Joe Miner

(not necessarily directed at JA, just the conversation in general) Both sides of the Christian/religion stance in politics are despicable. On one side you have politicians pimping their supposed religious values and beliefs for the sheer purpose of selling themselves to the public, because they think that's what the public wants (and some of the public does want it). Religion is a commodity much like a campaign wardrobe. On the other hand, it seems a person with genuine religious beliefs can't keep them to themselves, because they are constantly being attacked for having them. Then when they defend or acknowledge their beliefs in any way, they are moved into the zealot or fanatic category, even though that wasn't a main campaign or selling topic for them. But hey, whatever it takes so that we (as a country) can keep from discussing which candidate actually has ideas that might be worthwhile. Let's continue the popularity contest that's obviously working out for us so well up to this point.

Did you read the article? It's not just 440,000. It's an additional 440,000 for a total close to 950,000. It's also not just Accords. Also, this article is exactly what I'm talking about. It mentions Honda's recall in the first couple of paragraphs and then spends the vast majority of the article talking about Toyota. Somehow an article on Honda's recalls turned into another article about Toyota. Do some Toyota's have some issues? Sure. Is the news a bit ridiculous in its coverage? Absolutely.

Does that take away GM's responsibility for those parts?

Is 950,000 vehicles still a small recall? (Doesn't sound small to me, but I'm really am not sure what constitutes a large recall) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35320665/ns/business-autos/ I'm not saying Toyota is fault free on this, but the coverage is incredibly ridiculous. I even heard a news story on TV the other day about one of GM's recalls. The news determined that the recall wasn't GM's fault since they were using parts/technology developed by Toyota. So apparently even when GM has a recall it's still Toyota's fault.

Took me a bit, but I made it through all 45 treasure filled pages of that one, and then topped it off with the 22 pages of the njsue homework thread that thread linked to. Instant classics back to back...I think I need a cigarette.

Where's the post about Ford's recall on the Hybrid Fusion's brakes that needs a new software update?

Agreed that it was better than the last couple. Also agreed that that wasn't hard to do. Gotta say I'm more tired of Claire's character than Hiro's. But Season 6 is gonna need a new bad guy.

I don't think that anyone has been mocking him as a person or disrespecting his service to this country. In fact, I haven't seen anyone really mention his politics yet. There have been a couple of stupid puns made related to gall bladder surgery. No one is excited the man died. No one is tearing him down as a person, family man, veteran, or public servant. At the request to give some implied tasteless stock answers to his death, 3 people answered. In fact, all 3 answered in the form of a question relating back to the request. As if asking if their replies were what the request was asking for. Lighten up, no one is out here with placards picketing his death.

He didn't have the gall for health care reform?

You need to take into consideration the location of the holder in relation to the toilet. If it's too far away, then overhand would be better as you wouldn't need to reach as far. If it's too close, underhand would be smarter, as that would give you more room to maneuver. You would also want to look at the height of the holder in relation to the average seat occupant. As the difference in angle when you tear the sheets could result in a nice even tear across the perforations versus a jagged messy tear. I would recommend several run troughs to get a good feel of how you and your bathroom fixtures work best together, and go with that. Since everyone's bathrooms have different proportions and so do most people, a single answer is likely impossible. Function and comfort over form every day.

Yes it is

As a parent of a 2 year old daughter with another on the way in March, this is basically it. I get irritated and sometimes furious at other parents that seem oblivious to the crying/screaming/tantrum of their child. The sound of kids' crying is annoying for a reason...it's supposed to make you do something to stop it. If crying sounded good, we wouldn't want to stop it. Unfortunately as every parent knows, sometimes it's just not working. Kid's sick/terrible 2's/or just being a little turd for a bit are sometimes problem's that can turn on instantly and don't have a good quick solution. But the important thing is that you are doing something to try and rectify the situation. Remove the kid, try to sooth the kid, try to discipline the kid, try to talk to the kid, pick it up, put it down, take it to the bathroom, something... Just put in the effort, and most people will understand, and many will sympathize/empathize. Ignoring the kid, or laughing and smiling, taking a picture as they are being loud and obnoxious in public is incredibly rude. Parents should also have common sense. Although I don't know why I expect parents to have it since it seems fewer and fewer people in society do. If you have a kid that's going through a phase where he/she can't/won't sit still or be quiet in a restaurant, then perhaps you shouldn't be at a restaurant, especially those that are more quiet. There are family restaurants that play music and have a lot of ambient noise for a reason. Try those instead of the intimate dining steak house. Or maybe, just maybe, put others' feeling ahead of yours and stay home. If you are pretty sure that at some point during dinner your kid's gonna throw a **** fit, then stay home. You've just likely ruined the dinner of every table within earshot of you by putting your own desires ahead of others. And if you are the type of parent that cares when your kid screams, and tries to fix it, you'll likely end up embarrassed, frustrated, and upset ruining your dinner as well. For the non-parents though, you can almost always tell what's going on and how much the parents are trying just from watching for a few minutes. If they're trying, give them a break, hardly any trip with a child, especially a small child, goes like you've planned it. If they're putting in the effort to rectify the situations, understand that it's a difficult job that rarely has an easy solution if it has one at all. Lastly, don't ever touch someone's kid without permission, unless you are rescuing it from an immediate danger. Something as simple making eye contact with the parent and getting a head nod is usually good enough. But a parent really doesn't want to turn around in the middle of a store and see a stranger playing with their kid. And they really don't want strangers coming up uninvited and messing with their kids. Making faces, waving, playing peek-a-boo are all acceptable things that can be done from a distance that will likely go over much better.

The above should partially show how stupid this plan is.

Just remember this story was told through the eyes of a man that is suing Harrison, and who also had discrepancies in his story to the police. No one knows what happened except for those that were there, and 1 is dead, and outside of this man, for reasons none of us know, no one else is talking. No one also knows what other evidence the police do or do not have. The prosecutor didn't feel comfortable bringing this case us because of the character of the witnesses. Is that the whole truth? We don't know.

I hope that thing is self cleaning...

Huh... I always thought women didn't shovel snow, because there was no snow between the bedroom and the kitchen.

IMO, the gov't needs to get out of the realm of marriage all together. The gov't should turn ALL legal marriages into Civil Unions. That way, the government can do whatever they want, and religions can do whatever they want. A legal union shouldn't have anything to do with a religion, and a marriage shouldn't have anything to do with the government. Let religions marry. Let the government license civil unions. Problem solved. Religious people don't need to feel pressured to change their beliefs and everyone gets equal treatment from the gov't. For some people, it doesn't matter what the gov't calls their marriage, it matters what God calls it. For many others, it doesn't matter what a god calls their marriage, it matters what the gov't calls it. Make it so you can be "married" without having a legally binding civil union and a legally binding civil union without being married. "Don't cross the streams...It would be bad." Just my $0.02.

Pass. Weak class of QB's IMO Whatch got in an OT?

Just wait, Letterman's all over this tonight. Hedd will come back tomorrow with some really lame jokes on it. Good crap, Letterman is an unfunny hack. I really gotta tell my wife not to leave it on CBS when she goes to bed.

I decline my work provided health and dental insurance every year, and get an extra $1000/annual pay for it. I, my wife, and my daughter are all on my wife's policy, who not only has a better plan, but also gets her insurance free. I, as a lowly man, also share with my overburdened wife the responsibility to make phone calls to the doctor to get our daughter appointments.

Here's a tidbit of info for you to think about. Utilities have predicted their future needs along with all the associated fuel types and all sorts of associated costs. They have used estimated figures of the proposed Cap and Trade program. These numbers, even with the Cap and Trade inflated cost of burning the evil dirty coal, show that coal is still a more economical route than natural gas. So what is this program doing? It's certainly not making it financially irresponsible to burn coal, which in turn would have given the company an incentive to be green. So if this Cap and Trade program gives no incentive to be green, what is it's real purpose?

Talk about a department that's got plenty of expertise in torture.

This whole idea is retarded. The tax on smoking is retarded, but you can at least attempt to make some quasi-sensible argument that second hand smoke is dangerous to others. It's still retarded though. My ingestion of soda/fruit drinks/tea doesn't have any physical affect on anyone else. And Kev is right. Where do we draw the unhealthy taxation line? Fast food? Potato chips? Shoelaces untied? Coughing without covering your mouth? Noncompliance with mandatory weekly exercise? All of these dangerous activities are adding to our exponentially rising health care costs and need to be curbed immediately. I just read an article about flat screen TVs falling on kids and injuring them. We better tax the !@#$ out of TV's, TV stands, stupid kids and negligent parents. This kind of dangerous behavior must stop.

He got to be the Banker in a Monopoly game once. Does that count?

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story?id=09000d5d...mp;confirm=true I was just looking at the mock drafts on NFL.com, and I didn't realize how many people had him moved into the 1st round. 3/4 of those guys had him going to Indy with pick 27. I wouldn't complain if we traded for Henderson, and were able to get Hood in the second.