If your statements were formed by critical thinking, observation, and research I'll claim to be from MO too (for this one post)... Show me . Equating Bush solely to Katrina (for example New Orleans)... you have overlooked and/or absolved politicians like Ray "Hold the busses" Nagen, FORMER Governor Kathleen "huh, what... what do I do here" Blanco, and the people who made the CHOICE not to leave (I.E. taking personal responsibility). Partisan observations and selective reseach do not informed, educated opinions make. The lady doth protests too much methinks. The frustration and contempt you and your ilk may have in your misguided opinions about blaming Bush for things like Katrina is only rivaled by my frustration and contempt I have for those who fail to understand the basics concept of how our government operates. It pleases me beyond belief though that you are secure with yourself and feel the need to affirm that here... the only thing missing is "and doggone it, people like me" a la Stuart Smalley.

It's my impression some of you here probably boycotted Busch beer just because you believe it was named after or sounds too close to the name of the President.

Is it too much to ask for a modicum of critical thinking here before bashing Bush? Have some of you never taken a government/civics class? I'm willing to overlook organic brain dementia and genetic shortcomings; However, not sheer stupidity.

First, contrary to popular belief, we do not live in a dictatorship. It is my belief and understanding the ONLY thing the president can do without congressional reproach of ANY kind is the authority to launch nuclear weapons. Executive orders/Presidential proclaimations can be challenged. Veto's can be over-ridden or redressed (as in the pocket veto). Behind EVERY "Bush" policy there is a congressman/woman, democrat, republican, and independent alike who are equally complicit towards it's enactment.

To blame the president solely for economic/housing woes is inane. That responsibility falls squarely upon the shoulders of congress and the subcommittees. Granted, the president has "line-item veto power"; However, those powers were granted by congress.

The perceived losses of freedom, rights, and liberties. Those laws originate from where? Congress. (see link below)

In matters of the military. The president is the commander in chief. It is he who has the power and authority to deploy troops. Congress is in charge of the funding and has the ability to stop ALL military actions ordered by the president by halting or defunding at ANY time.

While I am thoroughly enjoying watching myself type, I believe some of this may be too difficult for some of you to comprehend... so I'll make it simple by providing this youtube clip. Schoolhouse Rock "I'm just a bill".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

I'm all for accountabilty regardless of the party affilation; However, I believe placing it on the appropriate individual(s) as well.

"Seriously...do people just sit at home with the phone in their lap looking for stuff to be offended by and report? Get a life!"

I suppose the same statement could be made about people who complain on forums about other people complaining.

ACLU tactics work both ways.

Lynann- Would you please further share with us who Rep. John Conyers, Jr., democrat, MI (author of the piece you cite in your link)is? Perhaps I can lend some assistance out of liberal minded "fairness". We wouldn't want to give the gentle reader the impression you actively participate in propaganda, now would we?

http://brookesnews.com/081905conyers.html

http://aeonweb.ws/more.php?id=767_0_1_0_M

(From above link)"Conyers landed on Judicial Watch’s “Ten Most Corrupt Politicians” list as a “dishonorable mention.” Here’s why: It appears Conyers, who is now Chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, repeatedly violated the law and House ethics rules, forcing his staff to serve as his personal servants, babysitters, valets, and as campaign workers while on the government payroll."

A minor case of the pot calling the kettle a community organizer (community organizer= republican code word for "black" for you David Patterson, democrat, governor, NY, followers) wouldn't you say?

I make no pretenses of being a geopolitical/military expert; However, I can't think of any "war" involving the US military that wasn't run backwards/poorly in some capacity. As per Bin Laden being dead, do some of you have access to top secret information the rest of us aren't privileged to? Is he buried somewhere around Area 51? It appears to me that some are allowing their obvious hatred of Bush/republicans/conservatives cloud judgement. I believe an ounce of pragmatism is better than a pound of visceral speculation.

"I have been saying my whole life we should worry about OUR OWN and OUR OWN HOME!!!!". The same thought/beliefs I speculate Neville Chamberlain had in appeasment of the Hitler. Has another 9/11 like event taken place since? No. It is my belief (and fair assessment) that perhaps if the Clinton administration had taken decisive action after the first World Trade Center attack, the second one may never have taken place. Who knows?

"Please explain how we can leave Iraq". The best way I can answer that is when the President determines we should or congress cuts funding (which they could do/have done at any time). Do we still not have troops stationed in or a military presence in areas of previous conflicts (going back to world war two)? Uh huh.

I agree with Fanta, that even if we kill Bin Laden(assuming he's not already dead), there will be someone like him or a group to replace him. Radicals like nature abhors a void. I completely disagree with his appeasment solutions though.

"We have to change tactics and we have to begin treating these people, cultures, and governments with understanding, equality, and cultural live and let live diplomacy". Would you please cite me just one source (no matter how obscure), anytime in history, anywhere on this planet that tactic has ever worked? I can cite several where it has failed. In reading some of your previous posts in other threads...too bad you don't practice what you preach here in regards to other posters (good natured ribbing, nothing personal).

I believe unless one is willing to abandon all individual and personal beliefs, ideals, and convictions- terrorism/war will always be a fact of life. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. It's a matter of perspective and relativity.

Very good question. One that required extensive personal reflection. If we are speaking in generalities, the short answer would have to be "Yes", I always publicly state that I accept authority . Do I always agree with decisions made by authority/those in charge? No. Just because I may have the right/privilege to voice dissent/redress grievances doesn't necessarily mean it's always prudent/wise to do so(in regards to opening a proverbial Pandora's box, indulging in the laws of unintended consequences, or creating a domino effect). There is a quantum difference between societal wants and societal needs. I believe it was Sun Tzu who said it best "... to choose ones battles wisely...".

An analogy. I want to play for the NFL. Under their current league standards (the authorities of the NFL) can/will that happen? No. Can I change those standards so I can play? Perhaps yes, if I file enough lawsuits to have the standards lowered to accommodate me.

madisonman-

Madison, Ohio... I stand corrected and apologize for my erroneous assumption/deduction. Thank you for enlightening me this one time. You obviously being very liberal and very open-minded, I simply didn't want you to give the wrong idea/impression if I persued your profile in regards to your geographical location. I'll take your word for it that you are from Madison, Ohio, a man, a US citizen, and love (or at least respect) the country you live in (though there is a plethora of evidence to the contrary).

As I stated before, just because you may believe it is "ridiculous" doesn't make the powers that be wrong in their judgement. This couple is NO different than anyone else who wishes to adopt; Subsequently, one can only assume to the motive to do so. Homosexuals are allowed to adopt, yes? Interracial adoptions are allowed, yes? This as a direct result of "expanding" (some may say lowering) previously established standards. We have yet to experience the rammifications/results of the above mentioned social experiments. The powers that be have established a standard in this case, reasoning behind that judgement provided. This appears to be a couple with a sense of entitlement who are unwilling to accept being told "No". They don't meet the established criteria plain and simple. Modus operandi- Don't get your way... whine and cry to a sympathic press, then file a lawsuit.

I would say regardless of who it was or their living situation (even if it were Bill and Melinda Gates) being told "No" means "No" by those in charge and have jurisdiction over the current situation. Don't fret too much, if current social trends hold true, they'll have their adopted baby quicker than you can say "ACLU lawsuit".

Emotionalism aside, I don't believe anyone will disagree that there has to be some standards in place for situations that could affect the health and well-being of another. This adoption policy is not a written in stone, absolute commandment. Like every other policy throughout every organized civilzation it will be re-evaluated, revisted, and refined... heading down that slippery slope of having lowered standards. Rarely in human endeavors of social engineering I believe standards are ever raised.

The liberal arguement of "Who are you to tell me I can't <insert indulgence of choice>?" always leads to the laws of unintended consequences. There are those will who find this current adoption policy inane, until it crosses a line they personally deem unacceptable. I'm confident that if this story were about a pedophile wanting to adopt the reaction would be different; However, from the pedophiles perspective he/she could argue "Who are you to tell me I can't adopt"? Hey, we all have our shortcomings in life, right? Nobody's perfect. Just because it doesn't make sense to you (generally speaking), doesn't mean the powers that be aren't right in their justifications/rationalizations.

Ok "average JOe". You have no idea what your government does secretly, join the club Einstein... neither do I and most likely everyone here. I'll try this from a different angle then to perhaps enlighten you by shrinking the geographic playing field and providing an analogy you may more readily comprehend. You know openly that the city of your namesake ("Madison", I'm going to assume Wisconsin)is a "sanctuary city" for harboring illegal aliens. Openly breaking federal law. EVERY crime committed against a US citizen by an illegal alien there is due to YOUR elected officials who represent YOU (regardless if you support this illegal policy or not). Last I checked, Wisconsin is still a part of the US.

If you want to selectively pick a topic that furthers your "attempt to make conservatives/republicans look bad" agenda, that's your perogative. It only exposes your own socialist hypocrisy further.

On a more personal note as per your "Realy its grade school level stuff hardly worthy of any meaningfull responce beyond entertainment." comment. Not that I was ever was a spelling bee champion and commit my share of typographical errors; However, I will agree with you about one thing- something is grade school level here in this dialogue. I should be demanding an apology from the Madison teachers union at very least.

"Verry simplistic and off target. Who said I voted for them? and when they were running for office did they say they planned to violate international law? of course not. I did sign the petition to impeach Bush by the way to no effect. Are you suggesting "gasp" I become a terrorist since I have no other means to address the issues? I realy do not even think your comments were worthy of a reply but it may get interesting eventualy"


Your inability to perceive things from the bigger picture was anticipated. I'll try to simpify things even further for you. IF you live in the US, ANYTHING that you do here (career/collecting welfare, paying taxes, purchasing goods and services) as a citizen- contributes to the actions you are so opposed to. On the flipside, they also contibute to your failed socialistic experiments/beliefs (which I did not sign off on either, nor supported/voted for politicians who do/did). That is called "reality". No matter who you voted for (if you voted), those elected still represent you, regardless if you agree with them or not. Liberal myopic selectivism, typical of your breed. Obviously you aren't familiar with a little obsolete term called "sedition" either. Was it not the liberal enviormentalists who suggested those who purchased SUV's were supporting terrorists as well? As they say "What's good for the goose...".

There's no shame in you admitting you're guilty of crimes against humanity as being part of one of, if not the biggest terrorist organization in the world according to socialist liberals. You reap the benefits of this terrorist organization every single day. The same farmers that feed these American "terrorists"... feed you. The same terrorists that provide you with everything you have... including safety and security from those who would rather chop off your head than to look at you twice (just ask the late Daniel Pearl).

"Are you suggesting "gasp" I become a terrorist since I have no other means to address the issues?". Not become one, you are one already by your residency in the US and funding your fellow terrorists. Granted, you're not quite Bill Ayres caliber when it comes to addressing issues you disagree with, yet, or that I am aware of. That crushing weight you feel is the weight of your own hypocrisy and double standards collapsing upon you and your ilk.

Thank you for your kind considerations and deeming my post worthy of your reply, I'm touched and honored.

Verry simplistic and off target. Who said I voted for them? and when they were running for office did they say they planned to violate international law? of course not. I did sign the petition to impeach Bush by the way to no effect. Are you suggesting "gasp" I become a terrorist since I have no other means to address the issues? I realy do not even think your comments were worthy of a reply but it may get interesting eventualy


Your inability to perceive things from the bigger picture was anticipated. I'll try to simpify things even further for you. IF you live in the US, ANYTHING that you do here (career/collecting welfare, paying taxes, purchasing goods and services) as a citizen- contributes to the actions you are so opposed to. On the flipside, they also contibute to your failed socialistic experiments/beliefs (which I did not sign off on either, nor supported/voted for politicians who do/did). That is called "reality". No matter who you voted for (if you voted), those elected still represent you, regardless if you agree with them or not. Liberal myopic selectivism, typical of your breed. Obviously you aren't familiar with a little obsolete term called "sedition" either. Was it not the liberal enviormentalists who suggested those who purchased SUV's were supporting terrorists as well? As they say "What's good for the goose...".

There's no shame in you admitting you're guilty of crimes against humanity as being part of one of, if not the biggest terrorist organization in the world according to socialist liberals. You reap the benefits of this terrorist organization every single day. The same farmers that feed these American "terrorists"... feed you. The same terrorists that provide you with everything you have... including safety and security from those who would rather chop off your head than to look at you twice (just ask the late Daniel Pearl).

"Are you suggesting "gasp" I become a terrorist since I have no other means to address the issues?". Not become one, you are one already by your residency in the US and funding your fellow terrorists. Granted, you're not quite Bill Ayres caliber when it comes to addressing issues you disagree with, yet, or that I am aware of. That crushing weight you feel is the weight of your own hypocrisy and double standards collapsing upon you and your ilk.

Thank you for your kind considerations and deeming my post worthy of your reply, I'm touched and honored.

madisonman- Please feel free to turn yourself in to the proper authorities for punishment if you feel so strongly about this issue. Afterall, you are an accomplice to these crimes (and EVERY other atrocity you believe the US government has committed within your adult lifetime). It was YOUR tax dollars that YOU paid to fund these crimes (if you work and/or contribute to the US society at all... not to mention what you benefit from as well). It was officials YOU elected into office to represent you (IF you voted or eligble to vote). Your apologetic Nuremberg defense of "I'm just following the law/orders" won't work. You may not have pulled the trigger my amigo; However, you did pay for the guns and ammo and every other item required to commit these "terrorist" acts. The only honorable liberal thing for you and your ilk to do is to turn yourself in, take personal responsibilty for your participation, and accept your fate.

Whilst perusing this thread, I became curious to know whether or not former president Bill Clinton had some naval vessel named after him or not. I knew Reagan did, Carter did (a submarine), and Bush 1 did. A brief search produced results that had me in tears laughing.

http://www.targetofopportunity.com/USS_Clinton.htm

(see site for photograph)

"The USS William Jefferson Clinton (CVS1) set sail today from its home port of Vancouver, BC. The ship is the first of its kind in the Navy and is a standing legacy to President Bill Clinton "for his foresight in military budget cuts" and his conduct while president. The ship, constructed nearly entirely from recycled aluminum, is solar powered with a top speed of 5 knots. It boasts an arsenal that is comprised of either a single F-14 Tomcat or a single F-18 Hornet aircraft, both of which are completely unarmed. Although they cannot be launched or captured on the 100 foot flight deck, they do present a very menacing presence. The AV-8B Harrier will never be based on this ship as it could endanger the lives of terrorists and other enemies that seek the destruction of America.

As a standing order there are no firearms allowed on board. The 20 person crew is completely diversified and includes members of all races, creeds, sex, and sexual orientation. This crew, like the crew aboard the USS Jimmy Carter, is specially trained to avoid conflicts and appease any and all enemies of the United States at all costs.

An on board Type One! DNC Universal Translator can send out messages of apology in any language to anyone who may find America offensive. The number of apologies are limitless and though some may sound hollow and disingenuous, the Navy advises all apologies will sound very sincere.

The ship's purpose is not defined so much as a unit of national defense - but instead in times of conflict the USS Clinton has orders to seek refuge in Canada. The ship may be positioned near the Democratic National Party Headquarters for photo-ops and can be used extensively for social experimentation, and whatever other worthless jobs, the ex-Commander-in-Chief and his wife can think of.

It is largely rumored that the ship will also be the set for the upcoming season of MTV's "The Real World". The ship was renamed and commissioned USS William J Clinton when someone realized the USS Blowfish was already taken."

So what's the problem? Obama is going to have to have many things explained to him, like how the REAL world operates. We've aleady seen a glimpse of this already. Al-qaeda (Ayman Zawahiri) referred to him as a "house negro" and the only retort from people associated with Obama was to the effect of "Oh, that's a racist comment... we condemn those remarks". This isn't a community organizational event in Chicago. One can't call for a boycott of Al-qaeda companies/businesses/products. No lawsuits for "hate speech". These kind of people cut off non-Muslim heads and play for keeps. Israel is one of the only allies the US has in that part of the world, I'd say they're pretty special.

The Israeli's were basically forced to sit on their hands while SCUD missles were being lobbed at them during the first Gulf War. Personally, I would like to see Netanyahu back as prime minister. If he and people in his administration perceive a real threat against Israel by Iran... take em out (a la the six day war), regardless of what the next US administration says. No need for Israel to repeat the folly of the Clinton administration when declining the offer for Bin Laden.

My first thought was "what about them"? They are of course what physicists consider the models of what BH's are. The same observations and data to prove the existence of BH's can be used to prove the existence Gravastars (eliminating the event horizon and singularity).

Contained within the of composition of a star, I would equate to that of regular water and "heavy water" (Deuterium). Thinking in terms of water being matter and the isotopes contained within heavy water being anti/dark matter. A star goes through it's life and burns off all it's fuel and condenses (eventually). Say we have a piece of dehydrated fruit. Add water to it, it expands in volume, even though you still have the same mass as before, it's just concentrated in dehydrated form. Now just reverse the process for a Gravastar. What is left behind after a star has used up all it's fuel would be dark/anti-matter (using the Deuterium analogy from above). The next logical step would be to try to explain the extraordinary high gravitational fields associated with these bodies.

Matter being the dominant component of our universe (by at least a 51.1% majority). BH's/Gravastars I believe in their concentrated form have "zones of influence". Kind of like a gang who controls one neighborhood of a large city. While their results of their activities can be felt throughout the city to one degree or another, most of it is felt in the immediate area where they reside (the attempt to hold onto territory). Instead of gravitational pull, I would suggest a form magnetism may be the major factor in the attraction that draws other bodies to BH's/Gravastars- using the "opposites attract" principle of magenetism. Think of matter as being positive pole and dark/anti matter being a negative pole. When you take two magnets- the stronger magnet always pulls the weaker one to it. Since this collision between matter and dark/anti matter isn't a direct one (like an asteroid hitting a planet), you wouldn't have the same kind of "explosion". It would be like deflected contact due to rotation of the bodies.

The matter and dark/anti matter interact. The understood result would be that they would cancel out each other; However, I believe the remaining dark/anti-matter contained within the matter would be absorbed by the BH/Gravastar. Like the human body does when eating. One eats an apple, the body extracts the nutrients to survive and grow, the rest is excreted. In this case, the byproducts of the are cast off as Hawking radiation and gamma ray "waste".

(edited to say : if I could only cancel out my previous incomplete post... uggggh).

My first thought was "what about them"? They are of course what physicists consider the models of what BH's are. The same observations and data to prove the existence of BH's can be used to prove the existence Gravastars (eliminating the event horizon and singularity).

The concentration of mass of a BH, I would compare to that of regular water and "heavy water" (Deuterium). Thinking in terms of water being matter and the isotopes contained within heavy water being anti/dark matter. A star goes through it's life and burns off all it's fuel. Say we have a piece of dehydrated fruit. Add water to it, it expands in volume, even though it's

I've never been a big fan of pro or large (division 1) football. Small colleges and high school, where kids have no contractual obligations to play (just playing for the love of the game) has always been my preference.

A few months ago, I heard about the movie "Friday Night Lights" and decided to research the team the movie was about- The Permian Panthers from Odessa, TX. The below is their homepage.

http://www.hometeamsonline.com/teams/default.asp?u=ODESSAPERMIAN&sport=football&t=c&p=home&s=football

This team is simply incredible. "MOJO" football is both rich in tradition and history. Currently 11-0 and in the play-offs. I've been listening to the games online, even though I have no connections to the team, Odessa, and Texas (except for a crush I have on a gal from TX here at this site) . I have never seen such support of a high school team in my life.

If you love high school football, this team is worth checking out.

It's been several years since I've been up to the Chicagoland area. There's a Mexican place up by the Brookfield zoo exit off I55. Going north on I55 you get off and take a right off the exit, go down several blocks to a I believe is called "Summit, IL" or something like that. The name of the place is "El Ferro" or something close. They serve these huge, cheap, fantastic burritos... anyone know the place I'm taking about? Is that the name?

Ok, you would not flirt with yourself in a bar. Would you flirt with a gar near a car? No matter how close or how far? Even if you wish upon a star would you flirt with a gar covered in tar?

(in reference to JustAGuy2112's grinch photo/post)