Anyway, here's the first one.
We're still looking for a title. Suggestions?
the one groping savage in the college of the learned
Rumsfeld was asked several times why the changes were necessary. "I think you have to ask Condi that question," he said, according to a transcript posted on the Web site of the Financial Times.Woah, getting a bit testy there, Don?
Pressed, he said: "I said I don't know. Isn't that clear? You don't understand English? I was not there for the backgrounding."
But they were black. And my husband whispered that in a nation where 70 percent of black children are born into homes without fathers, it was great to see a picture-perfect black family dining together. "I almost want to go give the guy a high five," he said, somewhat sheepishly.Aw shucks.
Under the Nice deal, each country wields 27 votes in the Council of Ministers, compared with 29 votes for Germany, which is twice as populous. 'If Nice is so wrong, why did they all approve it? Why did all EU countries ratify it?' asked Mr Miller.I'll have to revisit this. Is there anybody in the room who can explain what a "simple double majority" voting system is? It seems to me that replacing a system whereby each country gets 27 votes, but one gets 29, is only marginally different than a system in which each country gets one vote, which is what I thought the point of the Council of Ministers is (sort of like a Senate?).
The Giscard draft would replace the complicated Nice voting system with a simple double majority. Decisions would require support from at least half the member states and these would have to represent at least 60 per cent of the EU population.
Frankly, if the Red Sox ever do win the World Series again, I'm not sure Red Sox fans will be able to go on, because they'll lose their raison d'etre, which I believe is French for "no starting pitching other than Pedro."Also, since the comments software isn't working, here's my answer to Steve's question at PragueBlog. He points out that the Cubs, until last night, had not won a post-season series since 1908. "I did not know that," he writes. "That is wild, wild stuff. Anyway, the curse of the Bosox isn't anything like that bad, is it?"
What an election we're having between two pathetic extreme political hacks (Davis and Bustamante), a hypocritical witch (Huffington, now resigned), a right-wing ideologue with a mullah-like religious fanatic campaign manager (McClintock) and a libertine (Arnold). I guess in the end I'm sticking with the libertine.UPDATE: Here's another view on whether the LA Times really sought those people out on their own.
"From a purely financial standpoint, the Red Sox have less to gain by winning the World Series than just about any other team in the league," said Doug Pappas, chairman of the Society for American Baseball Research's business of baseball committee.Why? Because the fans will turn out no matter what. Indeed, sometimes I get the idea Bostonians might actually lose interest if the Red Sox started winning big time, like the Celtics used to. (After the mad eurphoria died down of course, which would take a decade or so.)
arose from the markings on the Roland-type missiles discovered last week near Hilla, south of Baghdad. In photographs released in Warsaw, the markings included the coding: 07-01 KND 2003.Oh what a shock.
Polish forces apparently took this to indicate the date of manufacture, but France insisted that it has produced no Roland missiles since 1993.