Slashdot Mirror

In a nutshell, it describes the anecdotal reactions of four to six year olds of various R-rated movies in movie theatres (the ones specifically mentioned are The Ring and Eurotrip). The column ends with the subject of the column (not the columnist) thinking of laws banning children (she thinks of 4-6 year olds, clearly everyone here would think 18 years and under) from watching R-rated movies, period.

A good quote from the column is this:

"Kids up to the age of 6 or 7," she said by phone, "don't know the difference between fantasy and reality. What they see, they experience as if it were happening."

What's more, she said, "Young kids are very responsive to visual images, and grotesque, violent visual images are inherently scary. If they see a monster or a vicious-looking villain chasing somebody with a knife, they don't make any allowances for the fact that this is somebody's dream or that it didn't really happen. Until their brains develop further, they can't put anything into context."

Also consider that, again anecdotally, children did not have nearly the same reaction to watching images of 9/11 as adults did. They didn't think it was real. Would the reaction have been the same in 1950?

Anyways, I'm not really pushing for or against any particular viewpoint at this time, other than I can't see why the CDC shouldn't at least look at the issue.

...the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has ordered inspections of all nuclear plants in Illinois (11, the most of any U.S. state) following an "emergency" at an an Exelon-owned plant on Monday along with several tritium leaks at more than one plant in past months. Of course, Exelon's flacks downplay the chances of public danger in all these cases.

If a ball player can do it, why not?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-06020 9soxdaley,1,4279384.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack =1&cset=true

Ahmed M. Rehab wrote a very good editorial about this in today's Chicago Tribune.

You have to remember that, like the bomb and shotgun wielding anti-abortion "Christian" fundies, these are NOT your average God-loving Muslims. These "Muslims" that kill are, like their clinic-bombing "Christian" counterparts, not following the teachings of the man they profess to follow.

They are secularists with a political agenda and see religion as a handy tool. I'm sure Muhammed isn't any more pleased with these jackyls then Christ is with the clinic bombers.

Don't judge me by that wolf in sheep's clothing Pat Robertson, and don't judge Muslims on the action of these "Muslims." They, like Robertson, are NOT following the teachings of their prophet, nor are they doing God's work, nor do they really care.

-mcgrew
(MRC="contempt")

I take it that you haven't heard the news: It's already being created!

http://www.urge.com/

http://www.technologynewsdaily.com/node/1924

In an article by Steve Johnson in the Chicago Tribune's online news-site http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/review s/critics/chi-0512210012dec21,1,423123.column?coll =chi-ent_critics-hed, Jason Hirschhorn, MTV Networks' chief digital officer said that they had talked to Apple about working together on Music and Video properties from MTV's catalog and was quoted saying:

"the problem is Apple believes in a closed system. It's hard to see how MTV and our brand work within that"

Isn't this odd: that the company wanting everyone to "Think Differently" changes it's corporate mantra to be "Think Capitalistically" or "Think Monopolistically" when it comes to portable media devices?

WhoWouldaThough?

--ScottKin

Economic freedom is defined as the absence of government coercion or constraint on the production, distribution, or consumption of goods and services beyond the extent necessary for citizens to protect and maintain liberty itself. In other words, people are free to work, produce, consume, and invest in the ways they feel are most productive.

All government action involves coercion. Some minimal coercion is necessary for the citizens of a community or nation to defend themselves, promote the evolution of civil society, and enjoy the fruits of their labor. This Lockean idea was embodied in the U.S. Constitution. For example, citizens are taxed to provide revenue for the protection of person and property as well as for a common defense. Most political theorists also accept that certain goods-what economists call "public goods"-can be supplied most conveniently by government.

When government coercion rises beyond that minimal level, however, it risks trampling on freedom. When it starts interfering in the market beyond the protection of person and property, it risks undermining economic freedom. Exactly where that line is crossed is open to reasoned debate. The goal in the scoring of economic freedom is not to define these extremes-either anarchy or utopia-but to describe the world's economies as they are.

Throughout history, governments have imposed a wide array of constraints on economic activity. Many constraints can be measured by assessing their impact on economic choices. Constraining economic choice distorts and diminishes the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services (including, of course, labor services).2

One fact, however, is overridingly true: When governments restrict people, their behavior changes, and probably not for the best. Coercion alters choices that ordinary people make. Economic freedom is diminished, and economic growth suffers.

Well - as long as you're happy with the new US motto:

America: still more rights then North Korea

Aw, shucks! The US is WAY better than that!

In the Index of Economic Freedom 2006 , the US ranks 9th in the world, tied with Australia and New Zealand. North Korea ranks 157th. That is a noticable gap.

Plus, I think you have the motto wrong. It is "In God We Trust"

Of course, it is as easy to be mistaken about these issues as it is about the legality of the NSA surveillance program, which actually has a strong legal foundation.

I don't know which is more shameful, the sorry state of government today, or that so few people think there's a problem. It's sad.

Most people don't think it is a problem for one of two reasons:

1) They think that conducting surveillance on people in direct communication with known members of terrorist organizations that have recently attacked the United States is actually a good idea.

2) They understand that the NSA program is very likely legal, as noted by:
The current Attorney General
A former Clinton administration Assistant Attorney General
The Lawyers at Powerline blog
and others in commentary & response.

High treason is quite explicitly attempting to forcibly overthrow the government. While that might be the effect of the Bush administration, it would be very difficult to prove it as the aim

High treason? Impeachment? right....

President Bush's post- Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents.

The Fourth Amendment includes requirements for the issuance of search warrants, and many critics of the NSA program seem to assume that this means that all searches must be executed pursuant to a warrant. This assumption is wrong. There are dozens of situations where warrantless searches have been approved by the courts. The overriding principle is that searches of Americans (defined to include resident aliens) must be reasonable.

One of the many situations where warrantless searches have been approved is when the government is seeking foreign intelligence information, such as information relating to potential terrorist threats. Next to the Constitution itself, of course, the highest authority is the United States Supreme Court. At least three Supreme Court cases have discussed this subject.

Here is the link to the statement you cited:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-051 2210142dec21,0,3553632.story?coll=chi-newsopinionc ommentary-hed

Basically, his argument is that the Bush administration operated in areas which FISA doesn't cover. There's no way for us to know whether that is correct or not, since the surveillance is all classified, but it is highly dubious to say the least.

Again,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-051 2210142dec21,0,3553632.story?coll=chi-newsopinionc ommentary-hed

  The passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978 did not alter the constitutional situation. That law created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that can authorize surveillance directed at an "agent of a foreign power," which includes a foreign terrorist group. Thus, Congress put its weight behind the constitutionality of such surveillance in compliance with the law's procedures.

But as the 2002 Court of Review noted, if the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches, "FISA could not encroach on the president's constitutional power."

Second time I have posted this:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-051 2210142dec21,0,3553632.story?coll=chi-newsopinionc ommentary-hed

n the most recent judicial statement on the issue, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the ... courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence ... We take for granted that the president does have that authority."

From: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-051 2210142dec21,0,3553632.story?coll=chi-newsopinionc ommentary-hed

Written by a friggen associate attorney general of the United States under the Clinton Administration :

In the Supreme Court's 1972 Keith decision holding that the president does not have inherent authority to order wiretapping without warrants to combat domestic threats, the court said explicitly that it was not questioning the president's authority to take such action in response to threats from abroad.

Four federal courts of appeal subsequently faced the issue squarely and held that the president has inherent authority to authorize wiretapping for foreign intelligence purposes without judicial warrant.

In the most recent judicial statement on the issue, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that "All the ... courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence ... We take for granted that the president does have that authority."

The passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978 did not alter the constitutional situation. That law created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that can authorize surveillance directed at an "agent of a foreign power," which includes a foreign terrorist group. Thus, Congress put its weight behind the constitutionality of such surveillance in compliance with the law's procedures.

But as the 2002 Court of Review noted, if the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches, "FISA could not encroach on the president's constitutional power."

Coalition forces in Iraq now number fewer than 23,000 from 24 countries, down from about 50,000 from 38 countries in 2003.

I will add a few links for commentary by:

Lawyer & blogger John Hinderaker of Powerline blog

Former Clinton administration Associate Attorney General John Schmidt

A Justice Department response to Congress by Assistant Attorney General, William Moschella

The quick & dirty version is: There is a very strong case this was prefectly legal.

And, of course, Congress was notified of the program.

I'm pretty much there with you.

There is no way that President Bush would ask, say, the NSA to do anything illegal is there?

And, although there may be a few renegades, there isn't much of official Washington that would use secrets for political gain.

But then there is the press which has recently developed some badly misplaced priorities, actively supporting and publicizing leaks of sensitive ongoing intelligence and military operations against the enemy over and over again. You would think it would be easy to understand that this harms our national security, yet much of the mainstream media passes over the issue in silence. On the other hand, they have endless energy and interest in a kerfuffle involving no crime.

Maybe the media will start taking the war more seriously if Al Qaeda makes significant progress in their announced goal of killing four million Americans. Or maybe not. If there are more successful large scale terrorist attacks in the United States, aided by the media's disclosure of on-going military and intelligence operations, I expect that the majority of the media won't engage in self-examination, but will rather most likely start banging the drums from the fever swamp. The fever swamp runs deep, and support for the President among the media is thin.

Well, if the other party gains power, maybe things will change... or maybe not.

Thank goodness we are a country where you can still engage in dissent against the mainstream.

Oh boy, this is going to sting a little..

"Every president since FISA's passage has asserted that he retained inherent power to go beyond the act's terms. Under President Clinton, deputy Atty. Gen. Jamie Gorelick testified that "the Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes."..from an associate attorney general of Clinton's

He has the authority to do it:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-051 2210142dec21,0,3553632.story?coll=chi-newsopinionc ommentary-hed

It's the necessary thing to do:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/20 05-12-21-bush-spying-edit-yes_x.htm

It's been done before by your pals Clinton and Carter
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051222-122610- 7772r.htm

You are all for it when it serves your politics :
http://realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-12_21_ 05_MM.html

----------
A Troll post for a Troll post.

"What happened today that didn't happen yesterday. That's what news is. Start typing."

Raymond R. Coffey, Tribune Washington bureau chief, 1983

For a long time, Ray Coffey's definition, crystal clear and well stated as was everything the complete news pro uttered or wrote, served the business well. It was the kind of measure you could take to the bank because it was unerringly correct and dependable.

But the veteran Chicago newsman's definition doesn't work so well anymore. What happened today is generally old news by the time tomorrow arrives. It's what happened a few minutes ago, maybe an hour ago, that is news now.

This has created a lot of problems.

In the glory days, reporters could whittle away for five, six, seven hours at an event, parse it out, look for the contradictions and try to present an accurate, compelling account that would be published the next day.

The electronic world has now seized the turf of news immediacy.

On the Internet, on radio, on cable TV, news is "presented" as it happens, or just after it happens. That period of measurement, consideration, reporting, writing, cautious editing has generally disappeared from the context of the "breaking news" event.

He goes on to say that that's a bad thing.

Generally, opinion, in the form of lots of blogging, will be slathered all over it, like peanut butter so heavily spread you can't see the toast anymore.

If you drop back out, you might well lose the crucial context or be left with a set of "facts" that are, ultimately, not facts at all, but changeable parts of an ongoing story.

I am bringing this up because of a brace of e-mails that flowed from the coverage of Hurricane Katrina. A lot of people apparently have decided the "media" got the story all wrong, starting with reports that there could be 10,000 dead Katrina victims in New Orleans.

Well, first, Ray Nagin, mayor of New Orleans, actually said that. It became instant news, without reflection, without questioning, without much editing, in the world of electronic news reporting. Much, much later, the record was corrected.

Those following things closely understood that. Those who didn't were stuck with a wrong version of events.

When Katrina struck, most meteorologists and wannabe bloggers knew what intensity and ferocity of hurricane was going to strike. I'm sure there are people up and down the Mississippi coast that never knew what was coming, for one reason or another. What sort of information, if any, were they getting? When Katrina was downgraded to a Category 4, did people think, "Oh, it's not going to be so bad?"

This is a rambling post containing mere quotes from the editorial -- I encourage you to read the whole thing -- so I'll leave with what I liked the most.

You are deluding yourself if you think you know what actually happened by dropping in for a few minutes of the latest. It's not enough.

These media are serving very different purposes, and the sooner everyone recognizes that, the stronger the individual components of media will become.

You can grind up a great stewpot of developing events on a Web site. But you are going to be eating it one quick bite at a time, which doesn't lead to a very satisfying meal.

And for anyone who cared, no, the guy isn't a conservative Big Paper shill. Quite the contrary.

Have you looked at the nutritional info on their salads? They aren't what I would consider healthy. When you count in the salad dressing, they really aren't much better than a Big Mac.

You know what, I just took a look at the nutritional information on McDonalds website and it looks like between adding the greazy chicken parts and the dressings you can really max out on saturated fats and sodium.

I'm not a dietician but as I understand it the best kind of salad is where you replace the watery iceberg lettuce with spinach (a superfood) and go for a lighter oil dressing instead of slathering on the "white goo" dressings.

Only upside to all this that I can see is a salad at McD's is going to be a lot better for you than eating the fries/burgers/nuggets. Also I've heard (and agree that) portion control goes a hell of a long way in helping you reduce your weight and intake of bad fats and such. In fact I read a decent article about it right here. (warning: free sub required)

Happy eating/gaming, McFriends!

Thank you for that fascinating string of ad hominems, misinterpretations of both my statements and motives, and uncited factually incorrect assertions. That is certainly a wonderful way to bring up the level of discourse and help others whom you believe misunderstand the situation to come to a better understanding.

As I am in a generous mood, I will go ahead and let you know the thing you desperately need to know:

No matter how earnest or angry you are, citing links to specific non-partisan sources to back up your assertions is much more persuasive than writing things you wished were true punctuated with bits of all caps ranting and using lots of exclamation points.

Here is an example. I have a position. FEMA and the White House screwed up royally in this crisis. Besides the obvious top level things like Bush staying on vacation through the disaster and for days afterwards, besides Condi Rice going on vacation after the crisis started, besides Dick Cheney staying on vacation for a week after the hurricane hit, Mike Brown screwing up so badly he was fired, etc., how else have they screwed up since the disaster started? Take a look at the evidence:

Some have denied that FEMA was responsible, or wasn't called in until after the disaster hit. This is false:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20 050827-1.html

The White House held up deployment of other state's Nat'l Guard in LA:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050903/ap_on_re_us/ka trina_national_guard

Bush dragged his feet on rubber stamping deploying the navy - it was his job to authorize their use and he sat on his hands. The USS Bataan, a naval vessel with helicopters, doctors, hospital beds, food, and water had been cruising off the Gulf since the Friday before the hurricane unable to act for more than a week:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi -0509040369sep04,1,4144825.story?page=1&coll=chi-n ewsnationworld-hed

FEMA sent back volunteers with flotilla of 500 boats:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0509/01/acd .01.html

FEMA prevented a convoy of Wal-Mart trucks from delivering food and water:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9179790/

FEMA won't accept Amtrak's help in evacuations:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/84aa35cc-1da8-11da-b40b-0 0000e2511c8.html

FEMA turned away power generators:
http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/WWLBLOG.ac3fcea .html

FEMA prevented the Coast Guard from delivering diesel fuel:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/national/nationa lspecial/05blame.html?ex=1283572800&en=1d14ebfbd94 2a7d0&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

FEMA won't allow Red Cross deliver food:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05246/565143.stm

FEMA blocks morticians from entering New Orleans:
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15147862 &BRD=1817&PAG=461&dept_id=68561&rfi=6

FEMA snubbed Chicago's offer o

So, the slippery slope is a fallacy? Well let's see what the a NAZI propagandist had to say:

Nazi Herman Goering on Military Recruting
"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

It worked for the NAZIs and seems to of had worked for Bush after 911. Now, dispite there being a constitutional ban on imprisoning someone indefinately without being charged, a federal appeals court has ruled that the government holding Padilla is legal.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi -0509100027sep10,1,5918883.story?coll=chi-newsnati onworld-hed Shows that the US is not that far behind, as an appeals court says it is legal to hold US citizens forever without trial, as part of the Presidential powers. I think the courts and our political leaders need to pick up a dictionary.

Fascism: A social and political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state or nation is the highest priority, rather than personal or individual freedoms.

I believe we had a world war over this.

The price, it seems, of liberating oneself is that some innocent people will have to give up their rights so that others may live as they choose.

People are not longer interested in truth or real justice. They are not interested in determining if a person is guilty or innocent. Conviction on mere suspicion or circumstances of birth is enough for them. They don't care how many innocent people are killed, they don't bother to suspect that authority itself could be blind or corrupted. People just want a sense of security.

If you are going to believe that the fourth amendment was invented for no reason and is a hindrance to the cause of survival, there is nothing I can do.

But, if you are going to record people's convictions, at least allow people trials to defend themselves. (I'm referring to the ruling http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi -0509100027sep10,1,5918883.story?coll=chi-newsnati onworld-hed that even citizens can be held on suspicion ..there isn't even a criteria on degree of suspicion). These are people who have no problems holding people for years or lifetimes without determing whether they are guilty or not. "If you aren't planning on giving me a trial, execute me and get it overwith I'd hate to be a burden."

If we're run by those who believe in God, why do they believe that God requires us to torture people without assurance of their guilt, give up our belief in trials, truth, and justice in order for us to survive?

For liberty, there are those willing for any price to be paid as long as it's from someone else's pocket.

As far as getting rescue supplies in and second stage rescue operations setup - yes, it could have been done better I feel sure. Yet at the same time, in order to have a chopper operating to do rescue, you need to setup a FARP where the chopper can fuel up. You need base facilities for routine maintenance and mechanical failures to be handled (we've seen remarkably few catastrophic failures given the number of rescue sorties and presumably pilot duty schedules). Pilots need to sleep and be fed as do mechanics and SAR techs. All in a secure area. That takes a lot of logistics, just to get these sorts of FARPs setup. And it takes time.
It takes time for an Aircraft Carrier or Amphibious Assault ship to steam to the area. It takes time for the army engineers to clear roads to let larger relief vehicles in. NO wasn't the only place hit, many of the roads into new orleans would be absolutely impassable.

Washington, not Baton Rouge stopped federal assistance from arriving on time to assist New Orleans and the Louisiana Gulf Coast. That order I showed you does request lots of money - which gets spent on all of the assistance that Lousiana deploys. I don't know why you think that a devastating hurricane/flood doesn't require (only 20%) more money for engineers than police, considering the vast destruction. And I don't know why you think that ordering the money isn't essential to the effort. If she hadn't ordered the money, would you be complaining that she was "stingy", or "expected to fix everything for free"?

I spoke this past weekend with a former Red Cross board member who's still involved, here in NYC. She told me that the Red Cross wasn't actually prepared or ready to help, they couldn't just go in the way people expect. So they've got people from FEMA to the press saying they were prevented by various governments, to cover their ass. Meanwhile, FEMA did stop all kinds of assistance from assisting, despite their actual policies - from a "battalion" of 1000 local boatsmen (with 500 boats in tow) which the Jefferson Parish Sheriff (who is the boss of the parish) brought back with an escort, to Al Gore's passenger jets that he called in on a favor from an airline. Then there's the Bataan, which could have saved many lives if used. And Bush has the power to send in all kinds of troops and assistance even without the state actions which were done, if communications were so bad that he didn't realize that prerequisites were complete. Instead, he didn't even leave his vacation for days longer, and first took care of some political work in California while people were drowning.

The list like this is very long. It's being reported all over the place. I don't know exactly which "Post" you're reading, but the facts are everywhere. The governor did all kinds of things she was supposed to do, the Feds did not, and thousands of people died as a result.

Bull Fucking Shit Yourself.

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.

However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn't handle the ferocious winds and raging waters from Hurricane Katrina, which was a Category 4 storm when it hit the coastline. The decision to build levees for a Category 3 hurricane was made decades ago based on a cost-benefit analysis.

"I don't see that the level of funding was really a contributing factor in this case," said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, chief of engineers for the corps. "Had this project been fully complete, it is my opinion that based on the intensity of this storm that the flooding of the business district and the French Quarter would have still taken place."

Strock also denied that escalating costs from the war in Iraq contributed to reductions in funding for hurricane projects in Louisiana, as some critics have suggested. Records show that corps funding for the Louisiana projects has generally decreased in recent years.

With the level of support sent by the US to disasters around the world (like the Boxing Day Tsunami), I wonder if the rest of the world is trying to help the US now?

A quick Google News reveals this article: "By Friday, offers had been received from Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Belgium, Britain, Canada, China, Colombia, Cuba, Dominica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, France, Germany, Greece, Georgia, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, the Philippines, Portugal, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Venezuela and the United Arab Emirates."

Some of the more interesting offers include:

Venezuela - "apart from the million dollars in monetary assistance, Venezuela is offering two mobile hospital units, each capable of assisting 150 people, 120 specialists in rescue operations, 10 water purifying plants, 18 electricity generators of 850 KW each, 20 tons of bottled water, and 50 tons of canned food."

Cuba - "1,100 doctors and 26 tons of medicine and equipment."

France - "a range of aircraft and two ships, with helicopters and planes capable of airlifting tons of supplies, a disaster unit with 20 soldiers, a civil defense detachment of 35 people and an airborne emergency unit"

Germany - "medical evacuation planes and airlift field hospitals, water purification systems and portable shelters"

Of course, one could criticise these offers as oppertunistic publicity-seeking, but then the same could be said of political photo-ops like Bush 'comforting survivors'.

Oddly enough, I found this quote in the washington post:

Bush told ABC-TV: "I'm not expecting much from foreign nations because we hadn't asked for it. I do expect a lot of sympathy and perhaps some will send cash dollars. But this country's going to rise up and take care of it."

Michael

You are pretty dense. The money was already allocated and the Bush administration slashed it by 80%. Since the Iraq war, the lion's share of the Army Corp of engineers time , man power and our tax dollares are going in to a futile effort to rebuild Iraq instead of the U.S.

You probably are aware by now that you have been thoroughly debunked, but just in case...

From the Chicago Tribune. The levee that failed had already had the work that wasn't funded for the others. It is a non sequitor. Get over it.

Additionally, raising the levees is a moot point. They didn't overflow, they BROKE.

Your the one being irrational. He is doing something completely wrong, diverting $300 billion dollars in to the otherside of the world in to a bottomless pit, while the U.S. goes down the tubes.

Yes, because we all know that the decision to invade Iraq in March of 2003 was made on August 31,2005 as Katrina was wreaking havoc on the Gulf Coast.

Do you guys have any informed or otherwise sensible criticisms? That would be nice. But right now you are talking out of your ass out of hatred of a man whom you have never met but for whom you have, nonetheless, developed a very unhealthy obsession, it appears.

Also (I guess this is as good a place as any)... the problems in New Orleans post-storm have very little to do with the federal government. The mayor of N.O. (the guy bitching on the radio today) waited until Sunday to order the evacuation of the city, despite the pleading of President Bush to order an evacuation on Saturday.
 
They sent people to the Superdome, with no means of distributing relief supplies once they got there--in fact, there were NO SUPPLIES there. They just shoved them in an arena.
 
None of the cities transportation resources were used to evacuate those who couldn't evacuate themselves. There a pic floating around tonight of hundreds of school busses sitting unused in a flooded parking lot. The city also has hundreds of mass transit busses that weren't used.
 
The national guard wasn't mobilized immediately (for the ignorant amongst you, the NG is under the control of the GOVERNOR, not the president).
 
After the storm, the city government was virtually AWOL. There was little or no police presence. Looters were completely unchecked.
 
The federal government moved very quickly as the true extent of the problem became obvious early Wednesday... remember, on Monday night and Tuesday N.O. had "dodged a bullet" (the phrase du jour in the media that day). On Wednesday, convoys of navy ships were deployed to N.O, including the USS Bataan--which carries helicopters and is capable of making drinkable water--and the USS Comfort for medical care.
 
I live in Orlando, Florida, and I experienced THREE hurricanes last year. In each of them, it was the city and county who organized the relief operations, and who appealed to the state for aid, who in turn worked with the feds. FEMA is at the disposal of the local and state governments who are coordinating the relief.

Unfortunately, the local government in New Orleans is run by an incompetent, apparently, who would rather blame everyone in the world except for himself. The federal agencies can't do much good if the people running the effort in the city/state don't have a clue. They are designed to build on a foundation that simply was not set up by the local officials. Now that the feds and other city governments are involved (like Houston, for example) things are working much more smoothly. You are completely misplacing blame here... it's sad that you felt the need to start blaming people at this juncture in the first place, to be honest.

It's a pity that so many here are so mired in irrational loathing and can't recognize the good that is now being done.

Cutting-edge food preparation and flavor combinations previously unheard of are being served across the world, but especially in places like Chicago, New York City, and parts of Spain.

I recently trekked out to Chicago to visit on such restaurants, Alinea.

Photos from my experience here.

The Tour at Alinea in Chicago lasts roughly four and a half hours and is made up of twenty-five courses paired with nearly as many wine tastings. The executive chef, Grant Achatz, opened his well-documented restaurant to excited reviews this past May.

Each course consists of either a bite or a few bites that almost always incorporates an experimental technique of preparation such as sous vide, industrial centrifuge, foams, anti-griddle, German vaporizers or flash-freeze dehydrators. Alinea presents each course on specialized serviceware custom made by designers like Crucial Detail.

The New York Times, Frank Bruni, writes about this new type of cooking, the Chicago Tribune rates Alinea and NPR's Jennifer Ludden radio documents Alinea with chef Achatz.

Cutting-edge food preparation and flavor combinations previously unheard of are being served across the world, but especially in places like Chicago, New York City, and parts of Spain.

I recently trekked out to Chicago to visit on such restaurants, Alinea.

Photos from my experience here.

The Tour at Alinea in Chicago lasts roughly four and a half hours and is made up of twenty-five courses paired with nearly as many wine tastings. The executive chef, Grant Achatz, opened his well-documented restaurant to excited reviews this past May.

Each course consists of either a bite or a few bites that almost always incorporates an experimental technique of preparation such as sous vide, industrial centrifuge, foams, anti-griddle, German vaporizers or flash-freeze dehydrators. Alinea presents each course on specialized serviceware custom made by designers like Crucial Detail.

The New York Times, Frank Bruni, writes about this new type of cooking, the Chicago Tribune rates Alinea and NPR's Jennifer Ludden radio documents Alinea with chef Achatz.

Doctors need to start writing prescriptions that read "Run your ass around the block a few times."

This doctor basically did, and look where it got him...

The law subjects store clerks to criminal charges and fines of $1,000 for allowing anyone younger than 18 to buy or rent video games intended for adults. The law also requires retailers to place parental-warning labels on video games with violent or sexually explicit content.

"All of the shuttle's 111 touchdowns to date have been done manually by astronauts instead of relying on the orbiters' current autopilot system."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/orl -rtf-shuttle041805,1,49701.story

This is actually not the first time for Eileen to command a shuttle, Eileen was also the commander in 1999 where she had to perform an emergency landing due to a electrical glitch. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi -0507100350jul10,1,5001379.story?coll=chi-newsnati onworld-hed/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/orl -asecdiscthomas27072705jul27,1,748691.column

Just read on news.google.com about this 19 year-old, Emerson, who started mugglenet.com -- a source of all things harry potter. J.K. found out about it and invited the kid to come meet her. Turns out J.K. wants to use the site to do cross references so the Harry Potter world is more coherent.

Read the Wall of Shame. The kid has a funny sense of humor. And the article says he hopes to be the world's greatest philanthropist, his fortune presumably made while he's at Norte Damn discovering alternative fuels. So he's a good kid, too. And home schooled.

I was impressed.

Here's the article.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi -0507110173jul11,1,6770856.column?coll=chi-newsnat ionworld-hed

Still, the Chicago Tribune (registration required... google for the AP version) has another comparative paragraph:

Scientists had compared the barrel-shaped probe's journey to standing in the middle of the road and being hit by a semi-truck roaring at 23,000 mph. They expect the crater left behind to be anywhere from the size of a large house to a football stadium and between two and 14 stories deep.

So there's still a great deal of uncertainty, but man, 23,000 mph is a heck of a hit-and-run accident.

Miami beach just got some publicity over its law. See http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi -0506090178jun09,1,5258947.story (the Trib requires registration, blah blah blah, bugmenot.com if you're offended).

As for longer sentances, yeah, that would be the logical way to go about it. Instead, numerous states have civil committment laws that allow the state to lock up "patients" indefinitely if a psychologist says the offender may be at a higher risk of reoffending.

Responders are right: no DA can pass up a sex offense prosecution, no local judge subject to election will refuse to pass the buck on issues dealing with sex offenders, and attorneys need to think twice before accepting a sex offender as a client (even when the court tries to appoint him to you). As they say, better 10 guilty people go free than one innocent be sent to prison, but for sex offenders, it's the other way around.

The gauling thing is that what is legal conduct in one state is a child sex crime in another. Kids can get married in one state, but get tagged as a pedophile in another. And never assume that hot chick drinking a beer is in fact over 21, or you may just find yourself on your state's sex offender registry.

For those of you mapping sex offenders, why not wait until the federal database is up and running? Then you have access to all states (despite Oregon's protest) and DC?

People seeking prostitutes in Chicago already face arrest and impoundment of their cars if they are caught, but now they risk something else: public embarrassment on a city Web site.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-05062 1daley,1,963401.story?coll=chi-news-hed
http://www.chicagopolice.org/ps/list.aspx

They're already trying. The scumbags at AccuWeather and Weather Channel, Inc. have bought themselves a senator to push their agenda. They feel exactly as the ACS does, and why? They can make more money by prohibiting the NWS from releasing weather information. They will still be allowed to release emergency information. Ummm, don't you need the regular weather to know when its gonna get nasty?
For more information about how Sen. Rick Santorum has been bought by the weather corporations, read here. http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-05062 00226jun20,1,5138022.story?coll=chi-technology-hed

I'd say quite the opposite. The poor continue to shop Walmart for staples like toilet paper and bath towels at $1.50. But Walmart is losing the middle class to higher-margin retailers like Target and Linspire off a pallete won't bring them back. Target thrives; Wal-Mart wobbles Microtel may be talking up Linux, but its latest offering for Walmart.com is a $1500 home theater styled Windows MCE.

Michael Jackson bought the rights to the beatles music way back in the 80's. Thats one reason to not buy beatles CD's. Pirate your beatles music, then buy something else by McCartney or Ringo, that way they'll see the profits. Buying beatles music supports a pedofile.

I wasn't aware there had been a verdict rendered in that case.
You wouldn't assume he's guilty now, would you?

Looks like the actors are going to go on strike http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/la-fi-voi ce25may25,1,5456782.story?coll=chi-technology-hed

According to this article in the Chicago Tribune the actors are considering going on strike http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/la-fi-voi ce25may25,1,5456782.story?coll=chi-technology-hed. It appears that these actors are either members of SAG or the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA).

"Target thrives; Wal-Mart wobbles"

"Wal-Mart Quits Online DVD Biz"

So I reiterate: gees, maybe mindless growth... yadda yadda....

Perhaps instead of spending time online slinging around insults, you should try reading the news some time.

These two men broke the law to prove a point they held dear.

Where, anywhere, in either the original link, or any other such as this one that even remotely suggests that this was some sort of act of civil disobediance.

You're quoting Thomas Jefferson too (well, you're trying, at least). Where do you come up with this crap? How big your ass must be to pull all this out of it! Where the hell do you get anything about their intentions?

Please tell me that Alan Funt is going to come walking out and say to me, YHBT HAND, because you have can't tell me that you believe the crap that you are spewing!

This is not a case of playing the white knight (or hat) and bringing the problem to the public's, or even school's, attention. These students did the theft/intrusion months ago! They didn't come forward, THEY WERE CAUGHT! Read here, for one.

All of you apologists need to get a fucking clue! You are the reason bad people go unpunished. You fucking social relativists can rationalize anything you believe.

If I was Clear Channel, I'd be looking at getting out of radio and into monopolizing something like billboards or concert venues. Just a thought.

Uh, yeah, they've tried that (eh, maybe my sarcasm detector is faulty today). Though they're apparently selling off the concert unit now.