The extent to which technology is allowed or disallowed in sports tends to be fairly arbitrary. For sprinters, we could make them all run in bare feet to see who is best using only their innate abilities. But we don't. We let engineers build superior shoes within certain guidelines and runners are allowed to use them. And, with winning margins what they are in sprints, presumably technology is a factor.

My guess is that prosthetics won't be allowed. Mostly because somebody (or some committee) would have to decide what constitutes a regulation prosthetic limb for track and field events. You'd essentially be writing rules that only affect one person.

So which pick is going to tank, Oden or Durant? Since we're choosing between being a millionaire or a billionaire. I guess it will the third pick that is sadly mediocre.

But, you're right, there will be someone great to pick at 4, 5, or 6. Only nobody knows who that is.

One of the best things about this show is how unpolitical it is. It's not about the evils of Dick Cheney and George Bush, and it ought to stay that way. Reading this article would make me think that it's only for Democrats and that's certainly not the case.

Also, there are some troubling elitist themes in the show, but that's for a different comment.

Those that have the talent, but lack the confidence.

It's also interesting, because I think you're making a nature vs. nurture argument here (talent vs. experience) and I'd tend to think it unwise to emphasize either side. But I suppose that when we're talking about players in the college world series, there's probably a greater disparity of talent, since players have a mostly similar experience level. At least compared to the pros.

If you're right and white evangelicals will fall into two categories "purists" and "pragmatists", why would the pragmatists back Giuliani? This assumes that the goal of white Evangelicals is any Republican in the White House, and I don't think this is the case. Their platform revolves around abortion and gay marriage, and those who can allow some leeway on these issues are already voting Democrat. If Giuliani is the Republican nominee, I guarantee a strong third party candidate. Even if it makes the Democrat candidate a lock. The religious right has a lot more to lose with Giuliani in the White House than with any Democrat. If Giuliani loses, they can be assured that no future Republican candidate will abandon them.

I know very little about finance. When I read your article this morning, I thought it was a reasonable explanation for know-nothings. After reading the comments on your article I became confused.

I'm now back to the point of being a financial know-nothing. It seems that the comment posted here argues that the current economic system is beyond criticism. It is what it is, like nature. Why is that? Granted our economic system is complex, but why should we not be able to criticize.

That answer does make more sense to me, but again I'll mention that I'm swimming beyond my depths.

The statistics on food and health care expenditures are interesting. It makes me wonder if there is some kind of feedback loop there. The article makes the argument that the less you spend on food, the more you will spend on health care. It would seem to me that, as health care costs continue to rise and more people have to make a choice between food and medical expenses, people will be forced to spend less on food.

At first, the argument over the use of "apparently" seemed to be one of definition, where Romney used it to mean "obviously" and McCain took it to mean "seemingly." Though perhaps McCain just took issue with Romney using adverbs which should be avoided for reasons of style.

You say that the rule about videotaping exists because the NFL likes rules. I think it's more likely that the rule exists because the NFL would like sole ownership of every scrap of video recorded at an NFL game. You can't have everyone with field access taking video that might be posted on someone's blog.

I know that those who think this must be cheating of the worst kind will protest, but is it possible that this guy was taking video for his own amusement? Would you bring a video camera if you had field access at an NFL game?

I have ridden my bike to work regularly in three cities, Philadelphia, Boston, and Atlanta. I have two things to say up front. First, I ride my bike because I like to do it and the benefits to me personally are significant. I am in better health and I save money by biking. Social benefits are icing on the cake. Second, most drivers seem to respect my existence on the road. I'd estimate that for about 99% of drivers, even if they do have a problem with it, they keep it to themselves. That said, the remaining 1% are extremely annoying. As a result of the %1, I often feel the need to justify my legitimacy as a vehicle on the road. And, frankly, I find it intolerable that someone in the federal government would question that legitimacy. I understand that we are a nation of drivers and I can live with that. I just don't want to be made to feel like a second class citizen for biking.

eMusic has been offering DRM free music for quite a while now. Of course, there are some reasons not to like eMusic. Mainly, their selection is limited to independent labels and they use a subscription model where you pay a fixed amount per month for a fixed amount of use-em-or-lose-em downloads. Still, the tracks on eMusic are less expensive than even Amazon's tracks.

As for iTunes, I never bothered and I don't believe that Steve Jobs actually cares about DRM. That whole saga just seemed like an excuse for Apple to raise their prices.