We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I generally have a bet I make for new light (and heavy) commuter rail systems. I bet that for the amount the system cost to build, every single daily rider could have instead been given a Prius to drive for the same money; and, with the operating losses and/or subsidy the system requires each year, every one of those Prius drivers could be given enough gas to make their daily commute. And still have money left over.
Sure Obama is moving to the right, just as any movement from the North Pole is south.
Yeah, I exaggerate, but you take the point.
Assistant Village Idiot
I agree that the Edwards story is dumb, but I'm amazed at the MSM blackout on the issue. After all isn't or wasn't he being considered for the Dem VP slot? Another obvious case of media bias. Wasn't it last week when Alaska's Ted Stevens was indicted and the MSM was falling all over itself to let you know he's a Republican. One of the major issues that helped the Dems regain control of Congress was that idiot Congressman who's crime was being a homo in the wrong party. Turns out he didn't do anything illegal, but the Dems got what they wanted out of him. Same thing with that jerk playing footsie in the mens room. Did I mention that he's a Republican. Who knows what party the Mayor of Detroit is from or that Congressman from New Orleans with $90,000 of my tax money in his freezer.
When and if the MSM finally nails Edwards they will probably forget which party he belongs to.
"Most people can ignore prostate cancer" is not the message to take away from that panel's recommendations. It basically said that in men over 75, the risks of treatment outweigh the risks of the disease (something those of us in the field have known for years, although the PCPs have been doing far too many PSAs in this group).
Prostate cancer can -- and does -- kill a whole bunch of men, and should not be ignored in younger men.