Johnny Coli

Except it hasn't. In fact, the past eight years have been about as anti-science as any have seen, with respect to the (Bush) Administration's relationship and attitude towards science. People have been yammerring about some intrusion of their rights and a tax blood-bath, yet no where has that been seen. Not even in very science-friendly, non-skeptical of global warming states. In fact, Massachusetts' Green Industry is actually thriving.

Wow. No, it hasn't been cooling.

I did answer. I said "no." Forty is the new twenty.

Wrong. There is a large data set of actual science--a data set that is being added to constantly--suggesting humans are causing global warming. That's not superstition (like religion). That is very real data. You may not like it, or agree with the interpretation. And the handfull of skeptics (who never actually show any data supporting their view, btw) may not agree with it. But the data is out there, published in peer-reviewed scientific journals by scientists who aren't running to Drudge for notoriety, with a very large majority of scientists agreeing with their assessment. If anything, the cult/religion analogy is more apt for the skeptics who seem to bluster and seek out the spotlight, yet never show any data supporting their views.

No. I do not for one second think it is a global scam by thousands of research scientists to make Al Gore rich and raise taxes. That's insanity, really.

PubMed is a database of scientific research papers. ScienceDaily is a compiler site for science news. ScienceBlogs is a set of blogs from respected academics. I probably looked at many more of the links in Erynthered's list than he did, and even looking at the first ten...the first four are youtube videos (and without looking at the videos I believe some are links to the same one), the fifth link speaks for itself really if you click on it, the sixth is a rambling opinion piece, 7 and 8 are by Lindzen who actually is a scientist but is known more for claiming global warming (and the link between tobacco and cancer, hahaha) is a hoax, the 9th is a Holcomb's Arm-like stat dance that doesn't really do much to dispell anything, and the 10th link crashed my browser. Seriously, if you actually go to the literature on this topic the number of scientific papers crossing a vast number of disciplines will give you a better idea of how on the fringe these people are.

Really? A link-bomb of anti-global warming videos and opinion pieces (some of which are duplicates of the same thing)? That is how you and others are educating yourselves on global warming?

No. The earth has not cooled the last few years. Seriously people, stop just looking to Drudge for your science news and actually do a PubMed literature search at NCBI, go to ScienceDaily or ScienceBlogs. Educate yourselves.

Agreed that that is how it should be approached but I don't believe they (Jauron et al) will be bringing in a QB to compete with Edwards. I believe they have handed the job to Edwards, for better or worse, and are looking for a short-money backup to go in when he gets injured. I do not for one second believe they will be opening up any competition in camp, and won't be advertising the job as one that is open for competition. Prepared to be underwhelmed by whatever journeyman clipboard holder they bring in.

Just use the link in the OP...she links to all five versions, yet picks the passed house version, for some reason. I didn't use the page numbers because it's easier to just look through the html text. I read the latest version (5 of 5). What is notable is that she didn't provide any full quotes. If she had I believe the "rage" of the opinion piece would have fallen flat. This is clearly an info tech coordination position. At least that is how I read it. EDIT: It not actually being in there as she described is probably what led to Specter's confusion during the Fox interview that was alluded to in a previous post. He didn't know it was in there because its not.

The person who wrote the Bloomberg opinion piece in the OP was using the first House bill, and I also think she was reading it wrong. I just read through the section of the version that the Senate actually just procedurally voted on, and I don't think it is saying what she is reading into it. Specifically, if you read through Section 3001 OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL COORDINATOR FOR HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (using the latest Senate version), the job of the National Coordinator looks to be a position that overlooks the standardization and implementation of the technology infrastructure of the electronic healthcare data, not the actual care. It's an info-tech coordinator position, not someone looking over the shoulder of the health care provider in the examination room, and not someone dictating actual care. At least that was what I got out of reading it. Makes sense, because if you're going to try and implement a usefull national system of electronic health information you don't want multiple platforms that can't cross-talk or share information. You want to incorporate standards based on input from all the relevant parties. That requires a coordinator. We don't want to put into place a clusterfug like they had to deal with in trying to synchronize all the law enforcement databases after 2001. Put down the pitchforks, people. There is no reason for outrage here.

Haven't looked into it much (or the actual suit that was filed) and agree he has every right to defend his land. If I was to hazard a guess, though, he's probably not being sued for the act of defending his land, but probably for detaining them under threat of violence. Like I said, haven't looked into it and am only speculating based on the news clips. The suit is for civil rights violations, though, which I'm sure prolonged detention under threat of physical harm would fall under. I'm guessing they will say he has the right to try and run them off his property and/or call the actual border patrol, but that his actions crossed over some legal threshold for property defense. From the scant articles I can find reporting on it, it looks like a US District Court judge has ruled that the evidence is compelling enough to go forward. Also, it looks like this same individual has lost two other cases, one in which he was found guilty by a jury for falsely imprisoning another family.

Some of you people are naming songs by bands that had multiple hits. In any event, when I think of a one hit wonder that I could literally listen to all day and not get bored with, it is the 60's garage punk classic 96 tears by ? and the Mysterians. Great bass line bouncing under that signature trashy organ sound, with ? yelling out the lyrics of love lost and revenge. A fabulous song covered by just about everybody, yet never approaching the intensity and emotion packed into the grooves of the original 45". What a great sounding, and feeling, record. Still sounds fresh 35 years after its release.

Not sure if the joint across the street, Frizzy's, was there when you lived there full-time, but we also had a freaking great time knocking back the swill in that place.

Agreed. They're leaking specific names off a confidential, supposedly sealed list. I have to agree with Schilling (gag) in that they need to release the whole thing. In 2003 MLB had no real policy anyway, so releasing all 100+ names at once would lessen the backlash for all the players involved, and hopefully we'd get past this crap. Wonder how many Red Sux players are on that list? This means you, Ortiz, you piece of garbage.

Had some decent wings at Gabriel's Gate last time I was in town.

Blood in the water according to the Party of Failure and the lot that (wrongly) believes they have a grasp on reality. The majority of Americans don't seem to be buying into your faux-scandals. They also think he's on the right track with the economy. So, while you people shout from the rooftops that Obama is packing his administration with tax cheats, the rest of us who don't want America to fail have confidence in the guy who won in a landslide victory on a platform that indicted your heros' economic policies.

And the LA Times article says he is disputing them, but paid them anyway to keep it from being an issue. All of which has absolutely nothing to do with Hilda Solis. She doesn't have anything to do with his business, and she didn't know about the lien. Furthermore, if Sayyad didn't know about them (according to USA Today), but paid them off when he found out, then where is the story here, and how does it in any way involve Hilda Solis? The answer is it doesn't and you and your party are grasping at straws to tank a pro-Labor, Labor Secretary nominee because you hate unions. No one gave a crap about a few grand lien (which just got paid, in any event) on an auto shop that either has been in dispute or wasn't known about for sixteen years prior to her nomination.

Actually I've placed the bar pretty high for the actual nominees, as opposed to yours and others' strategy of just making crap up where there isn't any. You post was loaded with outright fabrications.

You are crazy. The tax lien is on her husband's business, and it wasn't paid because he has been disputing whether or not it was properly assessed. So, to review why you are crazy, the lien is not on their home, the lien was not ignored, and lastly the lien has absolutely nothing to do with Solis.

I'm not surprised some of the ignoratti that frequent the PPP, such as the fool who made the OP, wouldn't have a grasp of multimedia art nor the definition of a derivative work.

"They" being someone who isn't the actual nominee this time. Is there a particular line of association you are willing to stop at? Perhaps any inadvertent activity by a nominee's high school biology partner? The babysitter of a child the nominee's child plays with? The only troubling thing about this latest "scandal" is how far into the realm of the absurd some of you are willing to travel to to disqualify a nominee.

Let's say your boss puts you up for a pretty important job in the company you work for. Now lets say that someone of the committee looking at the candidates for that job finds out that your wife has an unpaid parking ticket from 16 years ago, and now they question whether you're qualified for the job. That's about the scope of what we're talking here, and it is about as relevant to whether Solis is qualified for Labor Secretary as this new "scandal." The reason the GOP doesn't like Solis is because she's pro-labor. Imagine that. A Labor Secretary that's pro-labor. Solis will become the Labor Secretary. And the Employee Free Choice Act will eventually pass as legislation. You can only obstruct so long.

Young guy. Had two kids. Wow. That's a tough obit to read, man. What kind of cancer, if you don't mind my asking?

I will be optimistic this time next year when the new first time coach who is willing to work for peanuts (not the tainted ones) arrives.