well, this notion that hetero parents should get first dibs on adopting kids before the gays...guess what? There are way more kids out there in orphanages and foster homes than there are hetero couples who want to adopt them. So, would you rather keep them in the fucked up (in most places) foster care system than have them in a stable loving environment if the parents just happen to be a gay couple? Because when you outlaw gay parent adoptions that is exactly what you are doing.

And it's a sad fact that it's not just Romney who has this screwy opinion. It's all the front-running Dems too.

Thank you Connecticut voters! How long before he switches sides and starts caucusing with the GOP?

The 4th Circuit is one of the more conservative ones so I think that this is a big deal. I seem to remember during the trial that they were very skeptical of the Administration's arguments.

I suppose we see once again that superior marketing will sell anything in this country. How many people have any interest in mobile internet? Just like I can't imagine ever watching video on a teeny tiny screen, I can't imagine ever wanting to browse the Net on this teeny tiny little screen either. As others have noted, I spend too much time online as it is. The last thing I want or need is a mobile internet device.

I suppose this thing will be a nice expensive toy for gadget geeks. And it may very well bring out innovations and improvements from other companies as the ipod has done. Of course I am not their target market since I really barely ever use a cell phone at all anyway. But I am a bit baffled by the hype of this thing, and frankly of ipods as well. I have a Creative mp3 player that was cheaper, has more capacity, and works just fine when compared to an ipod. But if other people feel like the NEED to have Apple's gadgets I suppose that is their perogative. But it is a bit maddening that the general consciousness has been led to believe that Apple invented all of these things and makes the best. Even though this has been demonstrated time and again not to be true. It's sort of like the Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 myth that persists despite all evidence tot he contrary.

what sort of pathology allows a person to stand up on front of a room full of people and the whole world and say these ludicrous, insane things every day?

Do all of these SoundScan royalty issues only apply to webcasters set up in the US? Why can't they go off-shore? Or everyone can just listen to stations in the UK or Canada or wherever to get around the problem. I personally listen to BBC6 part of the day and a station in Bangkok (104.5 FAT Radio) the rest of the day. I assume that neither of them are effected by these issues. It's a big wide world out there people!

for sure a state like Florida (the "Sunshine State" after all!) ought to be covered in solar panels.

This is really pretty chilling. And I think no one talks about it because no one wants to think about it.

My question is, is there any way the Pentagon will be able to say "no" when he tells them to bomb Iran?

This film is a direct rip-off of Paul Hogan's latest movie called Strange Bedfellows in which two straight guys pretend to be gay so they can get domestic partner benefits. I guess the Aussie producers of that film are hopping mad that Sandler et al. ripped off their movie according to press reports from Down Under.

sounds like these guys have been paying attention to Venezuela and decide "why not us too?"

With all of the different copyright laws in different countries how could YT or anyone else expect to enforce them all? Or are we moving to some sort of worldwide copyright?

If I want to see a program or music video that is from another country and that will never be available here why shouldn't I be able to see it online?

If the copyright holder succeeds in keeping their material offline in addition to not making any money off of it, no one will ever see it. How does it do the right holder any good since they are not making any money off it either way?

he's not in charge of the committee anymore so who give a hoot what he's "willing to give up"?

while I am somewhat sympathetic to people who were duped into certain things like pre-payment penalties, the old adage "if it's too good to be true, it probably is" seems to have been forgotten by everyone. People bought houses they couldn't afford using mortgage products they didn't understand. But I'm not sure why my tax dollars should bail out people who got in over their heads. I feel sorry for them, sure. But I bought my home using a 30 year fixed rate mortgage at a price I could afford. Sure, I would love to buy a new place with all the latest and greatest bells and whistles, but those places cost too much. Of course because of job situations or whatever people have to move sometimes, but no one required them to use a risky loan product.

thank goddess this is over now. can we finally stop hearing about Barry Bonds now?