Bungee Jumper

Little early to be drinking, isn't it?

What's saying the same thing over and over again, but pretending you're saying something different each time, and expecting the same result?

You're not even reading the same book as everyone else. You're still confusing variance with error.

That's because you're a !@#$ing moron.

What did they wear to bed?

Yeah, that's what you've been saying all along. Measurement error causes regression toward the mean. And it's still wrong.

How in the hell do you expect anyone to believe that?

I don't know that it's necessarily fair to credit Peyton Manning with choking in January. It does a real disservice to Marvin Harrison's reknown choking ability...

So what were you last couple hundred posts, then? Measurement error?

IT'S STILL REAL TO ME, DAMMIT!

I'm a dyslexic God. I can't stop chasing cars.

Just when you think Lana's sweet and nice, she starts cursing like a sailor. Bet you don't cry over professional wrestling like a sailor, though...

So NOW you're point is "regression toward the mean happens", and not "regression toward the mean happens because of measurement error, just like when you don't roll a 3.5 with a single die..." like it has been for the past month. Do you honestly think you can blather on for fifty or so pages, and then suddenly wake up one day and claim you were saying something else?

And history still shows that, even when heavy ordnance neutralizes hardened targets, some poor ground-pounder still has to go in and do heavy fighting. Buna-Gona is a great example: an entire National Guard division was sent into a swamp with one artillery piece in support, and fought their way through hell for months to gain yards at a time. When they finally got support commenserate with their unit and mission (some Aussie 25-lb guns and light tanks), they finally cracked the defenses around Buna...and fought their way through hell for another month. Of course, Buna's an extreme example, since (with the possible exceptions of Milne Bay and New Georgia) it might very well be the most malignant terrain on the entire planet. But heavy support weapons - bunker-busting bombs, heavy artillery, etc. - usually doesn't make the bloody infantry's job any easier. Just quicker. That's also something to keep in mind when you see and hear military and political leaders talk about making war "friendlier", or about fighting wars exclusively from the air (a la Bill Clinton). Never works. Never. War always sucks, because it always involves some poor schmuck wallowing in the mud while dying from a high-velocity gunshot wound.

But are yours her size?

I can't wait to see the shiny Quayle $2 coin be distracted by itself...

Makes perfect sense, considering that there's NOT ONE LETTER in the House Ethics guidelines that covers anything REMOTELY like sexual harrassment. So they didn't break any rules, because there aren't any to break...but they really, really want to believe the House leadership was wrong anyway. The real farce will be that, despite all that, they STILL won't add any sexual harrassment rules to the ethics, even though they just found the House leadership "negligent" for breaking the rules that don't exist. !@#$ing morons...

I dream of a president that'll have the guts to stand up to Congress and say "I'm vetoing this budget you passed until you cut it by 20%." One of the few things I actually credit Clinton with is shutting down the government rather than accept an unreasonable budget from Congress.

You do realize, of course, that in two years the litany of accomplishments of the 110th Congress will be nearly as ludicrous, don't you? The central problem isn't Republican vs. Democrat here. The central problem is that virtually none of these !@#$s can distinguish between their pandering for votes and their actual responsibilities to the Constitution and country.

I'm trying to say that you'd be far better off just admitting you don't know sh--, rather than pretending you do and offerring shallow, silly, half-assed "solutions" to something you don't actually understand. I thought I was being clear on that. I apologize for not dumbing it down even more for you.

Link?

Untrue. Even with modern ordnance, it's still tough to root out a dug-in enemy. Tora Bora is as rugged and fortified as Iwo was, and it still took some hard fighting by soldiers on the ground during and after the bombardment to take that region.

Based on the eighteen months the authors' spent talking to the members of upwards of forty different insurgent groups and/or Iraqi political parties, and the fact that, unlike such garbage as "Fiasco" or any of Bob Woodward's narcissistic prattle, the books are extensively cross-referenced with other publicly available primary sources and easily fact-checked.

And how many "common criminals" are running amoke (sic) everywhere in Iraq? Do you know, or are you just pulling sh-- out of your ass? Again...it's the difference between understanding Iraq, and understanding the media reports.

Yes, it's a little superficial...as are most methods of meeting the opposite sex, when you think about it. I'd say the club scene is even more superficial, myself.