birdog1960

i counsel patients on lifestyle issues all the time. medicare even recently started paying me for it in the elderly (before this year, it was uncompensated)...it's called a wellness exam. most private insurers cover them as well. i do them once a year on all patient who agree to them. can't say the success rate is impressively high for changing lifestyles but even small successes will improve outcomes and statistics like those cited. the bigger issue that can be inferred from this study is that many of our expensive tests and procedures are not high value. we are paying way too much for noncompetitive results. the system is badly broken. i'll leave it at that or risk this getting moved to ppp.

funny video but would be funnier if i recognized the faces (know the names from looking at leader boards). have been playing over 40 years and used to watch the tour a fair amount. now really only watch the majors and mostly in passing. tiger made everyone else into also rans and it's hard to respark interest. i guess that's what this video's for but i'm not sure golf can ever be made really cool and trendy. it's just not. just look back at the clothes on johnny miller when he was winning big.

if you want to live long. check out the interactive map for data where you live.

yeah, i guess that might make the groom a little leery of the reception food.

"white trash wedding" by the dixie chicks

"marie laveaux"- cubanismo

none of which reflects the sentiment "hope and change are needed there". agree or not, military action is substantive and qaddaffi likely sees it as profound.

he said some rather controversial and i would say brave things about israel and palestine recently. reasonable people might argue as to whether they were profound.

agreed, but hardly a ringing endorsement for the office.

you found her impressive in those debates?

she is street smart, no doubt. but is that enough to compensate for her obvious deficits in her general fund of knowledge? you're right, it doesn't matter if her goal is to make money. it matters plenty if her aim is to be potus. i think and hope you're right about her goals although i actually would like to see her run and be forced to debate substantive and in depth, complicated issues. "aw shucks" just won't cut it in discussing the middle east.

i'll admit that liberals court impoverished (and therefore frequently undereducated voters) but not through deliberate educational repression. clinton was the last president that seriously tackled medicaid reform. it's generally cheaper to give hand outs than to actually change cultures and educational levels and i believe that's why more hasn't been done in this regard by both dems and repubs. it's the least expensive route to a reasonable level of civil obedience. conservatives court other less educated groups but by different means- social issues like abortion, gun rights and immigration. there's no monopoly on seeking dumb (m)asses votes.

are you proposing the existence of a direct correlation between intellectual achievement and conservatism?

i think on an intellectual level she's the near equivalent of baby bush. she just doesn't have the old money, preppy. ivy league, always land on your feet legacy he did. and that's likely why so many seem to find her appealing. i really think there needs to be an intellect level requirement to hold that office but many people obviously disagree. "idiocracy" is life imitating art.

this is actually a very good point.....and anyone can see that she's dumb as rocks without the need to look at her emails

would you call witnessing 51 years of decidedly, objectively measurable, unarguably poor performance an example of confirmation bias? perhaps you should try another tack here. .... maybe another ad hominem attack.

i agree that wilson is a better owner than these 2 scumbags but that's a pretty low standard isn't it? he's not the worst, just one of the worst. yeay!!! since he agreed to not move the team (as did all nfl owners) after the merger, he has actually just kept his word (and consequently the leagues anti -trust exemption) all these years. by comparison to other owners, i suppose you could call that admirable. on its face however, it's just what should have be expected.

as i believe Obama and many of us do. many differing visions share this commonality.

you're wrong initially and correct at the end. not really compatible sentiments..... those with the most meaningful and generally valued accomplishments win. i think an nfl owner will be more fondly and lastingly remembered for owning a team winning multiple superbowls than one whose primary accomplishment was self enrichment or, giving the benefit of the doubt, franchise viability.

and a real, very wealthy philanthropist would sign the gates-buffett giving pledge (50% of wealth)

no problem, i'll just go scour police reports for a few hours and be right back

fully realize that...and yet he wields enormous power, especially with the far right. his headlines and link choices (or omissions) certainly play to that audience.

as a percentage of net worth, i'll bet his philanthropy is on par with the average person who donates to his church, the united way and whatever other charities they may support. "to whom much is given, much is required". but good for him and for roswell.

to objective eyes he doesn't need smearing.... he's one colossal skid mark on the fabric of journalism