For those of you saying that the guy with the bag of money couldn't have done any better negotiating with the guys who were out of money, how about this: The Fed announces that they have a pool of money that is 50% of the total amount of swaps owed. They announce that they will accept reasonable offers on a first-come, first-serve basis, but once the money's gone, it's gone. So a bank would have an incentive to offer, say, a 20% haircut instead of a ridiculous 2%, to get more of the money before the other banks. The fact that the Fed didn't play hardball just shows you what a sham the whole Fed 'regulation' scheme is. The Fed works for the banks, not us.

I remarked about this during the election, that most Democrats agree with Dennis Kucinich on domestic policy and Ron Paul on foreign policy. Neither of these candidates were taken seriously because of the way the two parties are run and our election process. This is yet another area where Americans are at odds with their leaders, who do the opposite of the will of the people. It won't get fixed until we have serious structural changes and real election reform. A start would be forcing broadcast networks to give candidates hours of free time to state their case as a condition of their monopoly license, and codifying in law what's becoming obvious, that a campaign contribution is nothing more than a bribe.

1. Pot is a mild recreational drug, harmless or close to, and nonaddictive.

2. Meth is a harmful, destructive, highly addictive drug that ruins lives.

3. The cops, drug agencies, courts, jails, etc. only have so much money.

4. Every last dollar spent on pot prohibition while there is at least one meth user out there is a criminal waste of money. Unless someone walks into a police station and surrenders with a joint in their mouth, ALL police/prosecution efforts should be aimed at meth and the other hard drugs.

This argument really should convince even hardcore drug warriors if they have any grasp on reality.

have u no lulz? LOL, 2 much. Oh, yeah, we all use semicolons ;-)

I did what some people here recommend: I ditched cable, hooked my laptop up to my tv (it had a cracked screen anyway), got a wireless keyboard and mouse, and never looked back. Instead of cable, I pay for the fastest internet tier (still way cheaper), and Netflix, which has a decent collection of movies for streaming. There are plenty of sites with more content than I have free time anyway. I do selfishly hope that most people don't catch on for a while, when they do bandwidth usage will probably go up and so will internet prices.

Interesting comments, most shows do portray people as more open and confrontational than they are in real life. It helps move the story along. As for the smoking and drinking, the show is not real-time, and I assume that there are moments when the characters are just sitting around doing their work, no smoke or drink in hand (or maybe using the bathroom, even). Then again, Don's driving down the road with glass in hand seems too much even for the 60's. You think the writers are 'Trailer Park Boys' fans?

Yes, libertarians complained about government corruption producing shoddy results and liberals called them nutjobs, and here is a concrete example of how our government is broken and how doing nothing is better than what's offered. Yes, I'd rather have a quality healthcare plan like most industrialized nations, but until liberals get on board with fixing the systemic problems with our government that 'fringe' types have been complaining about for years, they will continue to be disappointed by their bought-and-paid-for leaders. Constitutional Convention!!!

I was without a car for 5 months, and got an electric bike. It's great, you can use the motor, pedal, or do both for more speed (and exercise). I think that most conservatives think that riding a bike is a 'misery', choking on fumes while drivers speed by in comfort. Actually, most of my commute now is on bike trails through beautiful parks, and every day I get fresh air and sunshine and arrive at work feeling refreshed while my coworkers plod in and head straight for the coffee pot. I now have another car and I hardly use it!

Holy crap, what vitriol on here! I do think there is something wrong with a generation that lives in 'old people only' neighborhoods. I went to visit my uncle who had moved to a 50-and-over neighborhood. He told me that some neighbors had complained because his next door neighbor had the grandkids visiting for too many days, and these people were actually offended by the sight of kids playing in the street. Isn't that sick? Aren't there some countries where 3 generations still live together, and everyone sacrifices for the future? It does kind of explain a lot, like how the old folks, who vote more than others, kept voting in right wingers who started wars (let the kids go and fight), prosecuted the drug war (let the kids go to jail), and basically had no concerns other than their property value and their other investments.

Weed is not physically addictive, like cigarettes, heroin, alcohol, and tobacco are. However, a small percentage of users may experience psychological addiction, just as some people get addicted to TV, video games, chocolate, slot machines, etc. We all know that there are a few people who really need to quit to get their shit together. So saying that one person is addicted doesn't tar every user.

in a Tarantino film is like complaining about the lyrics in an AC/DC song. Who cares?