Nightingale

You can see a lot of yellowstone while driving (around 10% of the park), but Glacier is much more of a hiking park, (from what I remember, roads only cover about 2%) so if you want to see a lot of it, plan on quite a bit of walking. They're both beautiful. See them both if you can.

just elaborate on what the upgrades are going to add/enhance

if, as you say, the Bible was never meant to be a science book, why do people keep trying to put it in science classes???

there's a couple of restaurants in West Yellowstone that serve Bison steaks and burgers. quite yummy. if you go into the park, the prime rib and the bbq ribs at the roosevelt lodge are fabulous. and if you stay there, you can hear the wolves howling in the Lamar Valley just over the hill. Staying at Lake Lodge is a little more central, though.

ah. if the tire loading was acceptable for your experience level, from your account of the situation, I guess one could chalk it up to "equipment malfunction due to improper maintenance"?

nah. I've been there several summers. It's not bad at all, traffic wise, so long as you avoid the Hayden Valley. And then, it's not cars you have to worry about, but the herd of bison that's decided to nap on the road.

from what the lady was saying, when I go to renew, I just fill out the paperwork, but when it comes to the license actually getting issued and sent to me, the info is then cross checked with social security computers to verify info. and if I ran into a moron, I ran into three. her, her supervisor, and her supervisor's supervisor. and suddenly the department of education can't seem to allow me to access my financial aid file due to "information does not match." this is looking bad.

I've contacted my congressman. he says to give his office at least a month or so to look into the matter. I filled out the paperwork to give him permission to do so today and faxed it in. I went through three different desk ladies (her, her supervisor, and her supervisor's supervisor). Apparently, the computer flat out won't let them do it.

make a detour to Yellowstone. It's the most amazing place I've seen in my life, and I've done a lot of travelling throughout the USA.

um... why wouldn't a parent be monitoring what their children are listening to on the radio? that's a parent's job, isn't it?

Miranda does only apply to someone who is under arrest. I have no idea about the name thing... Lawrocket would be a better source of info.

how does one go about getting the federal court to order something?

It's damned impossible to get adoption records and original birth certificates unsealed. People petition for various reasons all the time, and the majority of petitions are denied. Courts do not look in favor on releasing information about adoptions, because they feel that the birth parents have a right to privacy, and that original birth certificate will have their names on it.

but if you tried, you would probably do much better left handed than someone who has not had the small-muscle control training of computer usage. There's a scientific theory that's gaining more credibility that, while for a few people, handedness is really set, most of us learn it to some extent.

Ok... now this whole Patriot Act thing has gotten too personal! The story: I discovered, when attempting to E-file my taxes, that the social security people had my birthday wrong. They thought it was the 2nd, and its the 1st. a simple typo from when the card was issued. I can guarantee that my mom wrote the right birthdate on the application. She's my mom. I think she knows what my birthday is. So, I go down to the SSA with the following: my birth certificate my passport my drivers' license my social security card my LA Fire Department ID even my freakin' library card. Every single little piece of info I can think of to verify my identity. the lady at the counter says, that while she believes me, the "security measures we're required to implement by the patriot act" require that they get the ORIGINAL microfiche of my birth certificate from LA County to verify my date of birth. The problem here is: I was adopted. The copy of my birth certificate that I have is altered. The original records are sealed. SSA does not want to accept an altered version. They'll probably have to get a freakin' court order to open them, which, in the case of ANY adoption information, is a royal PITA and usually denied. So... I'm grumbling about the mess, but figured it wouldn't be that big a deal, since, other than not being able to e-file my taxes, the issue hasn't caused me any trouble thus far. HOWEVER... the lady then looks at my drivers' license and says "oh... we might have a problem here." She tells me that now, the DMV is required to verify personal information with the SSA before issuing or renewing a drivers' license. My license expires in December. They're claiming it will take them at least six months or so to work through this mess to unravel the birth certificate issue, so, I will probably not be able to renew my drivers' license when it expires. So, basically: Because of the patriot act and some moron's typo, come December, I won't be allowed to legally drive a car. someone please tell me how this is protecting America? (and no cracks about my driving. I have a perfect driving record from day 1, thanks much.)

I generally write with my right hand. Simply because its more convenient, as you don't have to worry about smearing the ink you just put down. Everything else I pretty much do interchangably, depending on what hand I happen to pick up the item in. I play pool right handed, but when a shot is tricky, instead of going behind the back, its just easier for me to switch hands. In baseball, I can bat both righty and lefty, and which hand I throw with depends entirely on whether I happened to pick up my right or left handed mitt. I blame this skill on my parents getting a computer when I was three. I learned to type before I could write, developing small motor skills in both hands. I also played a lot of video games when I was a kid.

67.8501% - Geek God

which books do the catholics include that are not included by other christians? last I checked, the bibles in the pews at my parents' church were KJV.

My dad and I eat lunch together every day. My mom and I are close too, but my dad and I are probably closer, because even though I see more things eye-to-eye with my mom, my dad and I respect each other, whereas with my mom, she still sees me as a little girl.

The U.S. Supreme Court has carefully reviewed the history behind the First Amendment and repeatedly affirmed that the Establishment Clause prohibits more than an establishment of a state religion. As the court stated in Abington School District v. Schempp (1962), "this Court has rejected unequivocally the contention that the Establishment Clause forbids only governmental preference of one religion over another." The court pointed out in Everson v. Board of Education (1947) that, after the Fourteenth Amendment made the First Amendment applicable to the states, the Establishment Clause means that neither the federal government nor a state "can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another."* And in Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet (1994), the court said that governments may not show a preference for "religion to irreligion." *edited to add the entire quote from Everson v. Board of Education: "Neither the state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or nonattendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and state.'"

um... why would you vote for someone you think is an asshat? perhaps he should have elaborated as to WHY, though.

it is. it's the part about "make no law respecting" religion.

I know, I know... its one of those horse/water things, isn't it?

they didn't rule on the matter of the pledge. they ruled that the plaintiff shouldn't have been able to bring the case in the first place. Just because schools were segregated in the early half of the century didn't make segregation constitutional. It just meant that nobody who had the grounds to challenge it did so, until Brown v. Board of Education. The supreme court's ruling did not MAKE segregation unconstitutional. The constitution wasn't changed by the court's ruling. Segregation was unconstitutional all along. It was just permitted to happen because nobody was able to stand up and say that it was wrong.

Just because it hasn't been ruled unconstitutional doesn't make it constitutional. It means that the verdict is still out, because the original suit lacked grounds. The court has made no decision at all over whether it is constitiutional or not. At this point, it's an unknown. My personal take on it is that it is unconstitutional. I'm sure the justices will make their own ideas known when the next challenger steps forward.