StrangeSox

Episode of the season (so far)

That they were reporters is inconsequential; they could have just as easily been civilians carrying some kinda-gun-shaped item.

Maybe #4 ahead of Danks, but I don't see putting him at #3.

Aside from the obvious "don't go to war unnecessarily", what can be changed in a situation like this? Working on the assumption that the spotter was willfully lying about the number of armed people (6 rifles + 2 RPG's), can the officer who cleared them to engage be held at fault? His command was given in good faith. There may not be time (or properly-secured technological means) to transmit live camera feeds to the officer to review the information before giving the green light--he has to rely on his troops in the field for information. If the spotter really did think those cameras were weapons, is there anything that could be changed? Did the soldiers really do anything morally wrong if they honestly believed that those people were carrying weapons? We could say "better technology and higher-resolution cameras" could make it easier to distinguish, but I think that only addresses this very specific incident and not the broader problem.

Yeah, products like this (iPad, iPhone, iPod, Kindle) are definitely meant to ramp up and encourage impulse spending on relatively cheap items.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 5, 2010 -> 05:40 PM) The Group "Wikileaks" has seemingly obtained and posted online video of what certainly appears to be the killing of 2 Reuters reporters and multiple Iraqi civilians from a U.S. helicopter in 2007. Is there more of a background on this specific situation available ie were there troops on the ground in the area, was there previously fire coming from that area etc. ?

Give me a PC/ Linux tablet with the same interface and I'm sold. I just hate being nickle-and-dimed to death with products.

I like the concept of the iPad, I just don't like its closed nature and the fact that you have to pay to do anything with it pretty much.

Great way to start the season!

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Apr 1, 2010 -> 02:07 PM) See I'm the same way.. And if anything.. I would KILL to have a Bowflex waaay more than P90X. I need some structured program to keep me on task. It works great with the program though (I can even use the frame for pull-ups) and gives me a wide range of resistances to choose.

Took the day off a few weeks ago, and just happened to luck out with the weather.

Radio show from Detroit Public Radio on the rise of right-wing extremism: Thursday, April 1st show: http://wdet.org/craigfahle/

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 1, 2010 -> 09:50 AM) "Oh no, my goo!" http://mypreciousgoo.ytmnd.com/

he isn't the first to try this. The other cases have been represented by Taitz and were working through the courts last I heard (getting admonished at every stage).

It'll be funny when he gets prison time.

Day 3, Shoulders and Arms (did it this morning). My quads are pretty sore/ tight from plyo yesterday. I've been taken it a little easier this time. The first time I tried P90X, I pushed myself way too hard too much, so I'm building in more endurance. Since I don't have weights, I've had to build a hybrid routine with the Bowflex I have. It's worked well for everyone but the bent-over bicep curls (forgot what that was called).

Thanks Jason, that was the general idea I had in my head. The government was incentivizing the loans via subsidies but wasn't covering actual losses. And they were always covering the defaults

Will they explain the child birth thing in a significant way or just a passing mention?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 1, 2010 -> 08:00 AM) While its true that they've had good lobbyists, I hope you realize that banks aren't going to make money on giving out student loans at like 2% interest delayed 4-8 years. They'd lose money, so frankly, it only made sense to subsidize it, since it was the government that wanted to be able to make sure the loans could be made that way. So the government is still going to lose out on this, right? They'll be taking the loses directly instead of paying out subsidies. I think that's what Mike was getting at.

I have a feeling that more democrats/ liberals will be energized come November simply to keep Republicans from taking seats.

Discuss.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 07:45 PM) And I was saying that once Europeans understand our system and not go by the spoon fed media blitz, they realize ours WAS much better. A Ferrari is better than my Pontiac but that doesn't mean I can actually afford the damn thing. Even if we accept the premise that "Some random Europeans like our system, therefore it is superior", it still misses the entire point of millions being unable to afford our system.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 11:17 PM) He's already told Congress that he has his lawyers taking care of the issue. Funny how the lawsuits were ready to go today about blocking this. Hmmm. He did this because this was the message to Congress to get the cap and trade legislation off of the shelf, and to dupe America into saying he worked with the GOP and they mocked him. Of course they did, because his announcement today means absolutely nothing, and everyone knows it... except those who want it to mean (or look like) something. If he opens up off-shore drilling but there are legitimate legal challenges to implementing any of it, it means that the talking point dies.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 05:59 PM) But Mike's larger point is that the government doesn't have these reporting standards to adhere to - so they "save" when banks had to keep the loans on the books less the deductability of the subsidies. Meanwhile, the government takes the difference and calls that a "savings" when in reality it's revenue neutral to a real accounting of the funds. Were they given subsidies because they were losing money on the loans or because they weren't profiting enough? That makes all the difference between revenue-neutral or not.

Sure, because the UK Parliament is in on it! GW is the single biggest conspiracy ever known to man!