I remember the first time I ever walked into a Starbucks and plopped down $3.50 for a cup of coffee. I spit it out. It's the worst coffee on the planet because the beans are over roasted. It doesn't matter what "blend" you choose it all tastes the same: burned. There's no way to tell the nuances between the different blends, because they don't exist and I suspect there really is only one Starbucks blend. Yet the majority of coffee "aficionados" in the US swear it's the best coffee they've ever had and they refuse to try any other coffee. Just goes to show the power of a great marketing campaign.

I shed no tears for Starbucks and I avoid drinking the coffee wherever I see their logo whether it's on the street, in a restaurant and I will go out of my way to patronize a local mom and pop coffee establishment, Peet's, Seattle's Best, or even a DD or McDonald's before I'll buy any of that nasty Starbucks coffee.

Posted under the wrong story

Tancredo is saying people crossing the border are far more sinister than just wanting to take our jobs. He's saying they want to murder us.

Fear and hyperbole taken to a whole new level.

Letter writer should butt out. If there is one conversation you don't ever initiate with friends, it's their finances. Discuss your own all you want, but if you want to keep them as friends, unless they've come to you for advice or help it's better to leave it alone.

If they crash, they crash. It's a situation of their own making and they're the grown adults who are responsible for the fallout. Yes, it's tough to watch it happen to people you care about, but at the end of the day the more likely scenario should you confront them even gently about it is they will end their friendship with you and do what they want anyway.

If the day comes when their financial world comes crashing down around them and they come to you for help, then you can help them see the error of their ways, but not before because they aren't asking for your advice.

Plain and simple. He's a partisan hack who's job it is to put lipstick on the Iraq pig and sell it to the public. He doesn't deserve the respect and honor that comes with being a senior (almost flag grade) officer in the US Military, because as such he is supposed to be above that kind of behavior. He's acting like a 5 year old with his hand caught in the cookie jar and is acting without honor or integrity.

The only way the e-mail could have been faked is that it was done by someone who not only had access to the network where his computer is located and his computer or was able to spoof his computer's IP address, but who also knows him on an intimate enough level to be able to perfectly imitate his writing style. That's a pretty tall order, and one that if true should immediately trigger an investigation, although the perpetrator should be obvious since it would have to be one of a relatively small circle of people who work closely with him every day like his staff assistant.

I'm convinced the e-mail is authentic because the scenario above, while possible is unlikely in the extreme.

Trojan horses have been around since the earliest days computing and can affect ANY platform. This isn't the first trojan horse ever written for MacOS and the only real way to keep them at bay is to be very careful about what you download and install. DUH! Every browser will display in one way or another the url for a link if you mouse over it. Pay attention to it and if it looks suspect don't click it!

This development says more about human nature, greed, and vice than it does about MacOS X security. Frankly anyone who is willing to risk clicking on free porn deserves what they get especially if they're willing to type in their password to allow the installation of software of dubious origin.

Which is why I have been watching this story with a fair amount of interest and horror. When I place a dog I've rescued, it is with the intent that the dog's new home will be its forever home. Part of the agreement I require all adopters to sign includes obtaining my approval before they can re-home the dog. It's really more so I can keep track of who is caring for the animal to make sure whoever has the dog can properly care for it more than it is about control over the people who have the dog. In addition I microchip every dog I rescue and the chip is permanently registered to me. The only time I'd forcibly take a dog from anyone is if the dog ended up back in a shelter or rescue.

Frankly I think Mutts & Moms could have handled it better. Sure Ellen was in material breach of their agreement, but instead of further traumatizing the dog by taking it away from people who obviously loved and cared for it, they could simply request the new family fill out an application and do a visitation to the dog's new home for re-approval. The way they handled it to me indicated they were more about imposing control than they were about the welfare of the dog (they were hiding behind the dog to justify their actions). It's shameful and it makes it more difficult for people like me who rescue dogs, spend literally thousands in vet bills and training to rehabilitate them, to place them in good homes because there is the perception we are all overbearing control freaks.