That's true. It wasn't a typo. Sometimes when writing quickly I write the wrong word: to instead of too, add instead of ad; for instead of fore; pray instead of pray. That's why you're supposed to proofread before sending out an important email. Mea culpa. I didn't proofread my post. If I had I would have clarified my remarks and *probably* would have caught *do* as opposed to due.

I proofed this post and found that I wrote "proof read" instead of proofread. And, if I had let go through - would that be a sign of a lack of education or something else? A lack of attention to to the spelling and grammar on an insignificant post.

It is, however, a faulty assumption to hold that transposing homophones is a sign that the writer can't distinguish between the two words

Yah. I'm a fking moron - either that or I didn't review my post properly. Which, according to you, probably makes me a fking moron. Notice, I also forgot to close the parentheses and wrote a run on sentence. Bad me. (Slapping my wrist.)

OK. Maybe some panicked. :- )

I live in NYC. No panic here. Not even close.

I see the media panicking. I don't see the American public panicking.

If anything there is concern that the government is not taking proper choices do to politics (such as restricting / checking people who travel to ebola and requiring that doctors spend 21 days (or so) at home or in a nice isolation ward at the hospital with TV and all the take out menus they want.

Because Catholics do not believe that everything a pope says is to be considered infallible.

How do you distinguish between an illegal alien's cell phone usage (living there but not to be included in the census) and a legal resident of the state?

In correct. The southern strategy was the result of a third party. George Wallace ,the racist Alabama Governor was running for President on a Third Party line. Nixon's southern strategy was the belief that he could win states with only 40 percent of the vote - thus it was worth it for him to spend time and energy running in the south.

He was right. He would states with 40% of the vote.

The south didn't turn republican until 1994 so ... either this is a bullshit meme or Nixon was one hell of a long-term strategist.

really? I've used it with eBay and to send money many times. I've never had a problem with them. There may be a problem when dealing with numerous small businesses (and scam artists) around the world. Paypal has made my life a lot easier in dealing with small entities around the world.

How are they ripping people off?

Then they're opposed to Roe v Wade.

No. There were embryonic stem cells that could be used - BUT new ones grown specifically for research were not to be used.

I'm not a socon so I'm not defending them. I'm only saying that it's hyperbole to state that this research was illegal. It wasn't.

I'm an atheist and for stem cell research but demonizing people who disagree with you is not the best way to go.

I'm pro-choice and an atheist but I don't think that being pro-life is a sign of being a religious fanatic. What outrages pro-life people are late term abortions, which, by the way, were not sanctioned by Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade kept abortion illegal after the first trimester (13 wks). Medical research on stem cells were not opposed by the socons - only embryonic stem cells.

Where is it illegal? Certainly not the US. Social Conservatives argued that federal funds were not to be used on embryonic research. That's not making it illegal. It was only illegal to create, grow and harvest embryos for the purpose of research - that's not the same thing as making it *illegal*.

No. There are a lot of people who are philosophically opposed to there unequality of wealth. I speak with them everyday; there are some in my family.

Equality of outcome is desired by many. My point made about the 1% is that too many people are saying that everything bad happens because of the EVIL 1% who control the world. If only, they say, this 1% would pay their "fair share" and government agencies ran everything then the world would be wonderful.

Yes. It's possible. But supply and demand affects job prices as much as it affects commodity prices. Some jobs are undesirable (for whatever reason) and they command higher salaries as a result of poor supply (of available workers). Others have people lining up because it's desirable (teaching) and the wages are pushed down due to an abundance of supply.

No. This was true 10 years ago as well. And this 1% nonsense is tiring. It's boring and it's stupid. You're worried about the control of the 1% - then get away from government control of the economy. You worry about some having more than you. Right? Ohh the humanity. We're not all equal. So what do you do? You get the government to get back at them to force equality. But it doesn't work that way. And then you're surprised that they protect themselves, do jujitsu and use the government to their advantage? The solution is to not use the government to enforce equality - else as in the soviet union (and ever so evident here in the US) people who have the government on their side get the plums - and the rest don't. To paraphrase Orwell - some pigs are more equal than others.