Boy, that antepenultimate panel really choked me up.

Coincidentally, I'm staying at my sister's house and her partner has all the Bloom County books in a bookshelf about 6 feet behind my head.

Let us hope that Obama wins, that Breathed reconsiders and that there's peace in the world.

Clearly I've managed to get to you! Makes me happy.

I'm curious as to why you do this. I'm sure you understand that when you spout abuse and profanity we all feel superior to you, which makes us feel good?

But we were told he was a Muslim!

You've honourably discharged your obligations to your wife and kids. Now is time for you to strike out and be yourself.

Remember: paradoxically, the more confident you are about your actions, the less you'll hurt others. You shouldn't do surgery tentatively.

And echoing Cary, you should take a great deal of pride in your integrity and your sacrifices for others to date. You have built up credit, but if you waste away your life in a lie, all that credit will drift away.

40 is still young, get out and do it!

What a beautiful ending. Sigh.

And thanks for the lookin, BB - a nice little extra, like the tiny piece of chocolate that stops up the end of a frozen ice cream come.

It's the first time we've seen Steve Dallas just... smile.

A lot of research in any field is second-rate - this actually seems pretty interesting.

The fact that standard economic theories imply that there's no rational reason to vote means, of course, that their models are incomplete because a large number of smart people do in fact perceive they have a huge reason to vote and do so (and unlike physics, the "general consensus" is important in economics).

The article in question pokes gentle fun at this, and then goes on to do some work to show what might be wrong. Perhaps you're not familiar with techniques in theoretical papers in the science (not just economics) but setting up a single, simple test model in your initial valuation of a theory or hypothesis is perfectly reasonable - you can critique the paper because you feel the test model is an outlier or just plain wrong, but it's not wrong to start arguing from a specific test case.

And their reply is cordial and also rational.

I think it's a win for them... best to concede gracefully.

Very clear, very specific, completely operational and mechanical, yet will lead to the desired results.

If the letter-writer doesn't really want a divorce, this will reveal the truth; if e does, these are the correct steps to take.

BTW, I'm sure the letter-writer is sure. The fact that not a single grievance is presented is to me the absolute evidence of someone who has made a decision and is no longer trying to justify themselves to themselves.

I really hope it works out for you. Very best wishes and more power to you.

...it's that the election will not be decided tomorrow but will take days, weeks or months to decide, so it's a grace that this woman could die knowing that her grandson would eventually prevail.

We're not out of the woods yet.

let's hope it's as simple as all that...

Perhaps leaving her the possibillity of parole when she's an old lady.

Remember - there are hundreds of thousands of people needlessly dead in Iraq because of Ms. Rice.

I mean, you couldn't make this stuff up.

However, I suspect it's just their arrogance that allows them to do this.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of cleaning to be done.

This is one of those cleanups - making sure that the Palins, who really did prove their evil natures, can't even run for dogcatcher.

In fact, this is the time when we can make the best progress, these next 200 days or so. This is our chance to jail some of the worst criminals, to open up the corruption to fresh air and sunlight.

Keep those slings and arrows coming - thanks for all your work so far and I'm sure you'll be very useful in the upcoming warcrimes trials (please!), and certainly in keeping Mr. Obama honest...

I do have high hopes for him, he certainly seems competent which would be a nice change, but without critics such as yourself to keep his feet to the fire he'll be dragged to the dark side.

I'm a little divorced from the media, so I get to observe my own reactions, uncensored.

It's that generally the male models make me think "bleh" - the models aren't aimed at me but women. I never feel threatened by them in my subsconscious for that very reason, which I suppose shows how dumb one's subconscious is.

However, there's a clear thought about the women: "I would love to sleep with them but they'd never sleep with regular old me."

Like a lot of studies, this one shows something your grandfather could have explained to you. (Not that they aren't worth-while, one purpose of science is to give evidence for "common-sense" knowledge.)

We followed your instructions: and we conclude that yes, you are a nutcase.

The Snopes link given before (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp) is authoritative. By the way, I have had some dealings with Snopes himself - he's extremely conservative - but he's an *honest man*.

We've had two years of endless examination of Mr Obama. When you get the point that you believe that you, smarter than all the experts!, can detect a forgery from a medium quality JPG copy of a scanned document!, you really need to take a Reality Check.

(I'd also add that I'd be really really surprised if a scanned document, any scanned document, had horizontal lines of text that were aligned to the pixel. I strongly urge you to scan your own documents and compare the accuracy of the scan with what you show in your .jpg.)

should be drummed out of the Democratic Party.