eym_sirius

This is from Wikipedia: Pathogens and role in the transmission of zoonosesAmong ectoparasites, bats occasionally carry fleas, but are one of the few mammalian orders that cannot host lice (most of the others are water animals). Bats are natural reservoir for a large number of zoonotic pathogens[59] including rabies,[60] severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS),[61] Henipavirus (i.e. Nipah virus and Hendra virus)[62] and possibly ebola virus.[63][64] Their high mobility, broad distribution, and social behaviour (communal roosting, fission-fusion social structure) make bats favoura

I'm fascinated at the concept of greasy spoon snobbery!! I think that it's like the fishing message boards -- If you don't have pictures -- It didn't happen! Just trying to support quality journalism here!

I'm betting that there will be no reply or that the reply will be a red herring. I'll betcha that there's no evidence at all of government funding of local tv news stations. The wazzoo - that's where I think this was pulled from.

Maybe I'm not understanding your position. You're saying that POLITICIANS want control over all media? And that the government "heavily controls" local news stations other than Fox? Under which program does this funding take place? I've never heard of it! Could it be that it doesn't exist? And you're saying that politicians target Fox 5 because Fox 5 won't take hush money? If that's what you're saying then provide a link or two that supports what you say. Otherwise you don't seem to have a lot of credibility in your accusation. This isn't about a LACK of journalistic ethics, b

Prima Facie evidence shows an intolerance of Fox 5's freedom of the press. How can anyone say that there was no wrongdoing when the recorded evidence shows differently? To believe that there was no wrongdoing would mean that you believe that the Governor has a right to blackball any local news station that reports anything negative about him. There's a "third world dictator" aspect to the Governor that everyone should find troubling!

Who is really surprised? Deal was pissed off because he was outed (by Fox 5) for giving a sweetheart deal to his daughter . Don't y'all remember that there were ethical problems with Deal? And financial malfeasance? Just add a lack of belief in Constitutional principles to his growing list of negative traits. What is so outrageous is that Deal was demanding an APOLOGY from Fox 5. What a human furball!!!

Yeah - Kind of like an electric fence!

I imagine that most people are similarly unexcited about "just Newt". Nothing against newts in general, which are slimy creepy-crawly things that show their tail because if they lose it, they'll just grow another one again and act like it never happened.

I think that for the reporter, she's just covering her bases in the event that everything is not what it seems. A more in-depth review of the evidence would need to be done before the woman could be officially cleared.

Mitch McConnell (R-KY) spilled the beans long ago. He said that their number one job was to win the Presidency back in 2012. Their strategy, curiously, was not to win the Presidency by Republicans doing a good job, but by doing a bad one so that the President wouldn't get any credit. The talking heads pretty much summed it up similarly. The plan was to thwart Obama at every turn, presenting an unfavorable, unstable climate which would (however inaccurate) point to his presidency and what they would call his "lack of leadership". The plan has been a dismal failure. Republicans are seen as t

See how easy it is for people of different perspectives to work together?

In the course of conversation, when someone challenges what I have to say with absolute B.S., just talking out their ass, I call 'em on it. I'm able to directly pinpoint the B.S. and I ask the clarifying questions that simply hold a mirror up to that person's position. The bser has the opportunity to back off of his position, admit that he misspoke or just not continue the bs. Many people bs for so long that they start to believe their own bs. They're embarrassed because the reality that they don't know what they're talking about kicks in. It's just conversation, though! People take posi

Yeah - How dare I misrepresent your position by quoting you, verbatim, right?

What does that have to do with your ill-informed statement that the President (OBAMA) sets the agenda for Congress? Like I said, you don't know how government works. Or maybe you read up on it to see just how wrong you are about the role of the President in the making of laws! That's about all that I can make out of this non sequitur response! But that's about all that you could do, isn't it - Make a nonsensical comment designed to take the conversation in a different direction. Why didn't you say -- Look over there!!! And then take off running??? Now, back to what you were saying abo

What does "setting the agenda" mean to Congress? Explain how that works! Start with Speaker of the House Boehner. Explain how a Democratic President "sets the agenda" for the Republican-dominated House of Representatives??? Mr. Obama is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Services and the Head of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government. While he has veto power, Congress has the power to override that veto (2/3 majority from both Houses). The Speaker of the House, Mr. Boehner, wields the power in the House and directs the agenda, not Mr. Obama, who only physically visits the chamber on

Therein lies the GOP impasse. Where can they find such a man - or woman? You've oversimplified the qualifications, yet not a single candidate distinguishes himself among the list of those who have already thrown their hats in the ring. Maybe god does forbid the Republicans from running such a candidate. How about McCain and Palin again? Give them another shot! If it was a good idea then, why is it not a good idea now? McCain is four years older - Is that all? Several years ago, I saw Newt in a bookstore at the airport hawking a book that he had written. The airport was as it usually is - p

There's only one troubling aspect to this story - The way that all writers conclude a self-defense shooting. It typically says something like "It is likely that she will not be charged". I'd rather that it say something like, "Being as how it was self-defense and in her own home, ain't no way in hell this woman would be charged - She's a hero!"

The President doesn't pass budgets. That's the responsibility of Congress. What part of the separation of powers do you not understand? Do you need to revisit the duties of the President? They do not involve making and passing laws. The President is not a legislator - you know -- the people who pass --- legislation???? You'll need to address your concerns to the responsible party -- CONGRESS. What kind of "newsjunky" doesn't know how government works???

Do you know why it's called, "OBAMACARE"? Because, like I said, nobody in Congress wants to take a position that reforms healthcare. This is NOT THE PRESIDENT'S JOB! But the members of Congress, as stated before, aren't working for the American People, but instead, for reelection. So what IS Congress doing, besides running for reelection? Nothing. No real change in the economy, immigration -- Nothing! I've heard Boehner say that raising taxes is off the table. The price of gas is up a buck since the Republicans took the House of Representatives! Boehner is Speaker of the House! How is

You're right about the question being leadership. But it's not the PRESIDENT who needs to do the leading to get things accomplished in the House and Senate, That falls on the shoulders of the main abdicators of responsibility- Harry Reid and John Boehner! THEY should be working FOR the American People. They work for their respective parties and themselves and SCREW the American People!! The House of Representatives and Senate pass the laws!!!! Hello!!! NOT the PRESIDENT!! So stop blaming the PRESIDENT for what CONGRESS ISN'T DOING!!!! What is going on is that the Speaker, in addi

Then you'd support a republican homosexual president? Of the ones you named, there's not a single one of them who can get the nomination.

You do know that the President doesn't make the budget, right? You know that appropriations is function of Congress, right? The President also doesn't make any laws and doesn't create any jobs. Those things are the function of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Those are the people you should want to throw out of office!!

What you're doing is illustrating the problem, so I guess I should say, "well-played!" It's the job of both houses of Congress to pass laws to keep the country up and running. So if blame is to be assigned, it's not BUSH and it's not OBAMA - It's CONGRESS!!! They defer to the President because they have abdicated their responsibility to make laws. If they make no decisions, then they make no unpopular decisions. Members of Congress have ONE JOB nowadays. That job should be serving the American People. Instead it is getting reelected. That's it - nothing else. The Senator

In the parlance of former member - He'd make a "Dandy" candidate!

Dandy = Easy to defeat? There's no way that Newt is going to get the nomination. Newt was bragging about all of the responses that he had received regarding his possible running for President. But he didn't indicate how many of them were POSITIVE responses! I responded and advised him to forget about it! How about McCain and Palin? If it was a good idea a couple of years ago, why isn't it a good idea now?