Frankly, having seen some of the newer construction in our country due to my job, I'd go for the existing home every time. The land costs alone (plot, excavation, septic tank and utility tie-ins) are ridiculous to start with, and an existing home quite often is located in an older town or urban center, meaning the house is serviced by public water and sewer. Frankly, I'd rather deal with a sewer system guaranteed by the municipality to be effective, rather than spend an EXTRA $15-20,000 on a septic system. In the Northeast, older town = sewer, newer town = septic.

And don't get me started on the overall quality of construction in the past 20-30 years. What you save in "greenism" you often lose in leaky roofs, sagging/bent foundations, and exterior siding promoting mold and rot. For example, lawsuits alleging shoddy construction practices leading to toxic mold in homes build in the late 1980's began to cripple builders' insurance companies with multi-million dollar judgments.

Give me a house build in the late Nineteenth century for structure, thank you.

GM's propaganda machine is calling this $25B a "loan" (http://gmfactsandfiction.com/frequently-asked-questions/). But in my (banking) world, a loan is based on the expectation that the debtor has the proven ability to pay it back. When you're burning through an average of $4B per quarter, and have enough cash to keep running for, oh, a couple of months at best, you can't make that case, which is why GM is not going to any bank for this "loan". They also seem to have no real plan to change from a dying to a profitable company. So, Jim, this is a bailout, pure and simple.

Now, in Britain, the govt. bailouts have involved much, much more than setting guidelines to make a company's product perform better. The company receiving all this largess has had to giving VOTING shares and a couple of seats on the Board to the Exchequer, along with government review of comp packages, and a commitment to pay the loan back before shareholders get a dividend. What are we getting for our investment? Nothing but scare tactics.

For Inhofe to criticize anyone calling for change in how the Big Three do business--after two decades of building SUVs and guzzlers in the face of increasing gas prices--is ludicrous and against all old-fashioned, Main Street Republican business sense. Detroit is a dying business model and throwing good money after bad means we'll hear the alarms for more money again in March.

Prester, yes, technically an emulsion is a chemical mixture of fat, acid and a binder, generally protein. I don't know that milk is an emulsion, but if it is, it's because of the protein bonds; as you know, fat and water won't mix without an agent.

As far as eggs go, the topic was vinagrettes and therefore salad dressings, which require egg yolks (the natural blend of fat and proteins) as the bonding agent.

I don't know if you're kidding or not, but an emulsion is a creamy dressing based on egg yolks, oil and vinegar. Think mayonnaise, Caesar, blue cheese, ranch, etc. A vinaigrette is without the egg blending--think Italian or Greek dressing. Technically, the Italian guy is right.

And this Rainbow Coalition thing is getting old and is definitely artificial on the part of Bravo to keep up its Queer Quotient. Not only does it tend to become a distraction but you actually have to go out of your way to find three gay male chefs. In ten years in kitchens I've never met any man who admitted he was gay (although lesbians are becoming more common). The many gay men I do know tend to be waiters, bar staff or managers.

...because it would be the one single thing that would torpedo McBush/Palin forever. And of course it would be thrown out of court.

By the way, wasn't that part of the whole Tort Reform package Newt kept yammering about in the '90s? Just asking.

I don't think it moved the national discourse in any given direction, but it was awesome.

The best historical indicator of how well the Repubs are doing is the stock market. Right now, the day after that speech, it's tanking. By a lot.

Now, maybe that has to do with other forces. Or maybe it has to do with an understanding that one great speech to the converted does not put McCain-Palin in the White House. The next two months will test Palin.

And lest ye forget: Hillary is now on board with Obama, and probably is looking for a Cabinet position. I think the strategy will be to unleash Democratic women to hammer the facade into smithereens.

But what would the PETA people say about that?!

Seriously, though, what was the rationale of the 5 families who chose slavery for their children over the piggy? Love to have been a fly on the wall for that conversation.

Of course, I'm in financial planning. I'm also 40, have salt/pepper hair (all of it, thank god) and a couple of love handles. My employers, a major financial firm, carefully don't ask about age, but I know that they won't hire anyone right out of college. They prefer candidates with at least 5 years' work experience, a family, and owning a house doesn't hurt either.

Why? Because they'd rather hire someone who understands life and, by extension, their clients. Who wants to put their retirement savings in the hands of someone 35+ years away from retiring? Or the college fund under the guidance of someone whose focus for the weekend is on getting blasted at a sports bar? People trust professionals they feel can relate to their concerns.

Would that get by the Equal Employment people? Probably not. But I'd say it's smarter.