RuntheDamnBall

PFT sux, but good enough news if it's happened. According to this, Huff gets 4 years, $22-25 mill. I wonder if Whitner is looking for anything longer-term. My guess is it'll pretty much be the same kind of deal, maybe less upfront money. Four years, $20M, $10M bonus, perhaps.

I thought it was about gigantically tall Chinese men pointing laser beams at the equator.

??? explain, please.

Only problem is that ethanol costs a lot of energy to produce as well. Except sugar produces a lot more energy vs. what it costs to extract it. Except we have to protect those American Family Farms™ over at Archer-Daniels-Midland, so, 100% tariffs on sugar.

Jeez, I feel for you guys across the border here in Greenpoint. Hope they get your power going soon. That's unbelievable. My dad works for National Grid as a lineman and they sent him to Philly. He's been working 16 hour days there. I was sort of surprised to hear that Queens wasn't seeking more outside help as well.

Raise your hand if you're glad that didn't happen. Here's one.

It's not a nonstory to people who are working on documentaries. I happen to be, and IMO it's bull sh--. It's not a nonstory to viewers, either. Look, I'm saying the President doesn't live in a lily-white world where no one swears or hears bad words, words that might corrupt a child to the point where they become President of the United States or meet some other awful fate. Nor did these soldiers, and I'm sure they've got something a lot more poignant to share than that they wished their opponents in war would stop "doing sh--." News is a laughing stock because what Paris Hilton had for dinner is news. News is a laughing stock because it is becoming MORE censored, MORE geared toward generating spectacle and excitement and less towards informing the people.

Exactly. Or is it, parental responsibility=bad, in this case?

1) You didn't answer my question, nice cop-out. 2) I've told you how I feel and I don't feel capable (ever) of deciding someone else's fate. I think that the taking of life is different by a longshot from these crimes. And yes, its duties have everything to do with protecting all citizens (criminal, suspected criminal or not) equally under the law. Read the goddamned Constitution.

You'll probably beat me eventually, but I went to camp every year from age 2 (!) in 1981 until 1999 when I was in college. So that's all 19 years it was there. I may try and stop at SJF for the first time on a jaunt through the state in a few weeks.

Story

Well I'm sure we're all glad Judge Holcomb's Arm is on the case. What if it was your brother being put to death for a crime he didn't commit, even if he'd committed a (less) serious crime? You'd have no problem with this, whatsoever due to some warped idea of the greater good? I'm sorry. As long as there is injustice, the work for justice is not done. You seem to indicate that there's an acceptable level of injustice. I don't. Guilty criminals who've authored serious crimes can go to jail for life and are not being unjustly punished, and it's not as though it's not "enough" punishment. In the meantime, the justice system can work out the truth. I find your supreme confidence in an instrumental rationality that solves all issues wrt the death penalty troubling. In the meantime, at some point, I keep hoping we're to rise above the criminal and renounce the violence they've decided to embrace - that we'll refuse to stoop to that level.

Looks like it could be a good psychological thriller -- intense to say the least. It's from the director of "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and the last Harry Potter movie, though it looks nothing like those at all. Children of Men

Where are they going to learn that? This government (and past ones) view learning as gaining the ability to answer tests correctly. They don't foster critical thinking. This government (and past ones) have let the media become a generally monolithic enterprise engineered for the creation of spectacle through both de-regulation and the idea that a select few companies owning most of the pie is somehow better than a monopoly. How is what you posit here going to happen? I'm all for it. But it ain't just "the public's dumb." It's a whole net of systems working in concert to maintain the status quo, because it's making enough people (on both sides of the political aisle) very wealthy and powerful. That's a lot to work against -- but not too much, IMO, if people get fed up enough.

What's your !@#$ing point? They might hate us, but they have a lot harder time pulling anything off against us when they're not flush with cash from ever-rising oil prices. Not only that, but the fact that these regimes can make money by drilling holes in the ground means they DON'T have to fund an infrastructure, an educational system -- they don't have to put the money into their people to build an economy. It's a surefire formula for desperation for the common man. Desperation conducive to ultra-religious fervor, a hope for salvation that lies beyond a life not worth living. And don't for a second buy this as rationalization. The onus is on you to sell it to me that it MUST be the way it is now, that more wholesale violent action isn't going to breed more enemies. So far the batting average is pretty damned low.

I sincerely believe that if we have no reason to be in the M.E. and rich regimes that have all the power they need from high-priced oil gradually lose their power base and source of income, it will be a democratizing factor. I didn't say it would make everything rosy, but we would be able to focus on protecting ourselves absent the oil issue. As of right now, we may have helped sound the death-knell for M.E. democracy (or at least set it back a good ways) by forcing it on a public that can, presently, be whipped up into jihadist furor. Face it. Saddam was no saint, but he was a chess piece there that meant these nations had to deal with one another -- or at least they neutralized one another. Now they deal explicitly with us. We're the lightning rod. Yes, they may have been trying to conspire against us, but I think that's where the oil issue comes into play. We don't fund these guys, things get much harder for them. I'm not convinced it had to be this way. Are you?

My team scoring more than the other team.

If you can get a good beer out to the masses, you just might get elected! Nice strategy.

This is a term I hear so often and it drives me nuts. Obviously, our way of life has changed if we have to sacrifice life to maintain it. I argue there's another way. We can kick our dependency on foreign oil, and on oil, period, and shift into high gear on sustainable energy sources. Yes, it's a change in our way of life -- but we can't keep expecting to live off of oil and live sustainably. We can change our way of life without committing American lives and deaths to war, by not funding both sides of the war on terror through our oil consumption. Profits for renewable energy will come when we stop subsidizing oil at the expense of the former. The question is this: which is more valuable to us? Short-term profits, or American lives? Isn't the latter what we're supposedly fighting for anyway? How far has it gotten us in this battle?

And, *cough, cough* a consensus on suspect ability at QB. Perhaps some Royal help and an improving line improve our young QB's, and our team's prospects?

"I wrote this song a long time ago..." "Favre and Strahan announce retirements, open dance club together" "Kurt Warner starts death metal band: 'I didn't mean it about all that Jesus stuff. Hail Satan!'" "Parrish, Flutie denied ride on Cyclone. Lawsuits forthcoming."

Damn, those unis are so freaking rad. Holding out hope here.

huh huh huh, Beavis, you misspelled "Dummycrat."

That's good, because otherwise next thing you know, that Embryo wants to marry a frog, and there's nothing we can do about it under the law.

I thought it was 100% clear that it's a Freedom Baby.