bills_fan

They certainly had knives, that was in the photos. And the Israelis initially boarded the ships with paintball guns. They did not expect to encounter such resistance. When the soldiers lives were put in danger, the Israelis responded in kind. I have no problem with the Israeli response and you should not either. Were the Israelis expected to just sit there and be beaten and stabbed to death?

I do not see the comparison. The people on the boats put themselves in harms way unnecessarily and for no reason other than to provoke an international incident. The supplies, if that is what was on the ships , could have been unloaded, inspected and delivered. Mocking people who have deliberatly put themselves in harms way to create an international incident is not apathy for the whole middle east, just the idiots on the boats. There were no innocents on those boats.

LMAOROFL!!!

No offense, Stl, but do you think the Big 10 would take Missouri and A&M over Oklahoma? Not sure that really makes sense.

Well said.

I did think the parody was funny. What did those people think would happen? Israel (and Egypt BTW) is inspecting all cargo. They were not going to just let the ships make a delivery that possibly contained weapons that would be used against Israel. Of course it was going to end poorly. That was the point...a set-up. As far as an American on board...so what? If he was dumb enough to put himself in that type of situation....well, one less idiot around.

Until you read about how Mexico defends its southern border. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/02/...hia-gorney-text We really need to do whatever is necessary to secure our border.

This article says its likely to happen. Man, that was the BEST 80s college football rivalry. I'd love to see it brought back. I had a T-shirt that said "God made Notre Dame #1, Miami made them #2."

I prefer to think of welfare guys as parasites or leeches, producing nothing, but consuming the lifeblood of the economy.

I didn't say silver platter, but I do want to make things easier for my children than I had it. I'm not sure what deductions are permitted under the estate tax, but $1 million can be reached fairly quickly, especially if the family home is not excluded. And my feelings on taxes are expressed in my signature, from Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address.

I believe that if I work hard, I should be able to give my children things rather than the government taking the fruits of my labor and giving it to others.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/commentary/show/187.html

Great parady video by Israel regarding the floatilla incident that happened last week. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_wl2491

You do realize the estate tax is revenue-neutral right?

Just poured myself a Laphroaig, 10 year cask strength. One of the finest single malts under $100 per bottle. Drank with just a small splash of Poland Spring to open it up (it is cask strength after all). Going to enjoy this one.

All they need to do is have one ump in the booth watching replays. If he sees something off, he buzzes down to the plate ump. Plate ump checks the last call, determines right or wrong, and we move on. Whole thing takes less than 2 minutes and the call is right. Not seeing the problem with this...

Thats what Lupica argues for. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball...o_jim_joyc.html And it has happened before...see the George Brett pine tar game.

Imagine that...sportsmanship in pro sports. How retro!

Interesting question. There have been 20 PGs in MLB history (21 after today's debacle). Have there been 20 players in baseball history better than Griffey? I don't think so, given he has not had any of the steroid rumors surrounding him.

I really don't care about replay for balls/strikes. But HRs and plays in the field, like the one in question tonite, yes, I want to see replay used. I want to see the call made right. IF you have to double check the monitor to get it right...absolutely, do it.

MLB should immediately allow instant replay. I feel bad for Galarraga...1st 28 out perfect game in history. Here is the call. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_...76&c_id=mlb And here is a link to the first out, an absolutely amazing catch by Austin Jackson, Willie Mays style. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_...76&c_id=mlb Give credit to the ump for being stand-up about it. But he should have been able to watch replay to get it right. “I just cost that kid a perfect game,” Joyce said. “I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay.” “It was the biggest call of my career,” said Joyce, who became a full-time major league umpire in 1989. “I don’t blame them a bit or anything that was said,” Joyce said. “I would’ve said it myself if I had been Galarraga. I would’ve been the first person in my face, and he never said a word to me.”

I think the reasons are far more nefarious. Lets think about this for a second....banks securitized the 1st mortgage and sold it off to pension funds, institutions etc. They act as mortgage servicers (we'll come back to this) on that 1st motgage (who do you pay each month). However, a large percentage of mortgages were done with 1sts and 2nds (90/10/10), not to mention home equity loans or lines of credit. In many (most?) cases, the banks hold the 2nds/home equity line/loan as an asset on their balance sheet, or in certain cases, off-balance sheet. The banks have that asset marked at $0.98 or $0.96 on the dollar. As soon as the 1st mortgage is foreclosed upon, the second becomes instantly worthless. The 2nd is always subordinated in that if there is not enough money to pay off the 1st lender, the second gets bupkus. If enough 2nds go belly-up, say goodbye to the bank. Take a look at how many banks the FDIC closes on a weekly basis and look at the asset haircut (loss) to the FDIC fund....its 40-50% in most cases. That 40-50% if off what the bank is reporting as "good" capital. Now, back to the servicers...a terrible conflict of interest when the banks also own a 2nd. Lets say the homeowner decides to get the free ride, as the article suggests and they have a 2nd/home equity line/loan. The banks have a vested interest in keeping the 1st as a performing loan, so that the 2nd stays a "good" asset. My theory: the banks are paying the 1st to perserve their balance sheet marks. The party ends when the cash flow runs out.

That was funny. I missed it the first times.

Really. I did not know that.

Not trillons on research, but a cap and trade system would cost trillons.