easy. One is not strictly related to the other, and if BOTH are deemed important both will occurr.
Peace!
TJR
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve McKellop
Well-Known Member
Knut the Polar Bear Dies
Elizabeth Taylor passes away
They're going to stuff the polar Bear.
Just saying!
On another note, "Westboro Baptist Church ('God Hates ****') to protest at Elizabeth Taylor funeral". What a waste of good air these a-holes are!!
Elizabeth Taylor passes away
They're going to stuff the polar Bear.
Just saying!
On another note, "Westboro Baptist Church ('God Hates ****') to protest at Elizabeth Taylor funeral". What a waste of good air these a-holes are!!
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Is there some sort of implication here? BodyWorks 3.0 maybe?
(Except even Howard Walowitz wouldn't claim to find that attractive...)
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
.
Last edited by a moderator:
