Carbon dating isn't accurate within a certain number of centuries, I believe 1400 years...after that it can be accurate

should know a secret conclave of fmods ruled that is definitely probably not allowed, depending on the circumstances!

I will not read 5 pages of that... doesn't der Speigel run that column every year?

"The proud US investment banks with globally recognized names like Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs have all gone bankrupt, been bought up or restructured. The American real estate market has essentially been nationalized. And the country's biggest savings and loan, Washington Mutual, has failed and been sold at a loss.'

Bankruptcy is one thing, restructuring is something any healthy company should do depending on changing markets to survive--Goldman Sachs got $5 billion from Warren Buffett because it is so strong--and the best listed companies can't prevent a buyout, and Bank of America buying out Merril Lynch makes BofA probably the strongest bank in the world.  BofA and WellsFargo are two banks who did it right all along.  Washington Mutual is NOT a savings and loan.

If they don't get their facts right I don't want to hear their usual whine about how America must pay its fair share to get its reputation back....blah blah blah...reminds me that we lost our "moral authority" about forty years ago...

I was glad to see the kangaroo get taken down.

ah Gulf of TOnkin

my grey underwears have a big hole in the back and no fly

It's become enough that you think Biden and Obama LOOK presidential.  Pointing out they are leftwing moonbats is just "ideology" and we need to move past that and vote our dreams.  Vote for Pedro!

No we got into it when a couple of US army regiments got slaughtered by Russian armor and south korea was reduced to a thirty mile pocket around the city of Pusan

zardoz rocks!!

holds the fort til I get back

"At The Corner, Mark Steyn has the latest on the Obama campaign's fundraising fraud and the media's studied determination not to notice it:

As readers may recall, a couple of days ago it became clear that the Obama website had intentionally disabled all the basic credit-card-processing security checks and thereby enabled multiple contributions from donors with fake names. The excuse offered in the New York Times story was that, ah, yes, the Obama gang may appear to accept contributions from "Mr Fake Donor" of "23 Fraudulent Lane", but all those phony baloney contributions are picked up by their rigorous offline checking procedures. As many Obama supporters wrote to point out, simply because you get a message saying "Thank you for contributing to the Obama landslide, Mr S Hussein of 47 Spider-Hole Gardens (basement flat), Tikrit!" is no reason to believe any real money is actually leaving real accounts.

The gentleman who started the ball rolling made four donations under the names "John Galt", "Saddam Hussein", "Osama bin Laden", and "William Ayers", all using the same credit card number. He wrote this morning to say that all four donations have been charged to his card and the money has now left his account. Again, it's worth pointing out: in order to enable the most basic card fraud of all - multiple names using a single credit card number - the Obama campaign had to manually disable all the default security checks provided by their merchant processor.

The reader adds:

Last night on Sheppard Smith's 3pm-ET show this issue was brought up briefly and they cited the Obama campaign falsely claiming that this sort of thing happens at the McCain site and that they catch these errors later in the processing. Well, it took three days to process my donations and they all skated through their rigorous screening.

And it doesn't happen at the McCain site. This reader tried donating under "John Galt" and "Saddam Hussein" to the McCain campaign and they rejected it.

This should be Journalism 101. I'm not the guy who made Obama's fundraising a story. The media did that when they ran hundreds of puff pieces marveling at his record-breaking cash haul, and in particular the gazillions of small donors. Isn't the fact that his website has chosen to disable basic fraud protection procedures at the very least a legitimate addendum to those stories?

Oh, sorry, I was waiting for the chirping crickets. But evidently Mr C Cricket is over at Obama Central charging 20 bucks to his MasterChirp.

Maybe after the campaign is safely over someone will be interested enough to find out how much of Obama's record campaign fundraising was criminal. Ten percent? Twenty? Fifty? On some other planet, with different reporters and editors, one might expect this to be a significant news story. Of course, in the world we live in, our reporters are too busy covering Sarah Palin's shoes and hair stylist to have time to notice that Barack Obama's entire campaign may be based on a foundation of criminal fraud."
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/10/021881.php

The Story they refer to
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGQ0MGJiNDE1MGJiYmZjYWVlMTllYjY0MTQzODZiYWM=

Yes, because they GOT INTO the home, but cannot afford to KEEP UP THE PAYMENTS