The statement said it supported U.S. President George W. Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."
In comments addressed to Bush, the group said:
"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."
"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."
Self defense is not murder. If it were, there would be no need to call it "self defense". We'd just call it "murder".
So how do you distinguish self-defense from murder? If only there were some way to lay down guidelines...
Murder / Not murder. That's all it should be.
So you feel there's no need to distinguish between the following situations? Tell us then. Death penalty or should they be set free? Remember, there's nothing in between.
A woman comes home to find her husband fucking her best friend. In a rage, she beats him with a heavy object. He ends up dying from the injuries though she didn't intend to kill him.
A woman finds out her husband's cheating on her, goes out, buys a gun and several days later guns him down in cold blood.
A woman finds out her husband's cheating on her, goes out, gets drunk and hits a pedestrian on her way home, killing him.
A woman hires someone to kill her husband, who is cheating on her.
A woman suffering from a brain cancer that's affecting her reasoning centers kills her husband who in her dementia she believes is cheating on her.
Upset from finding out her husband is cheating on her, a woman accidently hits and kills a pedestrian with her car.
A woman, upset that her husband is cheating on her, screws up at her job, resulting in the death of a co-worker.
A woman screws up at her job, resulting in the death of a co-worker.
A woman cuts corners on the job, resulting in death of a co-worker.
A woman turns a blind-eye to a co-worker who's cutting corners, which results in the death of another co-worker.
Murder or not murder. Either we blow her brains out or she's let go without punishment.
It's a cliche but the world is not black and white. There are many shades of grey and that's why we have varying degrees of murder and manslaughter with accompanying penalties.
Another related effect is that the government is competing with the private sector for lending dollars.
The money has to come from somewhere. Either it's simply being printed(driving up inflation) or loaned by lenders... which means it's being spent in Iraq instead of being invested in small businesses in America.
At least not the kind the Republicans are talking about. For example, medical malpractice rates. Several states have already put caps in place and it didn't budge insurance rates a damn bit.
They kept going up anyways because insurance companies couldn't competently invest the money they were being paid. They started doing riskier and riskier investments and when the economy went to shit, they couldn't cover their bills anymore. Jury awards have been trending slightly down for a while, actually.
Not to sound degradating, but do you really believe that the people who all run a corporation are trying to do nothing but poison the environment and put us all into economic slavery?
Corporations aren't evil; they're amoral. They're not out to poison the environment and enslave people economically; they simply don't care if that's the side effect. Just as long as they're "maximizing shareholder value", everything is fine.
Hear about the 2 dismantled Russian nuclear warheads that were found in a bunker that was covered by 10 meters of concrete?
A missile containing radioactive material is not a nuclear warhead, not unless you want to claim the US used "nuclear weapons" in both Iraq wars. AFAIK, they're missiles armed with the same depleted uranium that the warheads we've been saturating Iraq with use.
but it was reported hard and heavy on almost every major radio outlet.
Given that they've been a principle source of misinformation, it's not surprising you're so misinformed.
Your long list of cites is pretty much worthless. A bunch of articles about the same handful of shells dating back to the 80s. A little bit of lost inventory was bound to show up. It's not like we're particularly good at keep track of our chemical/biological agents.
Long-debunked reports and rumors of captured weapons. Most of the articles are the initial news reports that Fox News trumpeted across the airwaves. Naturally, Fox and Rush didn't give you any follow-up.
Honestly, if we actually found nukes in Tikrit, don't you think the Bush adminisrtation would still be talking about it? Posting several articles about the same assinine claim doesn't make it true.
The Bush administration's chief weapons inspector has come out and outright said there were no WMDs. We've controlled the country for over a year and all we've found is a few decades old shells and Bush is reduced to claiming we invaded because Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction program-related activities"? Quite a ways off from the mushroom cloud they were claiming was going to be the smoking gun, isn't it?
What happened to all those WMDs that the Bush administration repeatedly claimed to know the exact location of? Seems like a few of them should've shown up.
He didn't. He said he'd still support giving the President the authority to use force *if necessary*. His main argument, of course, is that Bush misused that authority.
Naturally, the So-Called Liberal Media and the Bush campaign chose to claim he said something else.
But the individuals are frequently unaware of how that money is being directed. For example, how many AAA members know how much AAA has spent working against public transportation? I suppose you could say that RIAA and MPAA funding comes from individuals as well, but if it is, it's nested too deeply. Individual->**AA member->**AA->candidate.
The RIAA and MPAA simply *cannot* give money to campaigns. It's illegal. Now, the RIAA and MPAA can set up PACs(that are segregated financially) that individual actual people can give money to and those PACs can give money to campaigns.
If you're ever curious as to *where* the money is going, all PACs have to file reports with the FEC. So if you're giving an organization money and don't know who they're giving money to, it's your own damn fault.
Please explain why my tax dollars fund the primary process when I don't have a voice.
Please explain why my tax dollars fund public schools when I don't have any kids. There are things the government does that don't directly benefit you. Deal with it.
If you recall, exit polls showed that if everyone who really wanted to vote for Perot did, he would have won. The combination of unbalance reporting and party FUD convinced them that they would be "wasting thier vote" and/or "handing the election to [fill in bad guy here]
If Perot hadn't acted like a petulent child, jumping out and in the race on a whim while babbling about the CIA trying to sabotage his daughter's wedding, I seriously believe he would've come in at least second place. As it is, the guy started coming off as a loon and that's his own fault.
Perot didn't do as well the second time around because Clinton had successfully implemented Perot's main raison d'etre(reduce the deficit) and people were happy with the way things were going. It didn't help that the reform party hadn't become more than a celebrity vehicle for Perot.
Dean was felled in Iowa not because of nefarious forces but because he entered into a murder-suicide pact with Gephardt(negative politics is a loser in Iowa) and because Kerry and Edwards' ground operations were flat out better.
Nader is a Republican tool.
Finally, I'm tired of people claiming "Everyone would vote for my candidate if they were able to vote their conscience!" No, your candidate is simply unpopular and everyone else out there on the fringe is saying the exact same tthing. And whether you like it or not, a majority of the populace or even a significant plurality do not ascribe to the Green party's(or whatever's) current platform. Wishful thinking does not make it so.
Hard work is more than just "voting your conscience". It's recruiting and fielding candidates at the local level. It's about building a bench of legitimate candidates rather than unqualified nutcases looking for attention. It's building party infrastructure from the ground up that'll last for years instead of from the top down with a celebrity candidate that'll be gone after November. The Greens in Germany successfully did it after many years of hard work; the Greens in the US seem to have finally clued into this, at least.
How about we pass a law that says only U.S. citizens can contribute or financially support a candidate?
We already have.
No PAC funding. No "soft" party funding.
The funding from PACs comes from contributions made by individual citizens. Ditto for party contributions. It's just a different way of bundling the money.
No corporate funding. No foriegn funding.
That's always been illegal.
Why should citizens of every party be funding primary elections for members of just 2.
In many states(if not all), 3rd parties are included in the primaries. For instance, here in Washington State, when I go to the primary in September, I'll have a choice of Republican, Democrat and Libertarian primary ballots.
I guess it's easier to bitch and moan about the state of things and how it's all so unfair rather than to get up off your ass and start seriously building a 3rd party from the ground up.
That's what annoys me about Ralph Nader. Has he done *anything* int he past four years to build up the green party? Nope! Having it sucked it dry like a parasite, he's moved onto a new party(reform) to feed his ego.
The funny thing is that Howard Dean's done more to reattach the Democratic party to its grassroots in the past year and a half than Saint Ralph and his various vanity runs have done in over a decade.
I worked on a congressional race in the Tri-Cities a few years back and went on a day-long tour of the Hanford facilities with the candidate, got presentations on how they were handling the many different kinds of nuclear waste.
I don't know what was my favourite. Was it the nuclear waste that was being stored in what amounted to two coffee cans? The containment tubes rated to last 10-20 years that had been holding waste for 50?
I'm thinking I'll have to go with the underground spillover tanks. There'd be a bunch of series of 5 tanks. When tank 1 fills up, waste spills over into tank 2. Tank 2 fills up, spills into tank 3. So on and so forth until you get to tank 5 where when it fills up, the waste apparently just spills out into the ground. Naturally, they weren't meant to last this long either.
So in addition to the nuclear waste, you have to deal with all the contaminated soil and whatnot too. US Gov't really clusterfucked the area. Fortunately, the state gov't(led by AG Gregoire) nailed their balls to an agreement to clean up all this shit.
That being said, it's a neat facility and everyone was friendly and eager to show what they were doing. There are a lot of interesting plume diagrams showing how the contamination is making its way to the Columbia River.
It also effectively gives the Blue Sun Corporation, which is paying for the terraforming and the transport of settlers, indentured serfs who are totally at their mercy.
Blue Sun Corp is probably also the people behind the government school that fucked up River's brain. Some of her "acting out" is against stuff with the Blue Sun emblem. The food cans that she peeled labels off of, for example. Jayne was wearing a Blue Sun t-shirt when she attacked him.
There's another problem: memory. You can't randomly generate a dungeon every time you enter, it would break the continuity. So you'd need to store the dungeon on the memory card, and depending on the complexity that could be big.
Actually, you *can* randomly generate it. You only have to preserve the seed used for the dungeon builder, plus a few others things(items found, puzzles completed.) Just run them through the generator again and you should get the exact same dungeon.
The fact is that there have been 0, that is zero, as in one minus one attacks on America since September 11.
Forgot the anthrax mailer did we?
And wisely, you qualify that with "attack on America" because terrorism has increased worldwide.
Given that prior to 9/11, the last time Al Quaeda had launched a terrorist attack on American soil was 8 years before in in 1993, citing the lack of terrorist attacks in the past 3 years is hardly proof of anything.
that if right-wingers and the press applied the same scrutiny they've given Moore's film to the Bush administration, we might not be in the mess we're in today.
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President." - President Theodore Roosevelt
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else." - President Theodore Roosevelt
And while we're at it, let's ask President Jefferson too...
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." - President Thomas Jefferson
Neither could handle account transfers properly. It'd recognize that the transactions that were transfers, and then create a matching transfer for each one. So it'd acted like I was transfering twice as much money from savings to checking. Then it'd treat them like normal transactions. My biggest "expense" was my checking account and my savings account was my biggest source of "income".
And it was a constant pain to get it to show the information I wanted in the way I wanted it.
I tried both Money and Quicken a couple times each and came away frustrated by what utter shit they were.
For the past couple years, I've used an Excel spreadsheet with a VB macro I wrote that parses OFX files for the transactions. Both my bank and Amex have unique transaction ids so it only pulls new transactions. Then I just to go into the spreadsheet and enter what category the transactions are in.
I have other sheets that detail my budget for each category, how many more paychecks I have left this year, and how far ahead or behind of my savings goals I am. I can pivottable my transactions to see how I'm spending my money each month. I have graphs showing how much money I have.
I have complete control over my financial information and how I see it.
I don't know how many people have been following the 8th Doctor books the BBC publishes, but the Daleks were supposed to have been revealed in "Sometime Never" as the mysterious employers of Sabbath who were attempting to become the new Lords of Time.
As it is, negotiations fell through and they had to come up with brand-new villains(Council of Eight) who were a bit underwhelming after 2-3 years of building up the storyline.
I still liked Sometime Never but I can't help but think it would've been a greater book if they were allowed to use the villains they had been hinting at.
"From the names of our fallen soldiers to the gradual withdrawal of our allies to the growing insurgency, it's become all too clear that facts in Iraq have an anti-Bush agenda."
Slashdot Mirror
Al Quaeda endorses Bush
The statement said it supported U.S. President George W. Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."
In comments addressed to Bush, the group said:
"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."
"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."
Self defense is not murder. If it were, there would be no need to call it "self defense". We'd just call it "murder".
So how do you distinguish self-defense from murder? If only there were some way to lay down guidelines...
Murder / Not murder. That's all it should be.
So you feel there's no need to distinguish between the following situations? Tell us then. Death penalty or should they be set free? Remember, there's nothing in between.
A woman comes home to find her husband fucking her best friend. In a rage, she beats him with a heavy object. He ends up dying from the injuries though she didn't intend to kill him.
A woman finds out her husband's cheating on her, goes out, buys a gun and several days later guns him down in cold blood.
A woman finds out her husband's cheating on her, goes out, gets drunk and hits a pedestrian on her way home, killing him.
A woman hires someone to kill her husband, who is cheating on her.
A woman suffering from a brain cancer that's affecting her reasoning centers kills her husband who in her dementia she believes is cheating on her.
Upset from finding out her husband is cheating on her, a woman accidently hits and kills a pedestrian with her car.
A woman, upset that her husband is cheating on her, screws up at her job, resulting in the death of a co-worker.
A woman screws up at her job, resulting in the death of a co-worker.
A woman cuts corners on the job, resulting in death of a co-worker.
A woman turns a blind-eye to a co-worker who's cutting corners, which results in the death of another co-worker.
Murder or not murder. Either we blow her brains out or she's let go without punishment.
It's a cliche but the world is not black and white. There are many shades of grey and that's why we have varying degrees of murder and manslaughter with accompanying penalties.
I took you 2 minutes 10 seconds to say that?
He kept running into the lameness filter.
That a post doesn't deviate from RNC talking points one bit lectures Democrats about groupthink.
I also find it funny that Democrates don't even know what Kerry stands for
I've seen this line about 4-5 times in this thread already. Repeating it over and over does not make it true.
The SBLfB are at odds with people who actually served with Kerry, official US Navy records, their own past statements, and cold hard reality.
A systematic take-down of Swift Boat Liars. They don't even past the laugh test.
Another related effect is that the government is competing with the private sector for lending dollars.
The money has to come from somewhere. Either it's simply being printed(driving up inflation) or loaned by lenders... which means it's being spent in Iraq instead of being invested in small businesses in America.
At least not the kind the Republicans are talking about. For example, medical malpractice rates. Several states have already put caps in place and it didn't budge insurance rates a damn bit.
They kept going up anyways because insurance companies couldn't competently invest the money they were being paid. They started doing riskier and riskier investments and when the economy went to shit, they couldn't cover their bills anymore. Jury awards have been trending slightly down for a while, actually.
Not to sound degradating, but do you really believe that the people who all run a corporation are trying to do nothing but poison the environment and put us all into economic slavery?
Corporations aren't evil; they're amoral. They're not out to poison the environment and enslave people economically; they simply don't care if that's the side effect. Just as long as they're "maximizing shareholder value", everything is fine.
Hear about the 2 dismantled Russian nuclear warheads that were found in a bunker that was covered by 10 meters of concrete?
A missile containing radioactive material is not a nuclear warhead, not unless you want to claim the US used "nuclear weapons" in both Iraq wars. AFAIK, they're missiles armed with the same depleted uranium that the warheads we've been saturating Iraq with use.
but it was reported hard and heavy on almost every major radio outlet.
Given that they've been a principle source of misinformation, it's not surprising you're so misinformed.
Your long list of cites is pretty much worthless. A bunch of articles about the same handful of shells dating back to the 80s. A little bit of lost inventory was bound to show up. It's not like we're particularly good at keep track of our chemical/biological agents.
Long-debunked reports and rumors of captured weapons. Most of the articles are the initial news reports that Fox News trumpeted across the airwaves. Naturally, Fox and Rush didn't give you any follow-up.
Honestly, if we actually found nukes in Tikrit, don't you think the Bush adminisrtation would still be talking about it? Posting several articles about the same assinine claim doesn't make it true.
The Bush administration's chief weapons inspector has come out and outright said there were no WMDs. We've controlled the country for over a year and all we've found is a few decades old shells and Bush is reduced to claiming we invaded because Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction program-related activities"? Quite a ways off from the mushroom cloud they were claiming was going to be the smoking gun, isn't it?
What happened to all those WMDs that the Bush administration repeatedly claimed to know the exact location of? Seems like a few of them should've shown up.
He didn't. He said he'd still support giving the President the authority to use force *if necessary*. His main argument, of course, is that Bush misused that authority.
Naturally, the So-Called Liberal Media and the Bush campaign chose to claim he said something else.
for reminding people that they don't gain karma for a funny mod.
Funny how that works.
But the individuals are frequently unaware of how that money is being directed. For example, how many AAA members know how much AAA has spent working against public transportation? I suppose you could say that RIAA and MPAA funding comes from individuals as well, but if it is, it's nested too deeply. Individual->**AA member->**AA->candidate.
The RIAA and MPAA simply *cannot* give money to campaigns. It's illegal. Now, the RIAA and MPAA can set up PACs(that are segregated financially) that individual actual people can give money to and those PACs can give money to campaigns.
If you're ever curious as to *where* the money is going, all PACs have to file reports with the FEC. So if you're giving an organization money and don't know who they're giving money to, it's your own damn fault.
Please explain why my tax dollars fund the primary process when I don't have a voice.
Please explain why my tax dollars fund public schools when I don't have any kids. There are things the government does that don't directly benefit you. Deal with it.
If you recall, exit polls showed that if everyone who really wanted to vote for Perot did, he would have won. The combination of unbalance reporting and party FUD convinced them that they would be "wasting thier vote" and/or "handing the election to [fill in bad guy here]
If Perot hadn't acted like a petulent child, jumping out and in the race on a whim while babbling about the CIA trying to sabotage his daughter's wedding, I seriously believe he would've come in at least second place. As it is, the guy started coming off as a loon and that's his own fault.
Perot didn't do as well the second time around because Clinton had successfully implemented Perot's main raison d'etre(reduce the deficit) and people were happy with the way things were going. It didn't help that the reform party hadn't become more than a celebrity vehicle for Perot.
Dean was felled in Iowa not because of nefarious forces but because he entered into a murder-suicide pact with Gephardt(negative politics is a loser in Iowa) and because Kerry and Edwards' ground operations were flat out better.
Nader is a Republican tool.
Finally, I'm tired of people claiming "Everyone would vote for my candidate if they were able to vote their conscience!" No, your candidate is simply unpopular and everyone else out there on the fringe is saying the exact same tthing. And whether you like it or not, a majority of the populace or even a significant plurality do not ascribe to the Green party's(or whatever's) current platform. Wishful thinking does not make it so.
Hard work is more than just "voting your conscience". It's recruiting and fielding candidates at the local level. It's about building a bench of legitimate candidates rather than unqualified nutcases looking for attention. It's building party infrastructure from the ground up that'll last for years instead of from the top down with a celebrity candidate that'll be gone after November. The Greens in Germany successfully did it after many years of hard work; the Greens in the US seem to have finally clued into this, at least.
Dolts who make the simpleminded "Republicrat" arguments aren't going to change their minds and aren't worth fighting for the vote of.
How about we pass a law that says only U.S. citizens can contribute or financially support a candidate?
We already have.
No PAC funding. No "soft" party funding.
The funding from PACs comes from contributions made by individual citizens. Ditto for party contributions. It's just a different way of bundling the money.
No corporate funding. No foriegn funding.
That's always been illegal.
Why should citizens of every party be funding primary elections for members of just 2.
In many states(if not all), 3rd parties are included in the primaries. For instance, here in Washington State, when I go to the primary in September, I'll have a choice of Republican, Democrat and Libertarian primary ballots.
I guess it's easier to bitch and moan about the state of things and how it's all so unfair rather than to get up off your ass and start seriously building a 3rd party from the ground up.
That's what annoys me about Ralph Nader. Has he done *anything* int he past four years to build up the green party? Nope! Having it sucked it dry like a parasite, he's moved onto a new party(reform) to feed his ego.
The funny thing is that Howard Dean's done more to reattach the Democratic party to its grassroots in the past year and a half than Saint Ralph and his various vanity runs have done in over a decade.
More like
+1 Sadly True
I worked on a congressional race in the Tri-Cities a few years back and went on a day-long tour of the Hanford facilities with the candidate, got presentations on how they were handling the many different kinds of nuclear waste.
I don't know what was my favourite. Was it the nuclear waste that was being stored in what amounted to two coffee cans? The containment tubes rated to last 10-20 years that had been holding waste for 50?
I'm thinking I'll have to go with the underground spillover tanks. There'd be a bunch of series of 5 tanks. When tank 1 fills up, waste spills over into tank 2. Tank 2 fills up, spills into tank 3. So on and so forth until you get to tank 5 where when it fills up, the waste apparently just spills out into the ground. Naturally, they weren't meant to last this long either.
So in addition to the nuclear waste, you have to deal with all the contaminated soil and whatnot too. US Gov't really clusterfucked the area. Fortunately, the state gov't(led by AG Gregoire) nailed their balls to an agreement to clean up all this shit.
That being said, it's a neat facility and everyone was friendly and eager to show what they were doing. There are a lot of interesting plume diagrams showing how the contamination is making its way to the Columbia River.
It also effectively gives the Blue Sun Corporation, which is paying for the terraforming and the transport of settlers, indentured serfs who are totally at their mercy.
Blue Sun Corp is probably also the people behind the government school that fucked up River's brain. Some of her "acting out" is against stuff with the Blue Sun emblem. The food cans that she peeled labels off of, for example. Jayne was wearing a Blue Sun t-shirt when she attacked him.
And of course, there's the blue hands men...
There's another problem: memory. You can't randomly generate a dungeon every time you enter, it would break the continuity. So you'd need to store the dungeon on the memory card, and depending on the complexity that could be big.
Actually, you *can* randomly generate it. You only have to preserve the seed used for the dungeon builder, plus a few others things(items found, puzzles completed.) Just run them through the generator again and you should get the exact same dungeon.
The fact is that there have been 0, that is zero, as in one minus one attacks on America since September 11.
Forgot the anthrax mailer did we?
And wisely, you qualify that with "attack on America" because terrorism has increased worldwide.
Given that prior to 9/11, the last time Al Quaeda had launched a terrorist attack on American soil was 8 years before in in 1993, citing the lack of terrorist attacks in the past 3 years is hardly proof of anything.
Who cares what the motive is?
that if right-wingers and the press applied the same scrutiny they've given Moore's film to the Bush administration, we might not be in the mess we're in today.
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President."
- President Theodore Roosevelt
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
- President Theodore Roosevelt
And while we're at it, let's ask President Jefferson too...
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."
- President Thomas Jefferson
Neither could handle account transfers properly. It'd recognize that the transactions that were transfers, and then create a matching transfer for each one. So it'd acted like I was transfering twice as much money from savings to checking. Then it'd treat them like normal transactions. My biggest "expense" was my checking account and my savings account was my biggest source of "income".
And it was a constant pain to get it to show the information I wanted in the way I wanted it.
I tried both Money and Quicken a couple times each and came away frustrated by what utter shit they were.
For the past couple years, I've used an Excel spreadsheet with a VB macro I wrote that parses OFX files for the transactions. Both my bank and Amex have unique transaction ids so it only pulls new transactions. Then I just to go into the spreadsheet and enter what category the transactions are in.
I have other sheets that detail my budget for each category, how many more paychecks I have left this year, and how far ahead or behind of my savings goals I am. I can pivottable my transactions to see how I'm spending my money each month. I have graphs showing how much money I have.
I have complete control over my financial information and how I see it.
I don't know how many people have been following the 8th Doctor books the BBC publishes, but the Daleks were supposed to have been revealed in "Sometime Never" as the mysterious employers of Sabbath who were attempting to become the new Lords of Time.
As it is, negotiations fell through and they had to come up with brand-new villains(Council of Eight) who were a bit underwhelming after 2-3 years of building up the storyline.
I still liked Sometime Never but I can't help but think it would've been a greater book if they were allowed to use the villains they had been hinting at.
"From the names of our fallen soldiers to the gradual withdrawal of our allies to the growing insurgency, it's become all too clear that facts in Iraq have an anti-Bush agenda."
Is this some sort of high-concept System Shock 3?
Where's SHODAN? Where are my cybernetic zombies?
Looks like they dumbed down the interface so they could an X-Box port as well.
Shame shame.