Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

< What Is the "Respectable Center?" | Supreme Court to Review Life Without Parole For Children >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I cant remember enjoying anything (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:43:42 PM EST
    in a long time as much as I enjoyed reading that the vile Michael Savage is banned from the UK along with 20 or so others including a former KKK Grand Wizard, a Neo Nazi and Fred and Shirley Phelps.
    but the very best part?

    I did not know until today that Michael Savages real name is Michael Weiner.

    question, why does anyone call him Michael Savage?

    I dunno (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by lentinel on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:48:05 PM EST
    Banning someone because of what they have said does not set a very good precedent.

    You know - they'll stop someone from entering who opposed the war in Iraq. Who knows.

    What I want to happen to Savage and the rest of these idiots like O'Reilly and Coulter and Limbaugh and Severen etc. is that people stop listening to them. I would also like to see liberal blogs curtail spending most of their space linking to their unbearably dumb comments.

    And speaking of the war in Iraq...


    Savage is certainly a Weiner... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:51:50 PM EST
    but I gotta jeer the UK over that one Capt....I love free speech too much to cheer that move...it's a brand of tyranny and thought-policing, even if well-intentioned.

    I dont know (none / 0) (#17)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:57:04 PM EST
    if you look at the list its hard to make an argument for a single person on it.

    I cant say I would want the US to do the same but I am glad they are.


    Not a pleasant bunch... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:08:45 PM EST
    to be sure...but they have inalienable rights like the rest of us.

    I get real nervous when government bueracrats are the arbiters of what is acceptable speech and what isn't...that is best decided by each individual listener.  

    Better to get this garbage out in the open anyway to better be rebuked and ridiculed...send them underground and there is no one to speak truth to hate.


    and we can do that here (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:14:15 PM EST
    as best we can.  but I am in not upset that another country is saying take you vile hate and stay out of our country.

    sall Im sayin


    I hear ya bro... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:19:50 PM EST
    just saying that slope is slippery, as I'm sure you can see.

    Next thing ya know Tommy Chong can't go to England for a cup o' tea because he talks about reefer....I put nothing past the nanny-state posse over there....they're scarier than Savage because they have power.  Its fun to see hate-mongers get the smackdown, but I can't applaud it.

    But don't let me rain on your parade:)


    It does mean (none / 0) (#34)
    by lilburro on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:25:19 PM EST
    that they may spend more time in our country...

    ok (none / 0) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:29:36 PM EST
    that is a valid argument

    It's not about the person, (none / 0) (#24)
    by Anne on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:19:09 PM EST
    it's about the principle.

    The UK has every right to decide who will and will not be able to enter their country - as do we - but much of what the people on that list are being banned for is about speech or some form of speech; as much as I abhor what the people on that list stand for, I don't understand the rationale that while you wouldn't want the US to do it, you're glad the UK is.

    Maybe this is how the black site prisons and rendition were rationalized - you know, we don't do that stuff here, but we're happy to send other countries some people so that they can do it on their turf.

    Clean hands, ya know?


    sorry (none / 0) (#35)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:25:29 PM EST
    you cant twist yourself into a pretzel and I wont shed a tear for Fred and Shirley Phelps or Michael Weiner.

    am I glad we have free speech here? absolutely.
    am I going to fret that the UK Germany or whoever does not have our tolerance for hateful nutcases? absolutely not.


    Whether the UK decision is reasonable (none / 0) (#76)
    by easilydistracted on Tue May 05, 2009 at 07:42:50 PM EST
    in the Phelps matter can not involve a discussion on free speech because the Phelps' behavior is based in pure evil, in my view. Their sign "Thank God For Dead [homosexual] Soldiers" is one such example. The only flaw in the UK decision is that it doesn't encompass all members of Phelps' Westport Baptist Church.    

    Nabucco Rides (Yet) Again? (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Addison on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:51:22 PM EST
    World Politics Review (5/5/09):

    For years, analysts have argued that the Nabucco natural gas pipeline -- a U.S.-backed effort to transport gas from the Caspian Sea to Europe via Turkey, thus bypassing Russia -- needed to accept gas from Iran if it was to be economically viable. But Iranian involvement in the project, which is intended to reduce European energy dependence on Russian gas exports, has been anathema for U.S. policymakers: Washington's efforts to thwart Iran's ambitions have so far overridden its desire to thwart Russia's.

    That may be changing [...,] at an energy conference in Bulgaria at the end of April, Morningstar refused to rule out Iranian involvement in Nabucco, and suggested that opening up the Iranian energy sector could be a "carrot" for improving relations on other issues.

    A "summit" will be held in Prague on 8 May 2009. Don't expect much. This story is more important in that it represents a potential thaw in US-Iranian relations and a feasible way forward for Nabucco, considering that as Iran's National Oil Company Director Jashnsaz said,

    Tehran announced from the beginning that the countries involved in the project are not able to supply the demand of the market and "without Iran Nabucco is a political project."

    Although with the assistance Russia has given Iran recently, it's unclear if Iran will help undercut Gazprom's supply-chain. But nothing much will likely happen until Turkey is admitted into the EU, as that accession appears to be the major reason Turkey's government is obstructing progress.

    run joey, joey run run (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:52:48 PM EST
     Sen. Arlen Specter's bid for reelection could grow more complicated than he expected, with Rep. Joe Sestak saying today that he is "inclined'' to seek the Democratic nomination as well.

    On Fox News Radio's Brian and the Judge today, Sestak (D-Pa.) said he is now more inclined than ever to run for the Senate in in 2010.

    Go for it Joe!!! Please! (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by ruffian on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:20:22 PM EST
    Same here! (none / 0) (#77)
    by aeguy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 08:13:43 PM EST
    I heart Joe Sestak!

    Specter wants Coleman to win... (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by magster on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:37:12 PM EST
    ... in the interests of doing justice.

    I think the party switch is making Specter more Republican.  

    OK, that's it (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by ruffian on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:00:31 PM EST
    Time to make sure he has a primary challenger, and seriously question Dem leaders about why we should support Specter. He has had a week to give us one good reason, and I have yet to see one.

    wow (none / 0) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:42:30 PM EST
    dig baby dig

    Could be a joke (none / 0) (#63)
    by sj on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:49:19 PM EST

    Q: With your departure from the Republican Party, there are no more Jewish Republicans in the Senate. Do you care about that?

    A: I sure do. There's still time for the Minnesota courts to do justice and declare Norm Coleman the winner.

    Hard to say without seeing it.


    A:(version 2) (none / 0) (#66)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:20:05 PM EST
    there is always LIEberman

    The hits keep coming from him today (none / 0) (#46)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:42:52 PM EST
    Maybe this was just a secret plot by the Republicans to make Toomey irrelevant and have no serious Democratic competitors.

    I think the guy has just plain lost it. (none / 0) (#48)
    by Anne on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:01:36 PM EST
    And I'm not kidding.

    The more he talks, the less sense he makes - maybe he's on auto-pilot and forgot to re-program for the party switch.

    His switch seems more pathetically desperate than ever, and I think if things continue on this path, he's done.  He ought to call it quits at the end of his term, and try to go out with some dignity.  If he gets primaried and loses, what then?  Does he do a full-Lieberman and go Independent?

    Someone needs to take him aside before he ends up totally humiliating himself.  Problem is that he is still probably viewed by some within the party as a net gain and efforts will likely be made to support him.

    He's going to end up making a mess of something we care about, I can see it coming.


    I think it entirely possible (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:04:10 PM EST
    he would run independent.  why wouldnt he?
    he has made it plain this is all about him getting another term.  by whatever means necessary.

    Pennsylvania, unlike Connecticut (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by scribe on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:11:59 PM EST
    has a sore loser law.

    Pennsylvania's sore-loser law prevents someone who lost in a party primary from running as an independent in the general election.


    but you have to admit (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:16:11 PM EST
    if they didnt, he probably would.

    That sounds like an awful law... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:38:18 PM EST
    especially considering Pennsylvania primaries are closed.

    Sun God forbid voters have more choices.


    {psst!} (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by nycstray on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:41:05 PM EST
    it's The Great Spotty B!tch in the Sky, not Sun God  ;)

    Impossible to go the Lieberman route (none / 0) (#51)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:06:27 PM EST
    in PA.

    He would have to run as an indy from the start.


    oh, to bad (5.00 / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:08:08 PM EST
    I wanted to see a balls out full tilt official flameout.

    Well, that is very fair of him, actually (none / 0) (#52)
    by Cream City on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:06:46 PM EST
    to figure that the way to balance out the unfairness to all the Republican voters in Pennsylvania is to now have unfairness to all the Democratic voters in Minnesota.

    Oh, wait, it isn't about the voters.  It's Allll About Arrrrrlen.

    Beware:  This man really does think that two wrongs -- against the voters of two states -- make it all right.  That's a problematic philosophy for governing us.


    Better than the Specter story: He's baaaack (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Cream City on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:11:49 PM EST
    or is he?  Brett Favre, that is.  Many here were entertained no end in past open threads by the spectacle of Favre's flipflops about retirement.  Then came the debacle of his year with the Jets before retiring again a few months ago, and for good, he said.

    Yeh, we've heard it before.  Word is now, in many sptz nooz venues, that Favre is coming out of retirement yet again to suit up for the Packers' arch-rivals, the Minnesnowta Vikings.  

    Oooooh, bring it on.  Bring Brett back to have him play with the Vikings against the Packers on our home field in Wisconsin.  We are SO ready for him, yah, youbetcha.

    When you're a star QB, spending time in (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Anne on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:31:27 PM EST
    the off-season cutting your vast expanse of grass in Hattiesburg, MS must really recharge the batteries...when you retire there after the bright lights of stardom, and contemplate day after day after day of watching the grass grow until it's tall enough to cut it again, it could seem like a fate worse than death.    

    Note to Brett:  Go out with some dignity - don't make America watch you wash up in humiliation like Unitas did in San Diego.  Get off the tractor, get out of Hattiesburg, and go live somewhere where there's more to do.  Get a regular job where they will still treat you like a god - broadcasting, coaching, something.  It's probably been so long since you knew who you were without football, and maybe it's scary to think about, but finding Brett Favre might be one of the most exciting things you will ever do (and there's probably a book and a movie in it somewhere, too).


    As long as it ain't the Jets... (none / 0) (#62)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:42:56 PM EST
    Packers DB's are licking their chops in anticipation as well I'm sure Cream.

    What do you think about Sanchez? (none / 0) (#64)
    by nycstray on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:54:32 PM EST
    Who knows... (none / 0) (#65)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:00:43 PM EST
    with QBs...I like the swagger, but ya never can tell till they do it.

    Cautiously optimistic as a perennial suffering Jets fan can be.

    The Mets are shaky as hell...thank the sun god for Beltran killin' it or we'd be really screwed.


    Papers reported the rookies (none / 0) (#73)
    by scribe on Tue May 05, 2009 at 06:04:09 PM EST
    came to mini-camp and shocked the O-coordinator staff with how much of the offense they knew.

    Turns out Sanchez called and held a group study session the night before so they could get ready, and didn't tell the coaches about it.

    Got him a lot of favorable looks/notice from the whole org.


    Heard about that on the news (none / 0) (#78)
    by nycstray on Tue May 05, 2009 at 08:49:55 PM EST
    have to give him props for that one. He seems pretty together and looks to be able to handle the initial media also.

    Be so nice if the Jets ended up with a kick a** QB  :)


    Oh, yeh. And count on Halloween (none / 0) (#67)
    by Cream City on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:20:50 PM EST
    to be hilarious, as the home game here against the Vikings is the next day, November 1.

    That is, if Favre can survive past the early October date when the Packers go to Minnesnowta.


    is it me? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:15:04 PM EST
    this is from CNS.  it is, I guess, their argument against this person for the high court:

    Judge Diane Wood, reported to be on President Obama's short list of possible nominees to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court, believes a judge's interpretation of what the Constitution means must "grow with the times."

    In a 2005 article she wrote for the New York University Law Review, Wood argued that the U.S. Constitution "survives" the test of time through the "evolving" interpretation of its text.


    question: how can anyone argue with this?

    First pick (none / 0) (#69)
    by waldenpond on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:36:36 PM EST
    You can't argue with that, but I expect the Repubs will think of something.  

    I'm waiting to see who the first pick is.  MSNBC reported that the first pick typically flames out as they don't have a team in place to protect them and speak on their behalf.  The theory goes on... the first pick is a political statement, the second is who they really want.  The Repubs would just look petty going after the second pick.


    Chris Dodd said (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by lentinel on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:52:16 PM EST
    ""I know people don't want to go back, because it is uncomfortable. The president has said I want to look forward," he said. "You know my father was a prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials. They were not a popular idea.... Nuremberg became a symbol of who we were. Even these thugs got a lawyer, even these thugs got a trial despite their acts. And so we became a symbol of jurisprudence and the rule of law."

    "Not to prosecute people or pursue them when these acts occur is, in a sense, to invite them again,"

    It not only invites the same behavior, it makes it inevitable.

    We have a winner! (none / 0) (#1)
    by scribe on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:30:47 PM EST
    Arlen Specter has chosen his primary campaign theme song!

    Watch it here!


    D.C. (none / 0) (#2)
    by CST on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:31:12 PM EST
    recognizes same sex marriages now.

    And Al Queda is chanelling Michael Steele.

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by jbindc on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:53:53 PM EST
    Not at least for 30 days and if Congress doesn't vote to override it.  But this is a good first step.

    Nancy Pelosi won't let it be reviewed (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:59:34 PM EST
    If I understand the mechanics of this correctly, it's a done deal.

    Well then (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by jbindc on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:01:07 PM EST
    Good news!

    And Marion Barry (none / 0) (#5)
    by Joelarama on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:41:10 PM EST
    finally takes a moral stand on an issue.

    Maine is next.  Everyone I know from Maine (three people) bets the governor will sign the bill.


    That just leaves (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by CST on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:46:33 PM EST
    R.I. as the lone New England hold-out.  Cmon' R.I. - all the cool states are doing it :)

    havent you been reading (none / 0) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:46:20 PM EST
    the threads today?  they are very informative. for example I did not know this:

    6.) You can get married and act like any married couple.  Joint accounts etc.  Same name on the house etc.  So what are you really missing here.  The ceremony?  Go somehere and have your ceremony.  I get the feeling you dont want to be incovenienced.  I want to be gay and have it all.

    Some silver lining for you (none / 0) (#10)
    by CST on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:48:30 PM EST
    eventually, they'll be dead.

    I feel (none / 0) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:49:32 PM EST
    better already

    Yes, THAT Marion Barry (none / 0) (#15)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:53:40 PM EST
    I'm almost happy to have him on the wrong side of this.

    Very heinous rape allegations... (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:34:30 PM EST
    levied against 2 NYPD officers...utterly repugnant if true.  Link

    It's an ugly case. (none / 0) (#4)
    by scribe on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:38:12 PM EST
    But I have no idea whether it's true.

    Not looking good for the officers... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 02:42:32 PM EST
    I have no problem buying it, but I'm prejudiced.

    Moral of the story, don't call the cops...ever. They are not your friends.  How bad must that cabbie feel about calling the cops?  


    Here's a story... (none / 0) (#22)
    by desertswine on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:14:45 PM EST
    about Van Gogh's ear. Makes more sense than slicing off your own ear, I guess.

    I can't ever think of Gauguin... (none / 0) (#25)
    by desertswine on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:19:14 PM EST
    without thinking of Anthony Quinn.

    That is interesting... (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:26:04 PM EST
    maybe we can stop blaming the absinthe for making Van Gogh mad enough to slice off his own ear...a classic duel over a lady makes a lot more sense.  

    Legalize all absinthe!


    Honestly, Arlen needs to (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:16:32 PM EST
    stop talking. He's on a path to self-destruction.

    Is it really that bad (5.00 / 0) (#28)
    by CST on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:21:46 PM EST
    If he succeeds at digging his own grave?

    No, not really (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:23:33 PM EST
    But I would rather run against Pat Toomey than Tom Ridge. If Specter had stayed a Republican, we'd have been sure to face Toomey.

    if its Ridge (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:26:42 PM EST
    Sestak is a far safer nominee for us IMO

    Probably (none / 0) (#41)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:31:20 PM EST
    I'm not sure that Specter has the stamina to run a hard race anymore. And besides, the best arguments against Ridge are dead if we go with Specter.

    exactly (none / 0) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:40:11 PM EST
    also I dont think Specter honestly realized how craven what he is doing appears to most people.
    he seems completely clueless.  I think his performances last weekend showed that perfectly.
    he seemed to think that all he had to do was be completely honest about the fact that all these decisions were being made for completely political considerations and everyone would be fine with it.

    As far as I'm concerned, (none / 0) (#42)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:37:06 PM EST
    dig, baby, dig. Give the man more opportunities to speak and a bigger shovel.

    you say that like its a bad thing (none / 0) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:22:08 PM EST
    Sen. Arlen Specter said Tuesday he regrets his vote against Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) two-decades ago that helped kill his nomination to the federal bench.

    last night on the Maddow show (I am starting to like this show) she had a very interesting segment on this.
    a lot of information I did not know.  the main point was, how ironic is it, with the republican party in the middle of a "rebranding" binge, for the face of the republican party on the Judiciary Committee challenging the nominee of a popular AA president to be a person who was rejected by that very comittee a few years ago for a federal judge seat because he was demonstrable racist?

    its a pickle.  no doubt about it.  


    I keep expecting him to throw me a bone (none / 0) (#32)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:24:07 PM EST
    At least he does understand (none / 0) (#30)
    by ruffian on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:22:19 PM EST
    this much:

    "I think in this line of work you have to prove yourself everyday to everybody," Specter said.

    Now, now (none / 0) (#33)
    by ruffian on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:24:21 PM EST
    Maybe he just meant he'd rather see Sessions on the federal bench than ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    then again, maybe not.


    Who knows WTF he's thinking. (none / 0) (#37)
    by andgarden on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:26:27 PM EST
    True - I am done guessing (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by ruffian on Tue May 05, 2009 at 03:27:57 PM EST
    It looks like (none / 0) (#50)
    by CST on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:05:05 PM EST
    Ben Bernanke reads the onion.

    I'm not saying he's wrong necessarily.  To be honest, I really have no idea.  But the timing is impeccable

    as I read on another site (none / 0) (#58)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:32:12 PM EST
    this is probably the only time I did not smile at the mention of this name.

    Dom DeLuise
    1933 - 2009

    To oculus... (none / 0) (#60)
    by Thanin on Tue May 05, 2009 at 04:38:42 PM EST
    about the Hillary/Albright question, I disagreed more with the overall assertion that Hillary wont be president and that she'll be treated in anyway that will significantly undermine her chances.

    ... But I probably should have just stated that than leave you with an ambiguous, low rating since your comment was sincere and didnt insult anyone.

    Thanks for the explanation. (none / 0) (#79)
    by oculus on Tue May 05, 2009 at 09:49:52 PM EST
    oh well (none / 0) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 05, 2009 at 05:37:12 PM EST
    it was fun to think about.

    No criminal case likely over torture memos

    Justice Department officials have stopped short of recommending criminal charges against Bush administration lawyers who wrote secret memos approving harsh interrogation techniques of terror suspects. A person familiar with the inquiry, who spoke on condition of anonymity, says investigators recommended referring two of the three lawyers to state bar associations for possible disciplinary action.

    Two Guys going out for a burger (none / 0) (#74)
    by scribe on Tue May 05, 2009 at 06:06:16 PM EST
    This is the kind of thing that gives the Secret Service fits - the President and Vice President in the same place, getting burgers.


    I think Bam needed to get away from the house for a while.

    Specter ? Where is James Bond? (none / 0) (#75)
    by joze46 on Tue May 05, 2009 at 06:08:19 PM EST
    Hey if Arlen Specter can get those Democrats in Pennsylvania to vote for him I have stock certificates in company to sell them, its real hot like Sarah Palin,  going to build a bridge from Palin's porch to Putin"s patio. Chuckle chuckle.

    Specter has had too, too, much radiation treatment his brains are starting to glow or go. Excuse me for joking about a medical personal issue but it is so funny. If those people in Pennsylvania do respond like saying O.K. it over your history from both sides of the isle. That should be what happens.

    It is obvious Specter is gambling to stay in the game. He has no interest in real leadership to act the way he is. That is why I say it was not good for Obama and Biden to be in the back drop and support his effort at a news conference. That was not a good move. Perhaps Specter is a hard core Republican going down and trying to take down Obama.

    The Party of ideas, the Republican Party should look at this video, certainly is a Neo-Fascist theme way back in nineteen sixty four with Peter Sellers one of my favorites. It is stupid funny stuff the way I feel when I write some my own comments. Have laugh or a few minute chuckles.

    Then one wonders why the French built so many nuclear plants??? or is this Dr the head of the current International Monitary fund...