finknottle

It's a terrible accident, and the continuing failure to cap the flow is extremely unfortunate. That said, I have no interest in following the story in any detail. But I do have a girlfriend from New Orleans. She is troubled by the fact that I read every other bit of the newspaper while studiously ignoring the human interest tales of tragedy and woe. She now thinks I am callous and heartless. The oil spill is causing real problems in my relationship.

Look up the number of people in the NFL who come from Samoa, Fiji, or Tonga, the so-called Pacific islanders. This site claims 28 players of Samoan descent alone on the 2008 NFL rosters: http://www.ipacific.com/forum/index.php?topic=60.0 By population those tiny countries have contributed an extraordinary number of players to the NFL over the past 30 years. By numbers, a Samoan is 40 times as likely to make it in the NFL than is an American. (Islanders are also disporportionately represented in professional rugby.) Most of the NFL players of island descent players grow up primarily playing rugby, and take up football in college here in the US.

We demonize the bond vigilantes regularly these days, which led me to wonder what one is exactly. As far as I can tell, it's the boogie man. The man who isn't there. You know, that guy who wouldn't buy your crappy bond at 2%, and wandered off to invest his money elsewhere. The bond vigilante is the guy who doesn't exist, the guy who you think is obligated to lend you money on your terms. I've seen the bond vigilante, and he is you. And I. And every other person who didn't buy Greek bonds this spring. We demonize the vigilantes as if they are actively driving countries to ruin. Seriously, is there a more tangible meaning that I am overlooking? Or is this just a mental creation, a usefull way to explain economics, analogous to the helpfull but misleading way we assign intention and purpose to evolution in Biology? 20 minutes searching on the internet came up with no real definitions.

Agreed - there may or may not be an angle of attack depending on what it actually says. But that's all the more reason for him to have been curious enough to personally read it.

As someone qualified to the AG, he should know that the SC unanimously upheld a states ability to enact and enforce laws consistent with federal immigration law. He ought to be at least a little curious to see if this law, which has garnered so much national attention and WH directives for him to challenge it, falls under that ruling or not.

Not even suburb. I'd call it light industrial, which is often cheaper. By coincidence I was looking for office space on Edsall Road - no way that is the going rate, not even with stimulus play money. According to the story the offices are in the same building as the school, which you can see a picture of here: http://www.washingtonislamicacademy.org/contact.html You be the judge.

If I actually believed the anti-Bush rhetoric, I'd say that was an excellent comparison: both stubbornly sticking to their conservative strategies long after it was time to try something else.

Eh - too obvious. Maybe Bush (the younger) and Shula (the younger) would be a better fit.

Obama = Gregg Williams. Both came in selling radical change, with a promise to shake up the organization. Both sold the idea that they were smarter than everyone else. Both had supreme confidence in themselves and their unique approaches to the job. (Don't want to go further in than this, lest it turn partisan.)

On the contrary. DE won the big one during his foreign land days, not as president. As president he got us to a couple of big games that didn't end well (see beginnings of Vietnam, ME, and Iranian interventions). Marv Levy won two Grey Cups during his foreign land days. He also came back to lead us to some big games that didn't end well.

One of the interesting angles about Cameron becoming PM is the question of how Obama will interact with another political boy wonder, one who is younger than he is. (Not that his relationship with the older established world leaders has been impressive.)

I've been following the election closely for the past month - lot's of fun. Was a bit suprised nobody here picked up on anything, there were lot's of intriguing similarities to our political scene. And differences, of course. Every once in awhile you read something that leaves you scratching your head and reminding you that the UK is in fact a foreign country: Labour are now cranking up their attacks on Cook's views, accusing him of homophobia. They've publicised a story from the Sun in July 2008, in which Cook attacked an NHS decision to consult the gay rights group Stonewall on designing a new doctors' uniform. But the thing that completely amazed me as an outsider was the lengths to which all of the candidates were pandering. Their speeches, debates and interviews seemed a nonstop stream of promises and giveaways: free bus passes, more welfare, a tax deduction for married and same-sex couples... I didn't hear any kind of bold vision for the country, just lists of things done/to do. Perhaps US politicians sound the same and we are just used to filtering the pandering, but I honestly thought the UK candidates came off as far less visionary and much more chicken-in-every-pot.

What do you mean "asked"? The bailout that was finally agreed to, the one that caused so much angst in Germany, calls for roughly half the money to come from the EU, and half from the IMF. And who is the largest contributer to the IMF?

Of course. It's not as if the added burden will cost you or I anything - it can come out of community money!

Surprise surprise, an NBA team supports the principal that people should be protected from enforcement of the law.

"Turd in the punchbowl! I repeat, we have a Turd in the Punchbowl!"

I like to use...periods...think...it makes me...sound wise...like Shatner...don't go in...for fancy...WSJ punctuation...

Just curious... Why do you say this? There are several countries, ranging from Switzerland to China, which do not allow a free flow of foreign labor and yet seem to do quite well with the free flow of products. Maybe it depends on what you mean by 'free flow.'

Why is somebody still a full-time student at 26? Did they fail 8th grade, like, a million times? (I think that's a line from "My Name is Earl" when Randy went back to HS so that he could score a touchdown.)

I can't believe you are still engaged in this thread.

All of it, if I'm not mistaken.

Wind farms kill migrating birds.

I'm sure most of you are aware of the Gordon Brown "bigoted woman" incident. Here's a link to a video news piece: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2...n-six-acts.html Here is the uncut video of the encounter, as well as an interview with her immediately after she was told what he said. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVPknIAhibo It looks to me like she was just an ordinary frustrated Labour supporter, worried about the debt.

So at the low end of the scale, tax-payers and illegal immigrants both consume more of the states resources than they contribute, but illegals less so because of tax credits. Fine. But speaking as one who is paying in more than he gets back, if my money must go into somebody elses pockets I'd rather it be one poor American than two poor illegal aliens. Don't I get any see in how I am to be robbed?