Valentine, NEbraska, was the place I was thinking about. Huge by Sandhill standards. Almost 3000 people. It's amazing how some place can strike you as amazingly undercrowded. That's how it struck us. And before my wife and I got to the Badlands, we'd spent 8 weeks in Yellowstone, and NW Nebraska still seemed really solitary. Is Fire Island still a place that might show up as a question on that "Is Your Child Gay" app, or have the gheys moved their frolicksome fun somewhere else?
Yep--almost half of the entire population of Cherry County...and Cherry County is larger than Connecticut. Whenever I canoe the Niobrara, we rent canoes from one of the outfitters in Valentine.
There are already classrooms that are peanut/tree nut free and latex free (no latex erasers whatsoever), so, the already are regulated. And the cost of providing non-latex erasers is borne by me, for some reason, not the school. It's not my kid that's a freak.
Remember that school where the parents fuh-reaked because they made the students wash their hands and rise their mouths so the girl with the peanut allergy wouldn't, you know, die and stuff? I don't know why they just didn't ban peanuts from school premises altogether.
Since there's no Dem Failure thread handy ... The biggest clowns in Washington to me are the Dems who are fighting Obama on the Buffett tax and closing corporate loopholes. At least actual Republicans have something of a fiscal plan -- protect big companies and the wealthy, and pay for this protection by taking more money from the poor and middle class by raising the payroll tax, broadening the income tax, cutting entitlements/benefits, and so forth. But these Dems-faking-at-being Republicans have nothing. They won't raise revenues and they won't cut costs either.
It seems weird, not just from a policy and (at least from my POV) decency standpoint, why *not* use the ultra-rich and major corporations as the strategy going into 2012? Makes no sense to me.
Probably because the ultra rich and major corporations are the key sources of their campaign financing. Of course, as a fictional character on The West Wing said, "if you can't drink their booze, take their money and then vote against them, then you're in the wrong business." A fictional Republican character, that is.
Immigration fail! http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/5/napolitano-us-will-set-record-deportations-2011/ LOL! Obama might as well give up. He gets it from all sides no matter what he does.
Not sure about that as per a recent poll even two thirds of Republicans favor the Buffett tax. Seems likelier to me that they have been purchased.
Democrats absolutely suck at debating semantics. How many perfectly good words have they let the GOP redefine without even a whimper. Maybe class warfare is appropriate right now but these chickens can't help but be afraid.
Couldn't agree more. Hell, I think it's a winning issue right now, but they're so used to losing these semantic battles they generally fold before the shooting even starts.
Liberal. Check. Liberty. Check. Estate Tax. Check. Various terms associated with Health Care. Check. Class. Check. Hell, even... ...Conservatism. Check.
Democrats have their own buzzwords, we're just capable of nuance so we don't have as many. Social Security, anyone? How about Pro-choice?
In Republican-speak: 1) Entitlements. 2) Pro-Abortion, hence anti-pro Life, though from what I can tell the media hasn't followed on that one nearly as much.