birdog1960

could it be because of drudge?

this interesting article suggests sticking with low risk value stocks. big risks don't generally mean big rewards.

and this is where you simplistic analysis gets you into trouble. people in those places rightfully don't define their countries by the despots who've ruled them. they define them by the traditions, cultures and ordinary people of those places...and that is reasonable and rational. some bills fans do exactly the same.

well written article. there are few good guys in any of this. what amazes me is how many ordinary people defend the owners in all this. "nice guys finish last" and "the ends justify the means" seem the prevailing mantras of the last couple of generations. anyone questioning these sentiments is regarded as naive, stupid or both. i think that bodes poorly for our future.

i wasn't aiming for "proper". ... more like apt. now who's being literal or even a bit silly? ya think most egyptians don't love their country? libyans? disenfranchised kuwaitis? they sure don't seem to like their unelected leaders. and nfl fans can voice displeasure in places like this and comment sections in newspapers. one can be even more crass if they don't confiscate your signs and paper bags at the stadium gate. voting en masse with your wallet is probably most effective.

exactly...it's much about nostalgia (i sure hope most don't think it's mostly about the present or recent past or they truly are into self flagellation). some of us love the bills despite wilson...i don't find that irrational at all. if you don't like the current president , is it irrational to still love your country?

many of us would settle for a few winning seasons and a playoff appearance every 5 years or so. is a .500 long term record too much to ask for? btw, never liked escalades and i prefer bourbon and venison. now scarlett johannson....

i don't think anyone's questioning whether it's a business.... but shouldn't one goal of a sports business be to produce a consistent winner? and to that end, wouldn't it help to recruit the best talent available for coaches and players? do you think this 401k move helps in this regard? you just have to look at he last 50 years on a macro level and the last coach and gm "search" on a micro level to see the obvious answers to these questions.

you can lose your ability to practice if you're found negligent repeatedly. you can be charged with a felony for malpractice... and i think appropriately so. but here's a better analogy. lets say i don't want to read through medical equipment requests from vendors (stuff like lift chairs, canes, erectile pumps, ostomy supplies etc) and i task it to a clerk and he/she gets a kickback for approving everything or it's just easier to approve everything...and it gets caught. should i be liable? should i be threatened with losing the ability to see medicare pt's? i think the answer is "yes" (and i'm pretty sure it is, in fact, legally "yes"). it's my responsibility just as it's the exec's to make sure that his corporate culture disallows illegal practices and fraud. btw, i don't task this to clerks or anybody else.

"don't know but could have stopped it" is grounds for malpractice in medicine. ever heard of failure to diagnose. if a patient has a positive mammogram and somehow i miss seeing the report and fail to act, i'm potentially liable. why shouldn't the guys wearing armani suits and liberty of london ties be?

forest pharmaceuticals. no one will be surprised by my take on this. i'm wondering if i will be surprised by others opinions, however. thoughts?

i have been for golf weekends at myrtle beach during both biker weeks. not a good idea. you can hear the bikes for miles at all hours, town is crowded and people are generally rude and sometimes downright intimidating. i don't blame businesses for closing. i just don't go at all anymore. there are much nicer beaches without biker weeks close by.

so this is the new litmus test for being a "real" republican? divide and conquer has always been a good strategy.

certainly all people do not believe that all life is precious....many terrible villains immediately come to mind. i do however feel that reasonable, rational people do believe that all life precious. i therefore stand by that premise.

did you find thomas aquinas or pope john paul ii stupid. see, now i actually am pontificating.

let's throw another wrench in the works! if you believe abortion is immoral (and i actually do) do you believe that the death penalty is immoral? isn't all life precious and to be protected? wouldn't it be logically inconsistent and indefensible to argue otherwise?

you want proof? how about the republican senators who broke ranks last night on the senate vote on ryan's bill? that's the best internal polling you'll ever see.

it is not necessary to be against this bill if you are for big govt, in a logical sense. it is necessary to be against it if you are against big govt. just because something is true, that doesn't imply that the converse is also true.

if i'm pontificating, then are you mullah-ing?

hmmmm, is THAT why they drafted wang?

it's far from perfect...i wanted and still want single payer. i offer no excuses for the waivers. they're wrong.

please, don't attempt to inject logic into this

you may be...speak for yourself

and that is where SCOTUS comes in and philosophy ends in regards to the govt role. they have judged abortion to be legal and to not be murder. just because you don't agree with it doesn't change that fact. and arbitrary? what is more arbitrary than saying there is no need for govt support for health care for poor, sick people well past the point of question in regards to the existence of life? refusing care is often life and death to them. isn't refusing care killing them?

no, it's you that is clouding the issue. the issue of hypocrisy is only tangentially related to abortion in this case. it's about big gov't vs small and govt interference vs none. focusing on abortion just makes the argument more emotional and less rational. liberals believe in big govt generally or at least in gov't intervention especially for society's most needy. conservatives generally don't. the new health care bill is entirely consistent with liberal beliefs. this abortion bill is entirely inconsistent with conservatives beliefs regarding govt intervention. it's really not that difficult a concept. at least try to comprehend it.