JohnnyD

Bluto: My point is: If you are going to go to war, to cause young American men and women to make the ultimate sacrifice, to kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of innocents collaterally, to cause the American taxpayer to shoulder the burdon of trillions of dollars while the VPs company and the oil industry are bathing in benjamins, you better be fucking right. Not I'm pretty sure, not the intelligence suggests. I mean not even debateable right. Anything less is unacceptable.

When the evidence is pristine. Nothing less. For example: Cuban missle crisis: We went to the UN with rock solid proof. See these pictures? They were taken this morning. These white things that look like missles? They are missles. Move them or we will turn your shit upside down. Thats how you do it. FWIW - I support the efforts in Afghanistan and I am really upset we have diverted our attention from it.

WMDs per UN = 0 WMDs per Administration = imminent threat of attack. If the UN is ineffective in the enforcement of its resolutions, how can it be possible that there were no WMDs in Iraq? Seems to me the ineffective label belongs elsewhere.

Post deleted by windcatcher

That could possibly be the worst article ever written. The title is "Let the Fight Begin" and by the end of the article, a past FCC chairman is saying there will not be a fight at all. If I turned that steaming piece of crap in when I was in college, my prof. would have said: I have good news and bad news about that assignment. The good news is you obviously didn't plagiarize it. The bad news is you should have.

Actually, the complexity of the system allows for change. People figure a way around something and the government figures out how they are doing it. Small changes can be made here and there and usually are every year. This allows for a constant updating of the code to keep it up with the times. There is also a cost/benefit to the avoidance of tax liability. It can be an expensive proposition to create the structure and environment that will decrease your tax liability and even when you believe you have everything in place, you may still lose in court. You are correct. The problem is one of tax burden. A flat tax, by definition, is neither progressive nor regressive. Our current system is both, depending on the type of tax. The higher income segment of the country would LOVE a flat tax. Middle income people just want something they understand. Currently, the wealthiest people in town pay the majority of the tolls. The revenue to the city from the tolls will remain constant, but the middle to lower class will have to shoulder a larger portion of the the total burden than under the current system. It can only work if the total required tolls are decreased. Currently, we are moving in the opposite direction.

Only if you assume that all people are going to spend every dollar they make. In reality, they will not. This is a horribly regressive tax structure. Percentage wise, as your income increases the percentage of it you will pay in tax decreases. Wendy's example was a good one. People who would be able would drastically change their spending habits under that system. I know I would. I've always pitched this structure (big exemption up front, constant rate above that point) against income tax, not sales tax. Your point is well put in terms of sales tax. That is an important distinction to make. You are in favor of a "flat tax" based on income. The "Fair Tax" is intended to be based on sales of new goods and services at a rate of 23%, IIRC. It seems like a nice theory, but there is no way it would even come remotely close to replacing income, social security, medicare, and capital gains taxes at that percentage. It doesn't even address federal and state unemployment and local and state sales tax. Also, our current system is many things. Among them is effective. I think this would be a very ineffective way for the government to attempt to collect revenue in that the less complex the system is, the less complex the method is required to circumvent the system.

I hope the battery in your phone was dead.

Not laughable, situational. People work for cash under the table and pick up illegals because it is one way to circumvent the system as it currently is. If the system changes, the ways we circumvent it will also change.

Only if you assume that all people are going to spend every dollar they make. In reality, they will not. This is a horribly regressive tax structure. Percentage wise, as your income increases the percentage of it you will pay in tax decreases. Wendy's example was a good one. People who would be able would drastically change their spending habits under that system. I know I would.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=47 These are some basic guidelines.

Mid-level makes no sense. I tried volume up all the way, and as I said, it wasn't enough volume. I had to crank the stereo up considerably higher to match the CD volume. Have you actually sat down with an iPod, a Zen, and a CD in a car, and switched back and forth between the 3 over the same segments of different tracks? I have. When listening to the Zen by itself, it sounds "ok", but when comparing it side by side with a CD the difference is obvious. I also hooked both players into an audio input on my home stereo system, and compared with each other and a CD... same result. Yeah, I have. Sounds like you were able to exchange a bad player.

Obviously things like interface can be subjectively judged. However, there is one point in my post you did not comment on, and that one is the most important - the reason I returned my Creative Zen. MP3 players exist for one reason - to play music. The Zen's audio was UNDENIABLY inferior when played in my car through a straight aux input. If I had to guess, I would say there is not enough internal amplification in the unit. I had to crank the stereo in my car way up to get the volume right, and then the sounds were all washed out. I cannot tell the difference between my iPod and a CD burned from the same mp3. You cannot argue that an mp3 player which cannot output a clean sound is superior to one that can. Maybe for headphone usage only it's alright, but as I said my intended primary use was in the car. And between the 2 units I tried, the iPod ruled. I bet there are other ones out there that work too, but I could not afford to keep trying/returning different units to find out, and this is one thing (surprisingly) that is not covered in most online reviews. The Zen did not do the most basic thing I needed it to, so I returned it. The iPod did most everything I needed it to, so I kept it. I noticed that exact problem with the Zen. The instructions say to set the volume on the device to a mid-level. It didn't work well at all. I just turned the volume on the Zen up. Problem solved. Can't tell the difference in sound quality between the Zen, Ipod, or a couple other players. Maybe you had a bad cable? Any rate, glad you were able to return something that wasn't working for your needs for something that is.

Interesting. I have a Zen Micro and my wife has an Ipod Mini. The display on the screen and the user interface is identical (Except the Zen has a vertical scroll and the Ipod has a wheel scroll). The Zen has many positives in addition. FM tuner, external easily replaceable battery, much easier to trade music with any computer, WMP is much easier to use than Itunes, don't need to purchase a charger. Cons: ear buds that come with the Zen are inferior. Fortunately this doesn't apply to me, because I can't fit any of the standard buds in my ears anyway. In short: IPODS DO, IN FACT, SUCK

If it were only that easy.......

I understand why it is very easy to be frustrated in a situation where you take all the evidence to the police of a crime (you have basically done the investigative part of their job) and they look at you like you are from another planet. It is my hope that as crimes of this nature become more common, local police will become more familiar with them, ant thus more able to arrest criminals in a timely manner.

Jen, Unfortunately, I have some experience with this. My advice is to be very persistent. We had an employee stealing. We took documentation (proof) to the police on 3 occasions and made countless phone calls. The problem is the police aren't trained to deal with white collar crime. You can't turn on the lights and sirens and pull it over. You can't put yellow tape around it. It seemed as if they just didn't know what to do. They tried repeatedly to pass it off to other cities, saying it wasn't their jurisdiction and the other cities passed it right back. In the end, it took us 6 months to get an arrest for crimes which we had all the evidence for on day one. The kicker was the employee wrote a check to get bailed out. Yes, it was hot. We told them not to accept a check from that company, as it was stolen and the accounts were closed. They did anyway. We were dealing with amounts in the 5 figure range. We are currently going through it again (not our employee this time) and the amounts are well into six figures. Different state, same problems. We have all the proof and documentation, but the local law enforcement doesn't seem to know what to do with it. So again, be persistent.

You just wait till the tractor is at 45 degrees - DUH!

MIT answer: >Yes, the plane will still likely take off. It's doable U of I answer: >the plane's not going anywhere, at least not until the wheels explode and the plane flies off the back of the belt. Just to keep score.

Also, the high cost of housing in that region forces a lot of people into PMI. I wonder how tough it would be to get insurance if your house is in a flood plain. One house I looked at in SD was in a flood plain and I couldn't buy it if I was going to be forced into PMI.

I don't know what leftist dogma is. I am not a Democrat or a leftist. Just a guess, since you seem to be incapable of posting without mentioning left this or right that. Although I haven't listened to Rush or any radio for a while, I hear his voice when I read your posts. We're fucked. I see no other option than to see it all the way through. Anything less would be wrong and two wrongs don't make a right. I think we will and should be there for years to come.

Left this, right that. Jesus Harold Christ. Shut off your radio and reengage your brain. Try a post that says: I believe......... and don't quote Rush.

And I say again: You are all about left and right. You support something you know is wrong because of it. I'll say it again because its worth it: Right and wrong is more important than right and left. Thanks for making my point. You are almost correct here because it is about right and wrong! Bush is right, you are wrong.........but your hatred will not let you see...... Ho Lee Shit! If you can wedge a tv in with you under that rock you're living under, you will find there are no wmds. Bush was wrong. WAY wrong. No amount of blind support will change that.

And I say again: You are all about left and right. You support something you know is wrong because of it. I'll say it again because its worth it: Right and wrong is more important than right and left. Thanks for making my point.

Iraq possess weapons of mass destruction and the United States is under the threat of imminent attack. - 100% wrong. Iraq did not have wmd's and therefore could not attack us with them. Please tell me what I need to read up on. Here is an update: Bush WAS wrong. The intel WAS wrong. It IS Bush's fault. We shouldn't have gone. I'm just pointing out the painfully obvious with the benefit of hindsight. The fact that you refuse to accept that which is now plainly obvious tells me you have an absolute inability to see or think beyond the party line. Congress authorized giving the president the authority to use force at his discretion. That was a huge mistake. I think we need Congress to be forced to declare war in the future. It would lead to more accountability than what we have now, which is a bunch of chicken shit Congressmen and Senators who were too afraid to say no in the shadow of 9/11. FWIW - I thought Bush was doing a good job in the aftermath of 9/11 right up to the point when he completely dropped the ball and gave up fighting the people who actually attacked us and are still to this day out there somewhere. That is the unfortunate reality, but as Americans, we have the duty to hold our government accountable. I wish that would happen, but we can't wipe out two branches of the gov't. I would settle for one.