UConn James

I would argue that, absent a cohesive population with common roots/struggle or the general apathy enforced by 16-hour workdays like we now have, there's nothing like two strongarms holding an AK to keep your citizens straight. Such is why KJ-I is still in power, why Pinochet lives it up in sunshine, I could go on.... People should appreciate the BoR and that our soldiers and police work, at the heart of things, to enforce OUR unalienable rights (like any other profession, tho, there are some bad apples), rather than whatever rights that a contemporary leader might grant us. Early on in Tiannamen, the protestors fought back hard when officers first arrived on the scene, and if you read Simpson's(?) account of it, you're in shock as he describes one officer getting pulled out of the police van and literally getting his brains smashed out, others being burned alive.... (Which begs the question, at what point is shooting at/killing a 'law enforcement officer' a matter of self-defense, even in our country?) And then the Chinese army came in and put up black sheets around the square.

Maybe I was wrong about Jimmah. Anyone who hates Janis Joplin and Doug Flutie can't be all bad.

Moorman and Lindell? That's about it....

I hate to be out of place here, but the song from the hatch that Desmond blared, "Play Your Own Kind of Music"... Was that Petula Clark? Sounded like Petula Clark. I've since heard that in a commerical, sung by a man. On edit: Mama Cass, released in October 1969.

Southern Africa has given them a run for the money, tho, is what demanded the qualifier. Ebola, HIV/AIDS, monkeypox, etc. But at least those govts recently haven't actively refuted that they have a problem despite all evidence to the contrary and have been asking for help. Or is this flat wrong?

Yep. Singer is probably the best brand. (G.Host and I aren't ladies, either ) But if you want to be safe, go with the gift certificate and let her decide, as apparently she'd know more about what she's looking for than you. When she opens it, you can explain that you heard about Singer but wanted to leave it up to her on such a buy. $200-300 is an expensive "But I really wanted one that'll...." buy.

Well, take a look at what they do to the mainland's rivers --- their fuggin' drinking water --- combined with the fact that SE Asia is fast becoming the world's bacteria/disease trap. And then shudder as you realize that it's just a matter of time before they're the world's next superpower.

When I was at UConn/Yukon, it would take an Act of Congress to get that place to close. The only time it did was during a true blizzard.

My earlier post here was in the vein of the broader issue at hand. Here's another example of the so-called "War on Christmas" that doesn't exist. Calling a Christmas tree a holiday tree is weird, I admit, but it's simply a changing lexicon --- and if enough people use it, that becomes the standard. Similar to how the adjectival "everyday" is now used by many people in the place of "every day." In our house, my dad always called it a "Hanakah bush." (No, we're not Jewish). The White House Christmas card is now getting flack for its lack of religiousity. Link. "Their cards in recent years have included best wishes for a holiday season, rather than Christmas wishes, because they are sent to people of all faiths," said Susan Whitson, Laura Bush's press secretary. Imagine that! Sending one card to cover everything rather than sending six cards over the course of a few weeks. Saving money from the federal budget (it's a frivolty and a drop in the ocean, but there still are people who believe in principles)! Those frugal bastards! LAURA BUSH BAD!

Growth in some other sector will eventually replace the housing bubble for things that drive the economy by being over-valued. Crediting or blaming a president for something that happens in the economy on his(or her!) watch is practically a non sequitur. They can fine-sand it using various tools like interest rates, but the economy is rough-hewn by the collective decisions of 290M Americans. In "1984" it was a razor blade bubble. Who knows? Pet Rocks may now make a comeback.

You'll have to ask someone else --- a true conservative neo-Dem (only b/c they generally seem to be the party who's advocating social positions where people can make their own choices) here. But from everything I've read of it, I'd be keen on resurrecting the Bull Moose party. Aside from the political issues, you get to use "I feel as strong as a bull moose!" as your slogan.

Well, I'll go about it the other way. Clinton being a World Cop proponent, selling us down the river with NAFTA, a general disdain for law enforcement, allowing the circumstances to happen such that he got bogged down by political crap.... I could go on ad naseum, but I've got more important/interesting things to do --- such as follow my dog with a little shovel, and listen to fingers run down a chalkboard. That post was directed at others in the thread with yours as reference.

Unless we use it to trade it down to stockpile picks, this isn't a good thing. The Top Five usually make more coin than they'll ever be worth (see: MW), when just outside the Top Ten, the contract numbers go down markedly, and you've got just as good a chance of getting a solid player. Maybe moreso, b/c you aren't as influenced by all the hype (again, see: MW).

Why read the whole document when the first sentence says everything of what you want it to say? Not that Bill Clinton = Democratic party, anyway. People here are always quick to point out, 'Well, Bill Clinton did X, so therefore all Democrats support X.' Look up what the friggin' DLC was. Clinton was an amalgum of the worst parts of both of the parties, combined with some sh-- luck.

How it translated was that it further exposed where the cracks are. The major one occurred directly in front of the "80 - MOULDS" locker. The defining moment of this offseason is where MM and TD can the people who worry about everyone else rather than focusing their own play.

Should've made it "Attention Defecit Dis... Oooo! Shiny!" IIRC, MW had his best performance in the second half of last year after Bledsoe called him out. He needs people around him that order him, "F--- your pinkie finger! You're f---ing playing! Don't whine, DO YOUR F---ING JOB!!!"

In this case, if their methodology/equipment is unusable, maybe they're going old-school like Mendel? I can see the logic behind it, b/c how else could a polar bear survive such hot temps, and then there's the Monster.... But I don't know if I'm down with it being a big human genetic experiment.

When newspapers stopped hiring copy editors because it cuts into their profits?

True, in that for expansion teams (especially Cleveland, but especially the Texans), the thing that generally takes the longest time to do is to build the OL. The expansion drafts and the college drafts are where the GMs first collect skill players. But it takes a while to acquire 5 solid starters. I think that adequately describes our position, and starting this offseason there needs to be major, serious (read: not signing stopgaps like BA) upgrade there. The cornerstone may be Peters at RT. CV at RG after recovering from nagging injuries, Preston at C, see if McNally can salvage something from MW with an entire offseason at LG. And Gandy or a draftee at LT. Plus, signing adequate backups. That's a lot to do on a team that also has quite a few other holes.

Hmm. I thought his defining moment was walking into that restaurant, using the can and then walking out.

At this point in his career, how much is it about the money? You think Brett Favre is staying on b/c of money? It's about wanting to win, and to be known 50 years from now. I think Moulds can realize that isn't going to happen with the Bills in his timeframe.

Could well be Moulds' people. Not exactly a state secret that he has been unsatisfied here for several years. This just puts the thought into everyone's mind (anyone who wasn't already aware that he is likely out of here) so they become used to the idea for a while before it comes time. By then, it will be more a matter of course rather than a tough decision b/w keeping him or having to eat all that cap $.

Thought that all spending bills and items must originate in the House. The Senate gets their suggestions and agreements in, and then there's the final compromise bill. So the House decides how many cookies to take out of the jar, and while the Senate can say 'We need more cookies over here' it's up to the House to decide if they want to take out any more cookies. Sorry, I know you all hate analogies over here that aren't apples-to-apples, just I haven't had lunch yet. And it's Friday. And I've got that last box of Thin Mints up in my cupboard.... Been a long time since a pol voted against something just b/c it was bad policy or spending. Now it goes, "Ooo. The Log-Cabin Republicans are voting for it; I'll vote against it." Blocs are great, don't you know?

To nail it down even further, it's the House controls the money, primarily.

I just find it unconscionable that people who serve and need benefits to cover things that happened to them while they were fighting for our country then need to fight a system that, well, used them. I don't care whether the government in place uses an elephant or a donkey. Your point that that's just the way it is.... In the last election, the only one I heard say anything about properly funding the VA, etc. was Kerry. Maybe Pres. Bush did, and I do remember reading some good interviews in 'American Legion' from congress members making promises and then nothing happened. "WS Repubs" probably was received with much more rancor than was intended. It's just sad that they'll spend so much time and money trying to fix other things that are fundamentally a lot harder to fix than the VA and don't have near the positive effects. Social Security for one thing; Bush touched the third rail before doing right by our veterans. If the White House and Congress were to push for more veteran's funding, I would dare any pol to oppose it b/c for sure they won't be re-elected. It's easy to say, 'Well they didn't do it either' as a reason why you're not going to do it. Where the people in charge disburse our tax dollars is the prime way we can measure how much they seriously care about something. You can't take these people by the words they speak. Only when the willpower to do something is high enough does anything get done simply b/c doing it is the right thing to do.