Carter is an enigma. He's an intelligent man, but he has no regard for his country. How can a man at the top of a country consistently make choices that harm the country and then go on to slander his own country for decades? Even his evangelical outlook can not possibly justify that sort of behavior.

I think if this were many centuries back he would be one of the dangerous idiots seeking to gain power by walking the countryside scourging himself with a whip until he was bloody and preaching poverty, abstinence and self effacement, while damning everyone who did not agree with him. He is a horrible man.

Its a dangerous position to take when you say that it doesn't matter. That opens the door for your worst nightmare, even though voting in earnest might not get you your favorite dream.

San Fuh-leap-aye
San Phil-a-pee
San Phil-eep
San Fuh-leap
They all work

Hugh like in Hugh Grant, Hugh-ston works ok for Houston

As for Kuykendahl, You're on your own.
Its tomato and tomato to me.

Right now there is an increasing tendency for the media to suggest that the Democrats are about to gain seats an the house and senate during the next election. This may be true or not, but then it could become a self-fulfilling prophesy, (Thanks CNN, MSNBC etc). Some will love this and some will hate it. Whichever way it is I have concerns for more than just party lines.

There has long been a lot of discussion about the economics of both parties, and there is a lot of difference between the two. Since the demise of Paul Volker there has always been firm financial control exerted by the Fed in the hands of Greenspan. This has mitigated economic choices made by presidents and congress in both parties.

The press has consistently gotten matters wrong where the economy has been concerned. Carter got the blame for his inflation, but really it was Volker for the most part. Reagan got a lot of credit for his economic programs, but Greenspan lead the way on that "recovery". Nobody got the blame for the crushing of American manufacturing when that was largely engineered by free trade agreements and Greenspan's economic policies. These free trade agreements have had bipartisan support through the years with some wrangling this way and that in both parties.

Clinton got credit for economic improvement during his term, but largely the change during his tenure was due to the tighter controls exerted by an increasingly strong Republican congress. Pork projects declined, but then resurged with the advent of a one-party system, with Republicans controlling the House, Senate and Presidency. For some time the happy marriage between the houses was just in a honeymoon. Its too bad for everyone there was no Newt in the speaker's chair to manage some of that.

Bush has gotten credit for ruining the economy, but largely the financial troubles he faces now are related to two things, one is leftover economic policies from his predecessors, going back through several administrations, and the other is the money spent on the war. Trade agreements are increasingly a problem as well.

I am thinking it might not be such a good idea to have a President the same as the party controlling both the House and Senate. If we had either in control of all three branches there would be no respite from the stupidity of our government.

There is always disagreement about what financial choices are going to help or hurt the economy. Unfortunately, since about 1900 or maybe 1930 there has not been a widespread interest in economics by the people or promoted in our education system. You would think the economy was a black box that managed itself. The media is unable to give good advice or to make reasonable interpretations. Letting them guide you in your choice of politicians to support might be unwise.

I would suggest people should try to inform themselves more of the issues so they could make better choices. But above all, do not vote for people who will go off half-cocked and blow our economy out of the water. Along that line you should think long and hard before giving too much power to either party.

Brian, It seems there has developed a tradition of talking politics here, and disagreement is part and parcel of politics. Sometimes the people have extremely divergent views and they become quite heated about some of the exchanges. Admittedly I am one of these from time to time. But even though it is a dating site some of us choose to engage in this type of discussion. Hopefully we all manage our emotions well enough to continue discourse in a reasonable manner. If the frying pan is too hot, get off the fire. In the mean time, why should it bother you if the rest of us want to argue our positions?

As for Democrats enabling Bush and the right wing, I see it a little differently. There is a ring of truth in the policies of both the democrats and the Republicans. People cross over in their votes because of this reason. If they never did so it would be sad for your country and suggest that there is no real governance, only demagoguery.

Some who dislike Bush or Clinton (or whoever) are particularly disheartened to see their opponents pet policies win bipartisan support, but as long as there is room for opinion these things will happen.

I think this is all so much ya ya ya wanking around. None of them really want to secede. People just like to talk because it ads a forum for their complaints. Its cute, coffee table decoration but that's about it.

Imperial Valley? Do you know where Imperial Valley is? It is close to San Diego in southern California. That place is right on the border, near the region where they are working on border fences. The place most likely relies on labor that crosses the border daily to work and then commute home. Any surprise that their labor would be interrupted wold be out of place. Most likely there is a very high tolerance for Hispanic work forces there though so I don't think there is a lot to worry about for the Mexicans in the area. They just need to work up some housing on the north side of the fence. If you go farther north, up to the major farming areas the demographics are different, and the workers there only have to cross the border illegally once in order to work for months or years at a time.

I have the uninformed impression that the record companies get the bulk of earnings from copywrited music. Probably the musicians get the smallest share. So the record companies' draconian collection practices seems to me to benefit them rather than the artists.

For that reason I'm in synch with Kerry's last couple paragraphs.

I get the feeling that some conduit for payment to musicians directly attributable to online file sharing and downloading could benefit artists and accommodate the public as well. Even very small payments could add up to a lot with large volume downloads.

I don't particularly like the I-tunes/Apple virtual monopoly on music exchange so some alternative would be attractive.

Huckabee has some character. Easy to give that guy respect. I'm all up for work on the budget.

The tax code remains incredible at this point so anybody who wants to work on that might be interesting, but be careful, you could ruin the economy with poorly thought tax code changes.

Ron Paul will always be a joke, you guys need to forget him. He's like a mini-Perot with a side of kook but without the savvy.

Did someone say gold standard? Gold standard? Did someone say gold standard? Come on, nobody really said that. Did they? Surely not Ron Paul supporter. (covering my eyes, I don't want to know). I can not possibly type the drawbacks of that kind of economic structure again.

I would prefer the sunshine standard. The more sunshine your country gets the more wealth you have. BUT. You can trade on it only by installing lots of solar panels and supporting electrical power conversion and storage systems.

Then everything is a technological race to perfect the next generation of crystalline structures to further enhance solar to electrical conversion efficiency. Oil use plummets, pollution dramatically falls, new industries rise, and Ron Paul wins a whole new support base because nobody is worried about war so much.

Maybe I've been a little too excited here and I should ease up. I'm sure everyone in this thread is just fine and I don't intend to say anyone here is short on compassion for others. Sometimes I could watch my words a little more closely, as I'm sure others can too.

This topic does trouble me though. I definitely have the feeling that security/police were out of line and that the poor woman should be alive today. The episode makes me think of people I have known in the past who were not capable of managing their emotions on a temporary basis, due to improper medication prescribed by psychiatrists, by simple alcohol abuse or some combination of those.

Besides that I have also known people who had extreme cases of bipolar disease with some other overlaying mental issues, who have at times been completely out of control, but then the majority of their lives were just sweet and kind as can be. Some of these people have been in and out of recovery or mental care facilities many times, sometimes for years.

Two people I know like that work from time to time at my company. They don't work full time, permanently, because they simply do not have the capacity to be stable that way. They can work for some time and then they just lose it and go on walkabout for a time, sometimes homeless, wandering the streets and sleeping in bushes with the ants and mosquitoes, carrying nothing but a Salvation army blanked and a paper sack with whatever insane accoutrements they deem necessary at the moment.

A few weeks in a mental facility and some stable medication and they come around and join society again. Eventually they wander back to the shop and ask about work, which we try to give them, and a little dignity to go along with it. Nice people, they enrich the lives of those around them, but you just have to know they are going to twist off sometimes.

To think of one of these, bullied and crammed into a room with handcuffs and no supervision would make me quite angry. To think that in a condition of mental distress they would be able to make good choices, like keeping handcuffs from getting caught around their necks would be folly. Its not funny, its serious, and if authorities don't have some serious training for dealing with these sorts of people, they need it.

Agressive greedy ones particularly annoy me.

I wonder if the music producers are shaking their own hands in glee over beating the poor girl.

Once, on a nature show, I saw a hippo come to the defense of a young gazelle that was being attacked by a crocodile. It was none of the hippo's business, but I guess the crocodile just pissed off the hippo. They won't get any of my money.

It seems excessive to me. Maybe they can 219,000 for the music production company and give out the 1,000 or whatever is left over for the musicians.

The girl will never pay it so they will have to do what they can to seize her assets if they really want something from her. Maybe she will have to file bankruptcy for protection.

I only buy CDs from live bands at live shows. Its my way of supporting the local talent. Any decent R&B band can count on me for at least one CD.

My boycott won't cost the big music producers anything because I'm just not a music buying kind of guy so I hope some of the rest of you will put your cash back in your pockets when its time to buy CDs.

I don't like monopolies much anyway. Agressive greedy ones

ewww, creepy

Obviously the woman had problems and obviously a person has to be responsible for their own behavior. I do not fault security for interceding on behalf of the public. I do not know whether they might have handled matters more deftly and resolved the issue more easily or not. I do, however, fault security for not seeing to her safety while in their custody.

The more I ear about this the more sympathetic I feel towards the woman and her plight, the more anger I feel that security did not take reasonable precautions for a woman who was in obvious distress. I do not think they needed to leave her with handcuffs on locked in a room by herself under any circumstances. You might think that her screaming might be a sign that she was having problems. It seems to me that the security should have been able to be aware of that. Further it seems that a reasonable person should have been able to know that there was a problem.

Personally I think the airport and the airport security should be liable in a law suit. If the family does not sue the hell out of them both I will be disappointed. This woman may have gone on to live a wonderful life after a little bit of professional help. It is inexcusable that security deprived her of this.

Fanta, you are out of touch. I still consider your making a joke out of this woman's death to be offensive ind in horrible taste. I don't think you have a whole lot of reasoning power anyway so this should not surprise me, but with the liberal stance you usually take I am surprised to find you coming down on the side of police and against the insignificant and meek.

When authority crushes people with mental problems and without power to defend themselves that authority should be questioned and taken to task for its actions.

I actually have a strange position on this. I do not think that health care should be restricted to citizens. Particularly when someone needs emergency care.

Lulu I think the situation you have been describing falls into a special category for extended care needs. I think special programs are needed to help with special cases like that. I don't think this should be a part of the normal insurance program covered by the government, but a special program. For most people if they are in really bad need of care, medicaid has some process to help fill the gap.

Fitness, the program Pacific was describing sounded a lot like high school to me. Do you object to that too? Pacific, do you think high school was inadequate for the task?

Shakes me haid n rollz me eyez.

Hey Spider I'm with you on this one. The police have entirely too much power. On the one hand we need the police to have power to protect the peace, but on the other hand, since you can't trust them, you need them to have less power. Its a tough call.

I knew someone who was tossed in the slammer for a traffic ticket, Didn't show for court and then got stopped again before taking care of it. The cops stole her money when she was being let out of jail. And the stole the person's money before her too because she witnessed an ongoing argument about it.

The process went like this. When you check in they take all your possessions including cash, which they count. Then they write down the wrong amount, give you a wink wink, then promise to look out for you while you're in jail, then they toss you in with whoever and ignore you till they let you out. Then they give you the incorrect amount back. Apparently this is institutionalized, as they have the power and nobody can challenge them. Cops, gotta trust them anyway. Where do they find those guys?

Earnings is not necessarily a measure of a person's character, but good character helps a person get and keep higher paying jobs.

So while it is not a measure of success, it still may give some indication of character in many cases.

Ha, from the title of the article I thought it had to be gay. Then since a girl posted it I thought it might be ok to have a look. The whole thing made me laugh so you are definitely off the hook.

I would go as far as the airport. The airport is not too far. I can get to the airport in an hour and ten minutes. That's not too far to go for love. An hour and ten minutes? Just a hop skip and a jump.

When you see a girl you really like a lot, give her 6 months or so then think about if you still want to ask her out. Then if she goes out with you and you like her a lot, wait about 3 or 4 weeks to call and ask her out again. Then if that works out you can call her two or three weeks for a while. Once she really gets the idea that you like her anything goes. You could even try kissing her after a few more months and see how she goes for that. Be careful though because its hard to know when you cross the line and become CRAZY PSYCHO MANIAC she should put you on call block or something.