*happy dance*

[hawkwing_lb]

No to Lisbon!

There's one for democracy, citizen participation, enfranchisement, and the democratic process, all things for which the Lisbon Treaty did not exactly stand in support.

In other news, sick cat is home. And needy. And at last, finally, washed clean of the shit he got over him at the vet's (either vomit or shit, I couldn't tell which, but god did it stink). It's his own: when I went to collect him, it was all over the newspapers on the floor of the little metal kennel thing. Poor boy.

So Unhelpful!Vet remained inadequate with the explanations, but apparently the boy's teeth are mostly okay, but he has mouth ulcers. Vet still says Virus! and muttered something about immune problems. I am there with the parent, so I restrain myself from getting in his face and demanding he tell me precisely what he means.

So yeah, the boy's on antibiotics for a week and steroids for three, and apparently we should expect this mouth problem to recurr.

Comments

[ossuarian.livejournal.com]

Could you explain to your myopic American audience the objections to the Treaty of Lisbon? I've read about it, but I don't understand it.

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

My primary objection to the Lisbon Treaty is that word-for-word, it's upwards of 90% the same as the EU draft constitution, which was rejected in referendum by France and the Netherlands (and thus didn't reach the rest of us) in 2005. See the points made by UK MP Gisela Stuart here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7139265.stm#Gisela). I agree with her.

But, also, it's undemocratic. It consolidates an EU central executive which will operate with very little oversight.In a post-Lisbon Treaty EU, citizens of member states, as individuals, and individual member states, particularly smaller ones, will have even less influence on policy and direction of the EU as a whole than they do at present. In practical terms, I suspect this means the disenfranchisement of entire local populations.

While I support the idea of the EU as an economic community, and consider the open borders a positive good, I could not in good conscience vote for a document that potentially opens the way for a central EU executive to direct social and foreign, as well as economic, policy for individual member states.

The idea of a pan-European body concerned with prosperity and justice both legal and social is a wonderful one. But that's not what the Lisbon Treaty is about: the Lisbon Treaty is about centralisation, which will consolidate power in the hands of people and interests who already have more than an equitable share.

Democracy works best at a direct, local level. Parliamentary democracy is at best a compromise that allows sufficient economic power to provide services whilst maintaining some degree of democratic oversight.

The present EU is unrepresentative, and only notionally democratic. The solution is not centralisation in the service of 'efficiency'. The solution is to accept some necessary inefficiency as the price of retaining the democratic element. And of retaining national autonomy, which, while I'm no nationalist, I do consider important both for the democratic process and in terms of setting (national) policy.

I believe in democracy and social justice, you see. And the smaller the population, I believe, the fairer the working of a full franchise democracy. Although there's always some unfairness.

But without a veto, in order to change the course of the EU, you'd need to convince several countries to go along with you.

And maybe that's democracy, but I think that that's democracy stretched to a point where the vote of an individual is all but meaningless.

And thus, not really very democratic anymore.

I'm not affiliated with any party - all the major parties let us down, anyway - and I really hate that being opposed to the Lisbon Treaty aligns me in the same camp as Sinn Féin.

But, my democracy. I will do all I can to make sure my ability to exercise my franchise remains meaningful.

(The BBC has a broad outline of the treaty's main points here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6901353.stm), if you're interested in more.)

[etumukutenyak.livejournal.com]

So his teeth are "mostly ok"? That still means there's a possibility that one or more teeth were not ok, and that the gym disease/oral ulcers are related to the dental condition (and not a virus).

Now, if this is truly Feline Herpes Virus (FHV), or Feline Calicivirus (FCV), then an immune-suppressed cat can get very sick with either of these, but they are a common cause infection in cats. In healthy adult cats, the disease is generally mild and self-limiting, although there's no cure for them. Treatment is supportive, and the cat heals over time.

If the vet expects this problem to recur, it sounds more like he's seeing Eosinophilic Granuloma (aka Rodent Ulcer, etc.). This is a condition in which the eosinophils (a type of white blood cell) are overactive and cause a few different things in cats, varying with the individual.

If this was purely a dental issue, then dealing with the plaque and tartar, as well as the bacterial infections will help take care of that issue.

Bottom line: I'm not sure what truly is your cat's diagnosis, but you're on the right road. Some tender loving care for him tonight and tomorrow will set him back on his feet. ;-)

[etumukutenyak.livejournal.com]

Gah. For "gym disease", please insert "gum disease". Your gym is still healthy.

:-P

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

Heh. :) No, it's not. Never has been. :P

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

Oh, gods. You do not know how much I appreciate getting straight possibilities rather than nothing.

Thank you.

[etumukutenyak.livejournal.com]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a diagnosis: there's something wrong with your vet. Perhaps he's got a viral infection of the brain, but it could be a bacterial infection of the spine..or perhaps it's just age-related competence-suppression.

I'd be inclined to throw antibiotics and steroids at him until he shapes up. Those little boxes can hurt if you get them aimed at sensitive spots.

;-)

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

LOL.

Thanks. :)

[jimsmyth.livejournal.com]

Your vet is defective and must be replaced.

Your cat is repairable, and should provide many additional years of good service.





(Also, my dog want to know why I'm wasting time typing about cats, when they won't even play with her. I think that's outside the scope of this technical bulletin, though.)

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

Heh.

(The cat says, Dog? What dog? Don't tell me there's a dog, I'm sleeping.)