Chilly

Supporting the War on Drugs and the bolded statement are two completely different things.

So, you support the War on Drugs but oppose big government? wut?

Because the War on Drugs is doing such a great job at preventing people from smoking and driving.

War on Drugs! War on Drugs! War on Drugs!

http://consumerist.com/tag/jpmorgan-chase/...rything-you-own

My guess is that they view him as pretty athletic, and want him to be a playmaker: on some plays, play run D, on some plays, blitz, on some plays, cover the deep threat, etc.

If the D-staff uses him as more of a roamer and athletic playmaker like they are saying they are going to this year, Donte Whitner.

<3

Waahhhhhh, Waahhhhhhh, Whine, Whine - Huffington comes to the realization that her boy is just another politician.

Depends on how u set it up silly. See: http://64.233.167.99/ You CAN hit a website based on its IP address sometimes.

- Scott Atran, Mishandling Suicide Terrorism

Some banks give fraud protection though, its up to the bank. Bank of America, for example, provides such protection.

ur made from eggos

Good read, thanks Lori. He definitely is good at side stepping stuff - spygate, non-shared revenue, probably why he was attractive for the job. I personally prefer the OT system of college - having a 7-OT game is extremely exciting, much more so than the NFL OT. An OT where you have to go back and forth is not only more fair, but also provides more drama. BTW, is there any word on what the official fan conduct policy says?

Ouch, that sucks; even via a test message, eh? I can download stuff to my ATT phone without any problems.

I think Southwest is likely to be your cheapest - they dont' show up on Orbitz or the other sites. Check southwest.com. Also, jetblue.com is worth checking out. Both fly out of Denver. I'm not sure if Southwest flies into Rochester, but they do fly into Buffalo - might be cheaper flying into Buffalo and driving to Rochester. Also, flying on tues-thurs is likely to give you a better rate then flying fri-mon I believe.

I think you just need a java runtime environment for the Opera Mini, and thus it works on most phones. They make a separate version - Opera mobile - for smart phones. Might want to give it a shot

Young also had 62 less passing attempts than our two-headed QB monster.

Happy BDay Bill!

No. I'm asking a guy who claims to be about a new brand of politics to be about a new brand of politics. He's putting lipstick on a pig, not creating a new brand of politics. You don't think his small-donor network would have raised the amount necessary for him to win? If you don't, then no, he hasn't done this in a "revolutionary way". You'll have to expand on this. I don't recall moveon.org having an influence on my thinking or position. Sorry, but there is no way that you'll get me to agree with this. If he actually felt he didn't need the money, the right thing to do would have been to take the public financing and accept donations from only small donors and no bundlers (which, as you acknowledge, is extensive - and would have been more than enough to beat McCain). If someone raises 500k+ for a candidate and is their largest donor, its going to impact policy, if not on a conscious level, at the very least an unconscious one. There have been a few political psychology studies done showing that this is indeed the case. In any event, thinking that someone who is donating a lot of money isn't going to get kickbacks while they are in office is foolish. The candidates accept this money knowing that there is an unspoken agreement that policy will be made for them. If Obama's ambition is to have two terms (and there are no indications that this isn't the case), he's going to need that extra fund raising, and that extra fund raising is only going to come through for him if he gives them what they want during the first term. There is a reason that all the larger corporate bundlers and lobbyists are the top donators to all the major candidates. It was going to happen anyway (if Obama used traditional fund-raising methods, Paul would have been viewed at as the extraordinary one). It was more of the internet coming of age than anything else. What would have impressed me is Obama running a campaign without resorting to traditional politics. He has the fund raising network to do it, be ethical, and win while doing so. So why doesn't he? Because he's not actually about "Change we can believe in". He's about "change that is politically advantageous to me". That's the mark of a continuing line of politics, not change.

Now you've got me really confused. Are you expecting him to issue a letter without his lawyer helping him when he still has civil liability?

Then he shouldn't lay out grandiose visions of American government where he has removed all undue influence from politics. Its not total bull sh-- by the way - its called a completely, 100%, publically financed campaign system, with bans on lobbiests giving jobs to former politicians, and lobbyists becoming politicians or working in their offices. Anything short of that is not good enough from the guy who claims he's going to instutue a new kind of politics. Do you understand who bundlers are? Do you understand what they do? Bundlers are corporate CEOs, bundlers are lobbyists, bundlers are hedge fund managers, bundlers epitomize everything thats wrong with American politics. They get around the disclosure laws by not ever touching the money, so that they don't have to report it. They are performing the same exact function as the "Special Interests" and lobbyists that he blasted Clinton for. The same lobbyist money he claims to not have accepted. Really? Planning on raising 100-150 million from bundlers cuts out "50-80% of the undue influence"? It does no such thing - it just narrows down who the power players are to a smaller number. No, he hasn't done just the opposite. He simply has shifted HOW he kowtows to big money organizations. Doing just the opposite would be only accepting donations that are given by individuals. Accepting absolutely no money from the DNC, no money from bundling, no money from PACs, no money from corporations, no money from anything other than individuals. He has NOT done this, and he is NOT planning on doing it. Great, so we'll just trust the guy. Given that he's a politician (by your own admission), do you really think this is likely to happen? Especially since its already reported that he's cozying right up to Clinton's bundlers? Really? Is this why Barack Obama has 14 lobbyist bundlers working for him, after claiming he doesn't accept lobbyist money? Is this why Barack Obama has 358 bundlers raising tons of money for him? Sure, he's done a fine job of turning the donation system on its ear.

It uses Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync. As usual, though, you should check with your company's IT staff to make sure the server supports everything necessary for you to use it.

I'd recommend getting a smart phone then. If you like the iPhone, sounds like that suits your needs much better.

Depends on how its setup. If your company does have an exchange server, you'd be able to connect to it using one of the 2nd generation iPhones (though I have no idea if it works well or not, haven't read anything so far). The LG Dare, from my understanding, doesn't have a real email client to access such a service. You *may* be able to access it using Outlook Web Access, if your company has that enabled, through the phone's web browser.