Andy9o8

WalMart demographics, on the other hand...

http://tronixstuff.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/clockdisplaysmall.jpg

No, no; it's called "religious freedom". Hey, remember when the MX missile was called the "Peacekeeper"? Boy, those were the days, weren't they?

Not specifically; more like general knowledge from having a broad general practice for over 25 years. Plus, the specifics are right in the IRS topic guideline: http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc417.html

Safety is an issue, but it is also about the integrity of the sport. If there was only run in the Giant Slalom or Slalom events, then allowing these lessor experienced competitors to compete would not have any effect whatsoever on the final results of the race. But since there are two runs in the technical disciplines of Alpine Skiing and the courses deteriorate with not only usage but also deteriorate with time, having these massive field of competitors does influence the results of the 2nd run. Vanessa Vanakorn is NOT a bad skier. It's just that she and some of these other fringe competitors just don't have the skills that one would expect to see at a major international event. I can't be the only one who watched that dude from Venezuela who took up ski racing this year. How he got in the GS is beyond me. But at least these fringe skiers are not allowed to compete in the Downhill or Super G disciplines. If they were, it would be the equivalent of allowing someone with a hundred jumps to try to compete in a PST Swoop event with a highly loaded cross-brace canopy. So maybe they should have a Junior Downhill for that class of competitor? I remember the first season I learned how to ski. By the end of the season, I'd just tuck and point myself straight down the intermediate slope and go as fast as the slope would let me, weaving around the slowpokes. In my mind, I was in The Downhill. I'm telling you, man, I was badass.

[raises hand] Ooh! Teacher! Call on me! In the US, the difference to a non-cleric is that in-kind compensation is taxable as ordinary income. Ah, but to a cleric, like, say.... an Archbishop... well, they can live in those kind of employer-supplied digs, and it's usually not considered taxable income*. Pretty neat, eh? Oh, and there's a third standard: the standard of Pope Francis. So regardless of how Caesar might view it, it certainly does not personify the humility of rendering unto God. __________________________ *It's generally either deemed within the scope of the non-taxable portion of the clerical housing allowance; or in the alternative, the cleric may exclude from income the fair rental value of the parsonage, including utilities, as long as it's not more than reasonable compensation for the cleric's services - which for the archbishop of a large archdiocese would be pretty high.

Doesn't really differ much from This recent example, except perhaps to the degree of expense. Hopefully, Francis will handle it similarly.

Nah, I don't think so. Even though I copied & pasted it from the original article, I still stand by it. Reasons? See above.

The title refers to the Church, not the cleric. That aside, the criticism is directed principally at the archdiocese, its management, and the hypocrisy of its financial policy-making, which smells all the world like utter callousness at the least, or corruption if more. Notably, the principal policy-making administrator of an archdiocese at the local level is its archbishop. Also noteworthy is that said archbishop just happens to be the same cleric who personally benefits here. So no, I don't think the tie-in is unfair at all.

Trespassing is already illegal. Why do you need a specific law regarding ag businesses? this if they are already breaking the law, then a good way to fix this is the use of their own video as evidence to arrest them for trespassing and vandalism and whatever else they did to get the footage no need for extra videos - privacy and trespassing, etc already is protected It's like banning 'texting' specifically instead of just bad driving for any reason - Actually, I understand (as in, comprehend) why. These bastards and their corrupt legislative enablers may be thugs, but they're not stupid. You see, it's to close the loophole of whether someone who obtains a job at the venue for the undisclosed purpose of secretly filming, and who films while on the premises in the course of his (thus-obtained) "employment", is or is not "trespassing" as defined in each particular state's criminal statutes. That's exactly how I'd defend a client charged with trespass under such circumstances. Huge grey area, and I can see lots of judges disagreeing on the answer. Never conflab a wrongdoer's evil with stupidity.

What would Francis do differently? http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/20/nyregion/a-church-so-poor-it-has-to-close-schools-yet-so-rich-it-can-build-a-palace.html?_r=0

I will admit I miss spiraling Wendy P. Ohh, you have NO idea.... Sigh..

Awesome.

To what do you attribute that? I have my answer, but I'd like to see yours and others'.

That ain't old. That was "transition". OLD: Rounds Really HOT rounds like a French Pap French paraboots Hockey helmet, preferably CCM Ropes & rings on a 5-cell Cool is a cross-pull ripcord. Really cool is blast handles on BOTH ripcords. Paradactyl. Oh, and knee braces if you jump one. Holding tension. Girl in high tiny cutoffs and tube top holding tension. Hey, turkey - unstable? So go back and try it again. Oh, and relax. Pattern? What's that? Sashay is the norm; spiral til you puke.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FcU_-ooFeJs/TjfvIqDstMI/AAAAAAAAFD4/weBjn7cq5-I/s1600/%2521%2521%2521%2521%2521%2521%2521%2521%2521pull.gif

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-cow-abuse-video-idaho-ag-gag-bill-20140218,0,3908830.story#ixzz2to9rgGPu http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/01/25/ag-gag-bill-returns-to-the-iowa-legislature/article

Nope. Your assertion; your burden of production. What I did was gratuitous. Except, of course, for the part about my bill. My time, for one, is valuable. You're fairly new here. Speaker's Corner has demanding standards. If you're not up to holding yourself up to higher standards than that which you criticize, you can always quit the game.

I once called a government official a dickhead to his face, in front of my boss and entire department. Wasn't fired either, my boss never said a word about it. The government guy actually tried to be more courteous after that. Yeah there were no consequences for this, which I expected given the informal nature of the work and the client had just made a request he KNEW was insane. He laughed at my reply :) The worst I ever did with consequences would have been when I was dating a subordinate. I couldn't treat her better for obvious reasons and I decided that treating her the same would be hard so I just treated her worse than her coworkers. No consequences at work but boy did I hear about it after I once called a judge an asshole to his face in the courtroom. Because court had just adjourned for the day (so we weren't on the record), and the only people in the room were a couple of courtroom staff, I only got about an hour cooling my heels in the courthouse cellblock. Absolutely worth it. Besides, as they say in libel law, "Truth is an absolute defense."

Thanks for the links, it'll give us a chance to look them over for substance and objectivity. (My Google searches, btw, were "cove + documentary + blood + water" and similar - focusing, as I said, on your assertion that the blood-in-the-water images were faked. Many hits, of course, but none supporting the "fakery" angle in the first several pages of hits - thus, my initial inquiry. Since it was your assertion, that'll be $1,000, less your $500, so I'll take $500 in my paypal account.)

Not entirely unexpected of someone whose psycho-social indoctrination (including education at the Evangelical Seminary at Maulbronn) took place in 16th Century Germany. If it helps illustrate the tenor of the time and society in which Kepler lived, I'll mention that his mother, a healer and herbalist, was tried for witchcraft.

That's the second time you've said that in this thread. The first time, when asked for a credible, objective source to support your claim that the images of blood in the water were faked, you simply evaded. Another person then called you on that, but I didn't want to pile on. (The reason I asked the first time is because I did do a search for a supporting reference, and didn't find one; thus I inquired of you.) How about now? It's your allegation - do you or do you not have a source substantiating it that we can review for ourselves? If so, it would be helpful.

That's one possibility. But another possibility is that some jurors were dead-set on 1st degree murder, while other jurors were dead-set that while Dunn was culpable of 2nd degree murder and/or manslaughter, it was not 1st-degree murder, and the two camps could not be reconciled. Thus: impasse = deadlocked jury on that charge.

I don't think "public education" can be painted with a single broad brush by any stretch. By sheer numbers, more than half of the quarter of people who got it wrong were products of public school. My thinking is that there is a broad 360 degree range of targets on this. Everything from Christians to unions and bureaucrats and lefties and Republicans. With that poll, I really think that the finger can be pointed at a broad swath. We can all look at ourselves. FWIW, and in line with post #5 above, here's another essay about this survey which helps put it in a bit more granular perspective: http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/18/opinion/kirshenbaum-science-literacy/index.html?hpt=hp_t4 It's a fairly balanced piece; but one of the points made: