idrankwhat

I do not believe that money is "speech". Call it what it is, "bribery", outlaw it, throw all parties who participate in it in jail and then maybe we'll get our representative government back. $0.02

It's actually a pretty good point. Axelrod discussed it yesterday on NPR. "....I do think that there's a great deal of anger out there about the state of the economy in which middle-class people are working harder and harder - if they haven't lost their jobs - just to hold their place. Wages have been flat for a decade. You know, health care costs have doubled; premiums have doubled over the decade. College costs have gone up. Retirement security has eroded. Home values have plummeted. And so, there's a lot to be angry about. And then they look to Washington and then they see the power of special interests in this town. And these are the same forces that really propelled Barack Obama in office in 2008. So we're well aware of them. This is why we're here. But as the party in power, you bear some of the responsibility for this. Or in people's eyes, you become the fulcrum and we understand that. We understand that as well. BLOCK: So going along with that message of anger, isn't part of the message also, you haven't fixed things, President Obama? We voted for change and we're not seeing it. Mr. AXELROD: Yup, that is. There's no question about it. And, you know, a year ago, Melissa, when I heard the economic forecast, I said to the president, you know, we've got some great numbers now, but they're not going to be so great a year from now because we're going to have to govern through the worst economy since the Great Depression, and that's going to be difficult. We're going to have to do some things to try and turn the economy around that are going to be politically difficult. And, indeed, we did. We had a recovery package that was absolutely essential. And most economists agree it had a lot to do with breaking the back of this recession and the momentum of this recession. And - but it was difficult to do. We had to stabilize the financial industry, and that was a distasteful thing. We had to help the auto industry, because to not do that would have meant hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in the middle of a deep recession. None of these things were politically popular. The president knew that when he did them, but he did the responsible thing. And we also knew that there'd be people on the other side who would try and take advantage of that. So, you know - and then we had a long health care debate that is important to the economic well-being of every middle-class person. But the process has not been very satisfying for anybody." http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122777075

I didn't realize that we were taking attendance. Lucky's doing fine.

You're right. That IS a shocker. Congress actually proposed a bill that would more than pay for itself. Agree with the plan or not, that's quite an accomplishment for the Congress This just in, as an homage to the "good old days" of a Republican run Congress and White House, John Boehner unveils the new Republican Health care strategy at a 2010 Election Campaign fund raiser which includes, but is not limited to, driving around around in pickup trucks and throwing out wads of cash. I know sniping and running is a low blow, but this IS Speaker's corner and I have a boogie to get to. Happy Halloween everyone!

I see, the old "pay no attention to the obstructionist behind the curtain" ploy. You claimed that the opposition to the health care reform is based on the plan itself. In some cases that's certainly true (based on sincere alternative ideas or by the amount of "free speech" that industry has lavished on them). Billvon and I have pointed out that there are many who wish Obama to fail at any endeavor, some for political gain. In that regard, my post is indeed substantial.

DeMint: "If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him," Inhofe: I just hope the President keeps talking about it, keeps trying to rush it through. We can stall it. And that’s going to be a huge gain for those of us who want to turn this thing over in the 2010 election.

This seems appropriate.

So true. This gem was taken a fraction of a second before I nearly collided with the leader of that formation. Nice shot. You must have had your head craned like a snapping turtle to get that angle.

Texas or Carolina barbecue?

When they give out a war prize you'll see our right wing leaders showing up in the win column. Heck, they might even give Cheney a lifetime achievement award.

My thinking was that the soft collar would provide the give necessary to not totally restrict minor movement but would provide a few pounds of resistance/support, like you do with your hands. In addition the material would make movement to the extremes nearly impossible. I don't know. I think I'll give it a try this weekend and see how it goes.....but only after I pack my own rig.

I thought I'd bump this thread to see if there was any additional input on the idea of wearing a soft cervical collar. I have a great opening canopy that can take up to 800 ft to open and I normally have no issues. I was in a hurry this weekend and let someone else (much more experienced than me) pack my rig. Video has the opening occurring in about one second. After I got my chin off my chest I looked up to check the canopy and it was still pulsating. It took a couple of seconds to verify that it was still square. Hurt like hell, and still does to be honest. I have a relatively light helmet and wasn't jumping the still, otherwise I think there may have been some real damage. I was thinking that a soft collar might be a good idea for those freakish occurrances, maybe even welcome in the winter. Anyone have any pros or cons that they want to offer?

Since I berate him when I disagree I figured that I should give proper recognition when I don't. Thanks Lindsey http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP_DMTbfbdE

Of the people I see face to face every day, I don't know anyone who favors a public option. Also, every poll I've seen indicates the opposite. The question in question is 34a. http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/WSJ-NBC_Poll090617.pdf And yes, wording in all of these polls, and the paraphrasing by our legislators and talking heads can be misleading. But from what I've seen, there is substantial support/acceptance for a public option. Not a complete takeover but another option to choose from.

Nope. Most people support a public option along with private insurance. The people are speaking but legislators are only listening to those with the most "free $peech."

When analyzing your results you should probably consider that those who are voting in your poll are those with a propensity for voting.

Common sense? No. Bribery? Yes. Industries have spent $585.7 million since 2007 on lobbying and campaign contributions Washington, D.C. – A campaign finance watchdog’s analysis of insurance and HMO political contributions and lobbying expenses found the industries spent $126,430,438 over the first half of 2009 and $585,725,712 over the past two and a half years to influence public policy and elected officials. The group, Public Campaign Action Fund, found that in the first part of 2009, the industries were spending money at nearly a $700,000 a day clip to influence the political process and that the monthly pace of political spending this year has increased by nearly $400,000 over the average spent per month in the previous two years. “The insurance and HMO interests are fighting health care reform with hundreds of millions of dollars,” commented David Donnelly, national campaigns director of Public Campaign Action Fund. “Why are so many in Congress willing to listen to an industry that is spending tens of millions every month on politics rather than on lowering their premiums or helping to address the costs of health care? They need the cash to pay for their campaigns. And that’s why we need Congress out of the fundraising game — which can happen if Congress adopts the Fair Elections Now Act.” According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the insurance interests have 875 registered lobbyists representing its concerns in Washington D.C., and HMOs have 920 registered lobbyists. The total figure for 2009, 1,795, is slightly fewer than 2,000 lobbyists the industries employed in 2008. It is possible that late hires during the important fall months will push 2009 figures past the 2008 record. The research released today is the first of a two-part study on insurance and HMO industry campaign contributions and lobbying expenses compiled by Public Campaign Action Fund. The study was compiled with data available from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics and the Senate lobbying disclosure websites. Tomorrow’s release will focus on the political spending by the top for-profit health insurance and HMOs. (A Common Cause study earlier this year found that health care and insurance interests were spending a combined $1.4 million per day over the first quarter. This study looked at insurance and HMO spending.) Public Campaign Action Fund advocates for the Fair Elections Now Act (H.R. 1826, S. 752), or comprehensive public financing of elections, The bill was introduced by House Democratic Caucus Chair John Larson (D-Conn.) and Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and would provide qualified federal candidates the opportunity to run for office with a mixture of small donations and public funding. The national nonprofit organization is dedicated to advancing comprehensive reform of America’s election laws and works to hold politicians accountable for the favors they do for special interests. http://www.campaignmoney.org/HMO_insurance_spend_to_kill_reform

Bad war. But I'd argue that you should change the option to "unnecessary war" as I see all war as "bad". As for the sig line comment, military men had nothing to do with the decision to go to war in Iraq.

Just out of curiosity, is VMS installed on an external drive or is it on the C drive? If the former, I think you'll have problems even if you get the paths figured out.

"Mark my words, our ignorance will hold.......ahhhhhh....it burns!" Thanks for this

I had someone contact me about how to get rid of the error message that we both are getting. I'm still getting the compatibility error message every time I turn on the camera. It sits there for a few seconds and then goes away although the card seems to function just fine. I thought the error message was gone but it turns out that at the time of the post I had switched to internal memory. The card is an 8GB Sony Memory Stick Pro-HG Duo card from Flash Memory Mall. I don't know if the problem is the card or the supplier. Is anyone else using the Pro-HG cards with a CX100 and if so, are you having the same problems or are they working just fine (and I/we should stay away from the supplier)?

Here's a relevant exchange, it's even from FOX HANNITY: And we continue now with our "Great American Panel." Should ACORN lose all federal funds? Juan? WILLIAMS: Well, yes, if they are guilty of this corruption, yes, they should, you can't have federal money going into a corrupt organization. Now, I will say this, Sean. Exactly how serious do you think this is? Because the way you play it... HANNITY: Extreme. WILLIAMS: ... you would think that this is the basis of all corruption, going to take apart our great country. And you know what? This is miniscule. And most of what ACORN does is help poor people. HANNITY: Getting tens of millions, getting $8 billion. WILLIAMS: Forget that. They got about $5 million. STEWART: The thing is, when you receive that amount of federal dollars or any amount, you should be held accountable. And the face is, whenever the layers are peeled back, the spotlight is put on them. In this case, when it comes to voter fraud, when it comes to using taxpayer money to support campaigns, which they did with the Obama campaign, they should all federal funds... WILLIAMS: That's not proven. That's not proven. HANNITY: Obama was a lawyer. WILLIAMS: That's not -- that's a charge. That's not a fact. CIANCI: Look, look, ACORN is an association that started back in 1970. It was to empower people. And I'm sure it was started for all the right reasons. Voter registration, helping people get home ownership, finding jobs, raising the minimum wage. I'm sure the goals are noble, but, unfortunately, as a lot of organizations grow, there's a lot of bad, toxic people who get involved with it. And that's what we have here. The videos speak for themselves. No one made those videos up. And so does it need to be investigated? Yes. And those congressmen and those senators are not going to stay close to ACORN. HANNITY: They've gotten over $54 million now. CIANCI: Over 10 years. HANNITY: That's our money. On track with the stimulus to get $8.5 billion. WILLIAMS: But it's not happening. Did you see the vote the other day? It was 80 -- OK, 80... HANNITY: Because of these two little kids. WILLIAMS: Eighty-three to seven. So that's Republicans and Democrats. The Census Bureau pulling out. But I will say something to you. You're a big guy. How come you're not going after people who take billions of dollars? Why don't you go after Blackwater? Why don't you go after the defense industry that rips off our country? You know, these are people... HANNITY: The industry that keeps us safe. WILLIAMS: Why don't you go after Wall Street? HANNITY: Look, how about we go after the corrupt radicals in the Obama administration? CIANCI: ACORN -- ACORN is an organization that maybe should stay in existence, but not the way it is right now. They shouldn't get a dime. HANNITY: We only have 30 seconds. STEWART: They should have zero to do with the census. They should not receive any more funds and have nothing to do with the senses. WILLIAMS: What about Bernie Madoff and the Wall Street people that do our people...? (CROSSTALK) HANNITY: How about we go after the government that bankrupted Social Security and Medicare? How about we go after the government that bankrupt Social Security and Medicare, and Obama that gave us a promise that we'd have 8 percent unemployment? WILLIAMS: Why don't we go after George Bush, who gives us prescription drug benefits without paying for it? HANNITY: I'm against it. I'm against it. (CROSSTALK) HANNITY: All right, we've got to run. Now, thank you guys. Great panel. Good to see you all.

Even at that rate it would take jussssst a bit longer than 15 years to get to 750B But who's really counting? This is all about posture.

only $750B? well then, that's ok. Much better to go after small businessment and shut them down - they're much more corrupt You mean Blackwater? Our Prince among thieves? But they're so cute when they put on those Crusader crosses. Really snappy. Worth every taxpayer penny I'd say.

Make sure that your box or camera condom doesn't block your IR source.