FreeflyChile

As DSE said, copyrights and patents are two totally, completely separate things. Mixing the two up really takes the credibility away from anything else you say because it shows you don't really know what you're talking about.

I agree that is wrong. Keep your personal shit to your self and teach your course. This makes me wonder. Why is that? Do liberals have more tendency to get higher education? or is it after people get higher education and become professors they become liberal because they went trough the system? Or I wonder if it is a tendency for the more liberal to see teaching as the best use of their abilities and higher education, as opposed to going to work in their chosen field at a company.

that's what I was thinking in another thread. How is Joe Sixpack endearing? It reminds me of the Miller High Life commercials with the sassy fat delivery guy that goes into high-class establishments and takes back the beer. Those commercials are really amusing to me because they seem to say "it's great to be poor! Can't afford a nice life? Don't worry, those people that work hard to get ahead in life are idiots. We'll stick it to them by taking back our shitty beer so they can't drink it!"

What I find amusing is the use of "Joe Six-Pack" in the election rhetoric and the average person who this is supposed to reflect doesn't think this is demeaning. Really? Your potential leaders think (probably correctly) that you're some yahoo in central US that only cares about his Coors light while working on his Camaro wearing a wife-beater.....and no one thinks this is odd?

I didn't believe the gov't w/r/t WMD because the gov't seemed to be the only source of the information, and it just seemed they were looking for a reason to pick a fight in Iraq - especially given that there was a legitimate reason to be in Afghanistan. With the financial crisis, sources outside of the govt were the indicators (banks failing, loans being harder to get, the job market sucking), so when they *finally* got around to saying there was a problem it was already evident.

2 things... freeflying on the hill and those freefly dives where you go with one other person without a plan and while you're in the air you just synch, understand each other and are able to get all kinds of docks, carves, and generally kick ass things without being able to speak to each other or having planned a thing before leaving the plane

You actually have a very valid point (altho' I'm not sure it correlates well with the topic of home loans) - increasing college student debt. A typical college student has ~$2700 in credit card debt. The debt burden on college grads from student loans is increasing significantly. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), part of the Dept of Ed, found that ~50% of recent college graduate have student loans, with an average student loan debt of $21,000 (2007). That's a doubling of average loan debt in less than 8 years. Some are much higher & obviously, some are much lower. The highest average loan burden is Washington, D.C., which has an average student debt burden of $27,757. In a survey of loan recipients from New Hampshire, 82% indicated that without student loans, attending college would not have been possible. VR/Marg I *wish* I had that kind of debt......

http://www.thinkgeek.com/books/humor/8e6c/images/2070/

Diesel is even MORE expensive!! I bet they still get better mileage than a Hummer...

With gas over 4+ a gallon.....hmmm do they have a hybrid option???

Yeah, I did. Letterman was PISSED. So McCain bails and who does Letterman bring in to replace him? Keith Olbermann. It was pretty hilarious.

I'm told by Xmas season, which is Thanksgiving or sooner Sweet!

According to my knowlege, REAL video cameras dont even have AF. They are full manual. (some one may correct me if Im mistaken) In a nutshell, most of the reviews I have read so far says that the picture quality of the camera is best among the canon lineup so far. Also the video feature is being predicted to revolutionize the whole industry.. Hows that ?! Consider yourself corrected. XDCAM HD (most common HD cam in the ENG/EFP market today) has autofocus. Canon is building most o their lenses for future with auto-focus ability. It no longer is "taboo" to use autofocus, particularly with HD. The concept that the "video feature is predicted to revolutionize the whole industry" is a prediction made by someone who doesn't shoot video. It *is* a sweet feature, but essentially meaningless in the grand scheme of things. However, I do agree with you that the new 5DMKII is a serious step into the realm of the 1D. But...Canon has some sweet things up their sleeve. Wait'll CES 09' Damn it...I'm sure you are bound by NDAs to not say anything but I really want to know!! So how long til the 5D Mark 2 is actually in stores?

Source: Bloomberg News Is there a source that shows that every single person that granted a loan they shouldn't have and also that every person that accepted a loan that they wouldn't be able to repay is a democrat?

Concur! And then some. Greed is not the problem. Greed is a constant. How good greed (entrepeneurial capitalism is encouraged/fostered) versus how bad greed is minimized is the problem. (One point I'll differ with Chris, both Sen McCain & Sen Obama have been warning of the potential consequences of bad greedy behavior. February 2006 Sen Obama introduced S.2280: STOP FRAUD Act (Introduced in Senate); To stop transactions which operate to promote fraud, risk, and under-development, and for other purposes, which directly addressed sub-prime and predatory mortgage practices. In March08 as reported by FoxNews, Sen Obama was advocating intervention and "reforming its own agencies to adjust to the realities of modern finance," at the time what Sec Paulson and Pres Bush did this week were still politically unpalatable.) VR/Marg "Greed is good. Greed is right." hehe

Here is a start. http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=111&sid=1476285 And I take it you don't read much news. This has been ongoing for awhile. Wonder what the new CEO will get for his golden parachute? I'm too lazy to do the research on this, but perhaps someone else will. Until that time, it's more of a 'have you heard' question. Have any CEOs of these failing financial companies refused their payouts and actually accepted any blame for any of this stuff? I don't mean where they get tossed and the fed govt blocks it (which IIRC is what happened w/Freddie and Fannie)..I mean, a higher up going 'this happened on my watch, the millions I don't take should be used to compensate those who trusted us with their money'.

What you are saying makes sense, and I am a huge believer in personal responsibility. I think that there are those people who, when approved for these deals, went forward in bad faith. I also think that there are those people that were probably on the borderline of being fine and not being able to pay. Then something went adversely, and they found themselves unable to pay. Not saying they should have entered into an agreement so close to the critical breaking point...but owning a home is a dream for many and hell, if they can just make ends meet, everything will be fine. I think that there's likely another group of people who are hard-working people that don't make very much. These people probably don't understand contracts or bank related documents very well...they just are told by their banker that they are approved for their house/car/whatever. And of course, they trust that the bank knows what it's doing - sure, they know that the bank is making money off of them and maybe they didn't get as good a deal as someone that is a banker or lawyer or whatever, but in the end they know that the bank surely wouldn't loan them money if they couldn't pay it back..so of course they accept. Again, I think that for contracts and just general business to work you have to place a certain amount of trust that the other party will live up to the deal or that, if they don't, they will suffer the appropriate circumstances. Still, in this case, I think that with all of the different types of people that sought loans, with all of their stories and backgrounds and credit scores and jobs and incomes - the constant was the banking institutions that OK'd these things. For a handful of defaults - I blame the people that went in over their heads. For a systematic failure that happened because the banks went ahead with business tactics that they either knew or should have known were risky at best - well, I think assigning blame to the institutions is in order.

sweet... when can we start seeing that in stores?

Does machine gun = automatic weapon? Or are assault rifles also in the "machine gun" category? I am asking because I honestly don't know.

great..now i am doing nothing but watching these clips...

wow those photos are spectacular... nice job, Brian!

Yeah, and despite what happened in Carolina, it looks like the Bears' D is back as well. If Orton could just throw the deep ball...he had Booker open on a fly route that he overthrew that would have sealed the game...

A woman can bring you a beer. Best of both worlds.

If you want to restrict things that haven't been used in a crime EVER, then where do you start? Barbie Dolls, Legos and chocolate chip cookies? Well, that was my point in asking. Though I'd be willing to bet that Legos and Barbie dolls have been involved in thousands, if not millions of undocumented battery cases between siblings.....

Because I ignore your hypocrisy, that's why. You lump the legal gun owners in with the criminals in your petty diatribes. Translation, mnealtx can't answer the question without revealing his own inconsistency. Since hobby rockets are no more popular with criminals and loonies than Lego bricks and Barbie Dolls, and a lot less popular than cell phones, maybe we should require fingerprinting and a full background check before we can buy cell phones, Barbie Dolls and Legos. Bullcrap - YOU advocate intrusion into private medical records because of what someone MIGHT do with a gun. Repeating that over and over doesn't make it true. You keep ignoring billvon's suggestion because it destroys your argument. So you continue to advocate serious restrictions on a product that has never been used in a crime, while arguing for less rigorous controls over a product used in hundreds of thousands of crimes and thousands of homicides each year. Your position makes perfect sense - NOT. Maybe I misunderstand your position, but are you advocating refraining from restriction on anything until it is used in a crime?