dwar0123

You made it, how mad could she have been :)

You staying up for much of this? I see it is past midnight where you are :)

I say this as an agnostic, but if a religious persons beliefs do not affect their decisions, what exactly is the point of religion.

Asking someone to source a claim they have made on a forum is not considered rude. Demanding others provide the proof of your own claims is. That said, the proof provided is interesting. Certainty the government does more for individuals then I thought it did for areas declared a disaster. That said, it seems most of the aid is in the form of temporary assistance and low cost loans. This quote struck especially relating to your concerns. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Flood_Insurance_Program Combining a flood insurance plan of last resort while at the same time requiring the community to create flood mitigation plans. Apparently it is meant to be self supporting through premiums. Though it is a net lose currently. It would appear that the NFIP is a mechanisms designed to prevent the moral hazard that concerns you and I still have strong doubts that expensive completely uninsured shore houses are the ones getting the few grants the government does hand out.

I'm claiming they don't exist, you are claiming they do exist, you provide the examples. With respect to hurricane flooding.

Source? This doesn't sound like something I have ever heard of the government doing. Two things I have heard of the government doing that relates to this. Buying peoples land so they can allow it go fallow so they don't have to invest in restoring infrastructure/creating expensive levees. And creating expensive levees. I have also heard of the government being sued when levees failed, not sure that has ever been successful nor even relevant here as I don't believe they have many levees on the eastern seaboard.

So I guess that means the odds favor him, lets place a wager. Heck, despite your quoted projections and polls, I will even give you even odds.

Here is hoping it is a lot of hoopla over nothing, but take care and be safe just incase.

I only recently saw Casablanca and really enjoyed it, felt it easily lived up to the hype. I watch quite a lot of tcm and for me the best old movie is The Philadelphia Story. A bunch of the best classic actors doing some of their finest work with a great script and direction.

Thanks, I thought it was a pretty routine 2♠ but it was a big loser this time around. So if you hold ♠- ♥at9xxx ♦ajxx ♣xxx and the bidding went 1♣-2♠-P - P X - P - P - ? Do you pass, bid 2nt or 3♥?

What ever might be said of Luke Warm, at least he believes what he says.

It is hard for me to accept that any "MOM" that is advocating the death of her child is really doing that from the "MOM" perspective. Anyway, why does a mother lose the right to kill their children at the end of the first trimester, heck I know some woman who wish they still had that right for their grown children. All analogies are going to be inherently trite as about the only thing worse than forcing a woman to carry an unwanted child to term is death. So when I say that my neighbor playing loud music at 3 am, day after day, no matter how I protest, causes me to decide as the expert experiencing the situation that 3 months is long enough and it is time for the problem to die. I know that the analogy is flawed because it doesn't get to the depth nor breadth of bullsh!t that the woman has to put up with. Yet still people have killed others for less, but we don't condone it. So if 3 months of loud music at night isn't enough to justify murder, what is enough. Certainly self defense rises to that level and few argue against abortion when the life of the mother is threatened. So there is another line that we can draw to justify abortion, convince me that 9 months of unwanted pregnancy rises to the level of justified homicide or you can still convince me that the fetus isn't a human being killed. I don't think the argument that mothers knows best holds much weight, I wish it did. I don't enjoy being pro-life, it makes me unpopular with people whom I otherwise get along with great.

As much as I am leery of wading in on this topic, you and Vampyr seem to be overloading on emotive arguments while simultaneously completely missing the point. I have no religious basis for my point of view, with respect to the idea of God I am as agnostic as you can get, with respect to any specific religion it would be fair to say I am an affirmed non-believer. Rape is horrible, but so is murder, if you can convince me that aborting a fetus is not equivalent to killing a baby, then you might make some progress in convincing me of my error. Causing a woman to have to carry an unwanted child to term is a horrible and tragic burden to lay on anyone, but when the only alternative is to kill an innocent human being, I am not sure how anyone can so casually dismiss the other point of view with these trite arguments.

People's who opinion I respect supporting Nate Silver's predications. vs My opinion of those who disagree with Nate Silver. Given the vast difference in my opinion between the two sets of people, even if Nate Silver was totally wrong in 2008, I would still grant him more weight.

An interesting use of campaign cash, I wonder if it could become a type of self fulfilling prophecy. Buy enough stocks to keep Romney over 55%, convincing some people he will win, leading to an actual victory. If it works, you help Romney win and you make a staggering amount of money. If it fails, you lose a staggering amount of money. Of course, staggering amounts of money are being spent by both sides already, so this might not really be that big a downside.

I had to read that three times to realize you were not referring to the virgin birth but rather to the video linked. My confused state of thinking was more profound.

2/1 Matchpoints [hv=pc=n&s=sa87632h6dt974c74&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1c2s]133|200[/hv]

I'd bid 5nt. I've never bid a grandslam force before, but this is what I thought one would look like. I wouldn't give a rats a$@ what the rest of the field might be doing, I don't pass up chances to do things I've never done before :)

While it would be nice to signal that the honors are tight by playing them in an order reverse of normal, I believe partner will never read you for having the jack if you play the queen. I think you need to play the jack.

:) Good catch, there were two originally, but I thought of a 3rd :)

If they had such evidence, I can see why that would shut the door on the case in north souths favor. However that seems a ridiculously high standard to require to instead rule against them. So I can understand why Blackshoe would ask for it, as it would end the question instantly. However, lacking it, I don't see why that does anything but going back to looking at the problem.

You are correct, I realized my mistake and deleted my post before you finished replying.

I would guess that every modern president has conceded Iran's right to nuclear technology. There are three things going on here, both of which are the reason you are not taken seriously on this forum. 1. That you would actually think the President would say such a thing in the context in which you are understanding it. 2. That you can't realize that the context is absurd and then deduce that the actual context for the quote(assuming the quote is real) is that it is relating to medical and energy nuclear technology. Though with the caveat with respect to nuclear energy technology, it being of the non weaponizable type. 3. That you would read and post from a site that abuses context so absurdly that meaningful conversation can not even begin.

deleted

I look forward to hearing why, as the only reason I can find to agree with your ruling right now is that you think they are actively cheating and have an agreed system were a slow 4nt is natural and an in tempo nt is rkc. I can think of lots of reasons why a BIT can lead to UI that would suggest alternatives that don't require active cheating/lying. Which is what I think you are trying to suggest with the above quote, but I don't see how they apply here, which is what I meant with my quote.