regulator

------------------------------------------------------------ Damn...just let him put it in your butt and you wont have to follow him on any more of these hikes.

I miss sandy and flipper. Lord knows thats alot more entertaining than this lame fucking thread!

After the president’s debate performance in Denver, this lifelong Democrat has made a difficult decision: he’s given up on Barack Obama. Even if his own wife doesn’t approve. When I told my wife Lisa that I was writing a column supporting Mitt Romney for president, her reaction was both impressive and revealing: “Why don’t you write about the infield fly rule?” It is impressive that anyone actually understands the infield fly rule, one of those arcane mysteries of life in baseball that became the subject of a riot in the St. Louis Cardinals’ 6-3 victory over the Atlanta Braves Friday in the first ever Wild Card One versus Wild Card Two playoff game. It is also true that my normal bailiwick is sports. The revealing part is that she would suggest the infield fly rule as column fodder, a clear signal that support of Republican nominee Romney over President Obama is not something she looks forward to seeing in print and could well create a War of the Tates. We have already agreed to no longer discuss politics. This is not a frivolous decision, nor is it an easy one. I grew up on the Upper West Side of New York, arguably the country’s nexus of liberalogy, where it wouldn’t have surprised me in the least as a child to discover that my parents, along with all the other attendees in some garret reminiscent of the French Resistance, had thrown eggs at Abbie Hoffman at a political get-together because he wasn’t liberal enough. Voting for a president is based on a combination of factual and emotional perception. The tipping point was last week’s debate in Denver. Romney finally did what he should have done all along instead of his balky cha cha with the old white men of the conservative Republican wing: he acted as the moderate he is, for the first time running as himself, not against himself, embracing his record as governor of Massachusetts. I have never seen a performance worse than Obama’s, distracted, his head dipped into the podium as if avoiding the smell of something rotten, acting above the very idea that a debate does provide a pivotal referendum on his first term as it has for all incumbent presidents, whipsawed by the legion of usual advisers telling him to play defense when his own intuition should have told him that he needed to go on the offensive as Romney slapped him around. But there was more than the entitlement of entitlement. He struck me as burnt out, tired of selling his message although he has always been terrible at selling his message when it veers from idealism into the practical. By instinct I still cling to my Democrat roots. But I admit that as I get older, on the cusp of 58, I am moving more to the center or even tweaking right, or at least not tied to any ideology. Those making more than $250,000 should pay more taxes, and that does include me. But I also am tired of Obama’s constant demonization, of those he spits out as “millionaires and billionaires,” as pariahs. Romney’s comments at a fundraiser were stupid, but 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income taxes. Yes, a majority are poor and seniors. But millions do not pay such taxes with incomes of more than $50,000, and whether it’s as little as $10, every American should contribute both as a patriotic obligation and skin in the game. This is our country, not our country club. I don’t see Obama spending much time running the country, unless you count his recent appearance on The View, where he was far more animated and charming than during the debate. Lisa considers me a traitor to the very essence of America, providing a helping hand to those in genuine need. There is a part of me that feels like a traitor myself, having seen firsthand on a sustained basis the cesspool of crime and crack and teenage prostitution and sinking-house dilapidation in which 25 percent of my hometown, the city of Philadelphia, lives, in poverty. Of all the hopes I have for Romney, this is the most tenuous. But take a walk in neighboring Camden, said by some to be the poorest and most dangerous city in America, and ask yourself how urban policy has even been a part of the president’s agenda. The tipping point toward a candidate is perhaps the greatest act of individuality in our unique democracy, although in this day and age of unprecedented political divide, telling somebody who you are voting for has no upside: There is no respect for your right as a citizen, but outright hatred from those who do not agree with you. I fear that I will lose friends, some of whom I hold inside my heart. Of course, I will also lose friends I really don’t like anyway. In my other life, as the afternoon talk show host for CBS WPHT-AM in Philadelphia, I have studied the issues assiduously, or as assiduously as I can given their complexities. I know that both candidates, while agreeing on health-care reform, have radically different ideas. I know that when Romney says people with preexisting conditions will be reinsured, he leaves out the gigantic footnote that first they had to have coverage through their jobs. But I also question the ability of Obamacare to control costs, given the administrative nightmare that exists when government is involved. One of the Obamacare methods of cutting those costs, the computerization of hospital records, has resulted in massive fraud by cheating doctors. At the debate, Romney did not simply act like he wanted to be president. He wants to be president. He showed vigor, and enthusiasm, and excitement, a man who wants to lead. It may all be ephemeral, because most of politics is ephemeral, a cynical means to the end of getting elected. But he also revealed compassion that, during the entirety of this absurdly long march, had never been in evidence before. He recognized the needs of the poor. He recognized the need for regulation. His tax plan was admittedly mystery meat. But the tag he has lied is unfair. To the contrary, he has recognized that his original proposal is more screwed up than the infield fly rule, not to mention mathematically impossible. So he is modifying it, coming up with a possible alternative in recent weeks that deductions should be capped at $17,000. Even the liberal party boys, like The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein, reluctantly admitted in the typical liberal style that it might have merit one of these millennia. I think Romney realizes that lowering the rate to 20 percent will not fly if he is to lower the deficit and make the plan work. And he is hardly the only candidate to assert something during a campaign that will change once in his office. As I recall, Obama vowed to cut the deficit in half. Democratic supporters offered the usual antidotes to Obama’s debate performance: he was tired from running the country, the mile-high air got to him (which is why Al Gore is better off with the midlife crisis of a beard). But I don’t see Obama spending much time running the country, unless you count his recent appearance on The View, where he was far more animated and charming than during the debate. He has said nary a word about the debacle in Benghazi in Libya where ambassador Chris Stevens was killed amidst all sort of questions over adequate security. While getting a tongue bath from Whoopi, he rejected meeting with Middle East leaders during the UN General Assembly, so essential in dealing with a region where personal relationships make a profound difference. As Syria burns more fiercely than ever, now enveloping Turkey with its own use of military force, he purposely stays as far away from it as he can, presumably until after the election if at all. Our engagement in politics is admittedly pathetic, one of the unforgivable shames of our society. But in the debate, more than 70 million were watching. It was a time for Obama to shine, not to mail in the same message, smooth and eloquent as always, but no longer connecting with an electorate that has been there done that (even the liberals will admit it behind the locked door of the bathroom after searching for bugs). I am not sure Obama really wants to be president in any practical way. He hates the rolling up of sleeves and schmoozing that is politics. I respect his principles, the way he does not veer from them, but politics is not principle whether we like it or not. It is friendliness and compromise. I believe that Romney’s move to the center is not yet another flip-flop sleight of hand, perhaps naively. I believe he will send to the political Guantanamo those dirty old white men of the party ready to bomb Iran (speaking of wars, are we out of Afghanistan yet, despite our so-called allies killing our soldiers? See Obama policy). Four years ago, all Obama had to do was speak and everyone swooned. That was four years ago. It is now four years later. He is no longer the chosen one. He is just too cool for school in a country desperate for the infectiousness of rejuvenation. Romney has it. Our president no longer does. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/08/buzz-bissinger-why-i-m-voting-for-mitt-romney.html

oh for fucks sake get over yourself and your stupid proclivity to alienate others due to your political pussyness.

(CNN) -- A web video featuring former special forces officers accuses President Barack Obama of taking too much credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden and allowing classified information about the raid to become public. The ad also includes former Navy SEALs. The organization behind the ad, the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund, has posted the 22-minute web video on its website. A spokeswoman says the group has raised about $1 million toward an advertising campaign in some key swing states. Over a picture of Obama, the video's narrator says that the group's mission is to stop politicians from using sensitive intelligence about the bin Laden raid and other clandestine programs for political benefit. In a series of interviews, former military and intelligence officers accuse Obama of seeking political gain by disclosing successful secret operations. "As a citizen, it is my civic duty to tell the president to stop leaking information to the enemy," says Benjamin Smith, identified in the video as a former Navy SEAL. "It will get Americans killed." Another former Navy SEAL in the video, Scott Taylor, says of the bin Laden raid: "If you disclose how we got there, how we took down the building, what we did, how many people were there, that it's going to hinder future operations, and certainly hurt the success of those future operations." Smith also criticizes the president for taking too much credit for the SEALs' raid. "Mr. President, you did not kill Osama bin Laden. America did," he says. "We have become a political weapon. We are not." Defense officials: Leaks didn't come from Pentagon Smith said the ad campaign pays no heed to political affiliation, and the organization describes itself as nonpartisan and says its focus is on protecting intelligence agents and special operations officers, not on politics. But it shares an office with two Republican political consulting firms in Alexandria, Virginia. Its spokesman Chad Kolton worked for the Bush administration as a spokesman for the Director of National Intelligence. Taylor has run for the Republican nomination for Congress in Virginia; Smith said he is a registered Republican but votes independently. As to who is funding the attack, which was first reported by Reuters, a spokeswoman for the organization would not disclose its donors. Darrell West of the Brookings Institution says it is too soon to say whether this campaign could become as successful as the 2004 "Swift Boat" advertising campaign, which mounted a barrage of negative attacks on John Kerry's standing as a Vietnam war hero. "Obama's strong suit actually is on national security. He's the guy who got bin Laden, and that's been a central claim of his campaign. So there's always a risk of the opposition coming in with this type of ad to try to undermine the president's credibility and take away what is really his strong suit," he said. West said the video blames Obama for leaks without providing any evidence the leaks are his fault. But still, West said, "national security is a very sensitive issue for many people, that's an issue that swing voters take very seriously." In recent campaign speeches, Obama has cited the killing of bin Laden as one of the campaign pledges he has fulfilled. "I promised to go after al Qaeda and bin Laden, and we did it," he told an applauding audience Thursday. The Obama campaign has even produced an ad called "One Chance" in which former President Bill Clinton praises Obama for ordering the secret raid to proceed. But Vice President Joe Biden made an effort to share the credit Tuesday as he was offering the crowd a list of the administration's accomplishments. "The man here pointed out, 'we also got bin Laden,'" Biden said. "Let me correct that. The president of the United States and the special forces got bin Laden." And the head of special operations, Admiral Bill McRaven, a former SEAL himself, recently told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that credit was due to the president. "At the end of the day," he said, "make no mistake about it: it was the president of the United States that shouldered the burden for this operation, that made the hard decisions." But like other top officials, including Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, McRaven was highly critical of the recent leaks about clandestine operations. "Are lives at risk? Absolutely," he said. The White House has denied leaking secret information about clandestine operations, and two federal prosecutors have been assigned to investigate recent leaks about the Stuxnet virus and drone strike operations. But in a recent speech in Reno, Nevada, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney called the leaks "contemptible" and said they occurred on Obama's watch. http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/16/politics/former-seals-obama/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Just what we need...a bunch of worthless people unwilling to get jobs to support themselves living off the goverment.

Republicans are accusing the Obama administration of unilaterally gutting welfare reform after the Department of Health and Human Services quietly notified states that they may seek a waiver for the program's strict work requirements. HHS made the announcement in a policy memo Thursday, news that slipped well below the radar amid a raucous day on the presidential campaign trail. But a few prominent GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill picked up on the change, and accused the administration of overhauling one of the most important bipartisan agreements of the past several decades. "President Obama just tore up a basic foundation of the welfare contract" Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, D-Ohio, said in a statement. He also called the move a "blatant violation of the law." Mitt Romney on Friday spoke up on the change, saying: "President Obama now wants to strip the established work requirements from welfare." He said "the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life." How exactly the HHS change will play out is unclear. In Thursday's policy directive, the department said the states may seek a waiver from the work component of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, in order to "test alternative and innovative strategies, policies and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families." HHS stressed that any alternative should still aim to get welfare recipients into gainful employment. Any plan that "appears substantially likely to reduce access to assistance or employment for needy families," will not be approved, the memo said. But HHS is suddenly allowing for more flexibility in a program known -- and in many circles, lauded -- for its rigid framework. Currently, states have to have 50 percent of their caseload meet certain work participation requirements, though there are ways around that as many states fall short. The latest department directive suggested alternative plans could "combine learning and work" to fulfill the work requirement, or let "vocational educational training or job search /readiness programs" count as well. The hard-fought welfare reform agreement in 1996 was struck between the Bill Clinton administration and a Republican-led Congress. It is still considered a signature legislative achievement from that period. The number of people on TANF has decreased dramatically since 1997, but roughly 4 million people are still enrolled according to federal figures. The change comes in the middle of a competitive election fight between Obama and Romney. Rep. Dave Camp, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, have written to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking for a more detailed explanation of the change and her authority for making it. Both expressed concern that the change would strip the crux of the 1996 welfare reform deal. "This ends welfare reform as we know it," Camp said in a statement. "I'm disappointed that after years of sitting on their hands and failing to propose any significant improvements to the TANF programs, the Obama Administration is once again over-stepping their authority and attempting to circumvent Congress through an unprecedented bypass of the legislative process," Hatch said. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/13/republicans-accuse-hhs-gutting-welfare-reform-with-quiet-policy-change/#ixzz20WSFNXp8

I'm not dissing female engineers...I just know Shah loves them!

http://www.driveforinnovation.com/the-problem-with-women-in-engineering The problem with women (in engineering) PHILADELPHIA–For decades the percentage of women in engineering has stagnated at between roughly 5% of overall engineering jobs. This despite the fact that women are growing as a percentage of workforces in mathematics and the biosciences over the same period of time. Theories abound for this situation in the engineering ranks. Some believe that while girls excel at science and math in the early years, they run into a wall of social pressures in high school, expectations from guidance counselors or pressures from parents. Another school of thought argues that women tend to gravitate towards scientific disciplines where they can demonstrate clear social outcomes day in and day out. Electronics and mechnical engineering often have great social outcomes that are realized well down stream of the actual design work. The MIT experience Others have argued the chicken and egg situation: There simply aren’t enough role models in faculty at college level to inspire young women to stick with engineering. In the 1990s, MIT observed this phenomenon in their science and engineering schools and took steps to increase the percentage of female faculty during the next 10 years. MIT published a study this spring go gauge the impact of the previous decade’s policies. Clearly, women increased as a percentage of faculty and feel more inclusive and less forced to make difficult work-life choices. The jury still is out, however, on whether a doubling of female faculty in the engineering sciences department will draw more women into the program or keep them to the full four years. Katherine Kuchenbecker, who can’t remember a time when she didn’t want to be an engineer, represents the 5 percenters. She’s a mechanical engineering professor at University of Pennsylvania here. She acknowledges she doesn’t have all the answers, but one of them, she’s sure, is mentoring. And it’s not just women mentoring women. Hear what she had to say when we visited her at Penn in September:

Lesson there is, if the cops dont believe you and are about to leave you with Hannibal, punch a cop in the face so you go to jail. This is a fantastic point...I do think if that young asian man had done that exact thing he could still be on this planet.

Dont know if you recall this but he actually had one of his gay lovers escape from his place and someone called the cops and they brought that same person back to jeffery's place where he later killed him that night.

A New Hampshire grandfather has been arrested and is facing a possible prison sentence for firing a shot into the ground and holding a burglar at gunpoint until the cops could arrive. Dennis Fleming, 61, came home on Saturday night to discover that his home had been robbed. He saw the burglar, Joseph Hebert, 27, climbing out of his neighbor’s window. Mr. Fleming yelled, “Freeze!” and fired a shot into the ground before holding the crook at gunpoint. When the police arrived, they arrested Hebert, but instead of a big old “thank you” and a slap on the back for Fleming, he got arrested too, on a charge of reckless conduct. Yes, you read that right: A grandfather of 14 was arrested for not letting a criminal escape. What was he supposed to do -- hold him down? Then they probably would have arrested him for assault and battery. Besides, we are talking about a 61-year-old man versus a 27-year-old man. Fleming did the math on that one himself. He told FoxNews: I didn’t think I could handle this guy physically, so I fired into the ground. He stopped. He knew I was serious. I was angry ... and I was worried that this guy was going to come after me. The police also seized Fleming’s collection of firearms including seven rifles and a .38-caliber handgun. Just in case any other bad guys out there get it in their minds to rob an unarmed house, keep in mind that Fleming still has his Louisville Slugger. Vigilantes can be dangerous, and people should not take the law into their own hands. But that’s not what happened here. The police were called and were on their way. Unfortunately, teleportation hasn’t become a reliable source of transportation quite yet, so the cops were not able to spontaneously appear out of thin air to arrest Hebert. Fleming did what he had to do to keep the younger man from escaping and/or harming him. By breaking-and-entering at least two homes, Hebert had already proved that he doesn’t play by the rules. I doubt he would’ve waited around to be arrested just because Fleming said, “Pretty please.” Americans should have the right to protect their personal property. It’s a keystone to an ordered society. What happens when crooks know that people are unable to defend themselves? Penny Dean of Gun Owners of New Hampshire says, "The fact that this man would be charged is an outrage. Burglars in New Hampshire must know it's open season, since homeowners cannot defend themselves, as evidenced by this case. This is charging the victim." Here’s to hoping County Attorney Tom Veladi shows some common sense when he reviews this case. People should not have to worry about getting arrested or going to jail for self-defense or for protecting their personal property. http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/133341/grandfather_gets_arrested_for_holding

Damn you guys are going waay old school. What ever happened to More than a feeling by Boston or Renegade by Styx perhaps slow ride by foghat?

http://www.break.com/index/carl-sagans-pale-blue-dot-2300622 A truly wonderful way of portraying life on this small planet.

another spelling nazi --------------------------------------------------- Actually I think this instance the term 'punctuation nazi' would be more appropriate.

My wife had something similar happen to her...albeit not a murder case. A lady with her same name had an accident in Houston and they couldnt find the lady that had the accident so they started sending out mass notices to anyone with that name. We had to get the services of an attorney to get them to leave us the hell alone. Guess its a good thing my sister married a lawyer.

I'm 99.9% convinced this is not the real daughter. Wasn't she supposed to be 16? +1 This has all the makings of a good drama. Guns, lesbians, you tube, rednecks. Yeehaw!!! ----------------------------------------------------------- You are of course taking the dude with the guns word for having a daughter in the first place. For all we know thats his step sister who he's pounding after they turn the camera off. I'm totally jealous too...bastid

I don't think so. As I understand it from 'reputable' sources over the years, homosexuality is an in-born thing. You don't just 'chose' to be that way. This thing is being milked and that cow is about to dry-up. Maybe, the little missus didn't want to watch an 'action thriller'!? Chuck ------------------------------------------------------- Id bet that all the experts in the world still couldnt come up with an actual reason why people turn gay. Thats like coming up with a reason why the sky isnt blue every day. Seems like a bunch of panty grabbers want to hold a town meeting and learn how to fix those pesky gays because a pair of them just moved in next door.

Ok lets find out for sure....you hold her down and I'll check beneath the panties for verification of her real age.

From the sound of it...it appears her control freak dad has subsequently turned his daughter into a lesbian as well....and to think I actually watched 'the kids are allright' last night...that is THE LAST TIME I let my wife pick out movies!

I don't know if its been posted yet, but here is the daughters rebuttal to her dad's shooting of her laptop...sounds like shes got some dirt on ole dad after all... http://www.break.com/index/the-daughter-responds-2300080

It's in the subtext of the whole thing though. The fact the guy thought his gun was the solution to that particular problem says a lot about how he deals with life in general. I'm sure there is a faction of folks out there who think he's some kind of "hero" now because he put a few holes into a laptop. However, it's not parenting; it's childish. IF, in fact, the video is actually real. IS it? Or is it simply a great way to get hits on YouTube? ----------------------------------------------------------- Yeah you are correct...pulling a gun out just shows he's more of a douche than he's letting on and he said that he was in IT. If it were me, I'd just set up a proxy server and redirect her IP traffic to the proxy that would only display pictures of animal turds to illustrate how much her attitude sucked. Sounds like if he wasnt such a cornhole, then perhaps she wouldnt be making such facebook posts about her parents in the first place.

Stay low & don't bunch up, you'll be fine...BTW update your will lately? I'm thinking about handcuffing myself to the couch. ------------------------------------------------------ So you own handcuffs huh...guess your next stop will be at this very store to buy your own weapon of choice.

to put it in perspective it took from 5pm yesterday until 9 am this morning to transfer all of that data. She messaged me this morning with this message...'my laptop ready' yeah um NO

This is for all the IT people out there... IF youve ever had to migrate user data over... whats the largest user profile you have encountered? I have a SQL programmer that decided it would be a good idea to index all her files away from her user profile and dump everything on the root of the C:\ drive and remove some files...you know like ntldr and ntuser.dat She wonders why it wont boot up... oh and her damn user profile is 190GB!! for christsakes!!