Punch cards won't protect you. Of all the places that would still be making use of them the US federal government seems the most likely.

That is what I was taught years ago as well but what I wonder is if photography is still really taught other than here is how to use this specific device.

While pixel count matters we have probably already crossed into the realm where lenses are going to be more important for picture quality than pixel count unless you have a Hasselblad with a full frame digital back. Most people understand megapixels and for a long time a higher count meant you would get better pictures but as soon as you mention diffraction limits you have lost them. This was something that I was taught about years ago in high school in the photography class using Pentax K1000s and ISO100 black and white film with the general rule that for crisp pictures don't stop the lens down beyond f/8. There are exceptions like you really want a very high depth of focus or you are doing a very long exposure but you understood why you were doing those things.

The GP is also right in that now days camera chassis are fairly disposable unless you are looking at the very high end ones. I still have my Pentax Spotmatic F with close to a full complement of good lenses (looking for an M42 screw mount 17mm fisheye and 400-500mm range telephoto at reasonable prices) and as long as the camera shop near me exists I will keep on using it. My wife however is on her 4th digital camera in 10 years as they just don't last even though my SpotmaticF has been exposed to substantially harsher conditions while I have owned it for almost the last 20 years.

I'd tell them they can install it on my vehicle and let them sort out a positive ground pre-emissions little british roadster. Of course the Lucas Electric components may let magic smoke out of their device but it wouldn't be my problem.

I don't think I pay $1200 a year to insure all 3 vehicles in my household. It probably cost a little more than $1000, but $1200 a year for a single vehicle seems on the high side of things.

Close but much more likely is when the other party does it scream bloody murder.
Remember Bush and how all the democrats screamed about the stuff he did while the republicans kept their pie holes shut. Now that Obama is president and doing the same things the democrats are the ones keeping their pie holes shut and the republicans are screaming about it.

To be fair that was a rather odd but close election. The sitting senator Norm Colman initially had won but by a very slim margin (surprising since I figured he would have lost by a large margin after his TV commercial basically telling Minnesotans to STFU about the bailouts just before the election) and it was only during the recount that Franken came out ahead. From the news on it there were some questionable things that happened plus the Minnesota law on recounts states that the ballot judges need to determine "voter intent". So it wasn't really the Minnesota GOP trying to be dicks any more than the process playing out in a very close and contentious election with some bad laws that are open to personal bias. On this topic I remember there being a controversy about a found ballot box in someone's vehicle that was from Minneapolis, but didn't see or hear much follow up on it. I do remember that was a major point of contention since from what I remember it was that box that put Franken over the top.

Yup. I still have the scars on my forearm from when I was little and skidded out on my bike on a city street that had been freshly tared and coated with fresh gravel. I had to drag my bike home as I bent the front wheel too much for it to roll and that was probably a good mile walk. That sucked.

At the other end you have cases that are so clear showing CPS should have intervened but didn't that it seems like the whole system needs to be redone.

Part of me wonders if they are taking a similar approach to that of cops, why go after the real problems which might turn out to be dangerous and instead come down real hard on those in which they face no real danger.

Sounds similar to my experience except replace scotch with Blatz.

I have a friend who's wife is part of that whole mess and that basically sums it up. Add in that she is so afraid of punishing their children and he is a giant pushover they have the worst behaved children I have ever see and that includes some with some rather bad physical and mental difficulties. Everything for their children is a choice and they have been shocked at how different my children are.

The best example of this was the one time a bunch of us were over there palying cards and my friend's oldest daughter didn't want to go to bed and kept taking candy she wasn't suppose to have. My friend was trying to get her to go to bed by saying "Amy could you maybe please go get ready for bed?" and "Amy could you go get you jammies on?" of course since this was a choice her response was no. I asked if I could try something and it went like this:
Me:"Amy come over here."
she looks at me strangely.
Me:"Amy come over here."
she walks over
Me:"Put the candy in my hand."
I hold out my hand and she put the candy in.
Me:"Go up stairs and put your jammies on."
She then goes up stairs puts her jammies on and comes back down about 5 minutes later.
Amy:"Can I have my candy back?"
Me:"No. Now go say good night and have your dad put you to bed"
She goes over to my friend does the good night thing and he puts her to bed.

He was shocked that this worked and didn't know that there was something between beating the piss out of your children and letting them run roughshod over you that worked. Sometimes all that is needed is making it clear that this isn't a choice. I have been told by the mother that I am too strict with my children and I have had to explain that there are very few rules in my house but I do expect those rules to be followed and the punishments are doled out immediately.

Sounds not legally binding to me as it would have been signed under duress. Unfortunately anyone who has children seems to be one step away from this sort of thing.

In my exchanges with him he was always at least willing to listen which is more than I can say for a lot of the representatives I have dealt with, only Phil Sterner was worse than Klobuchar in that respect but John Kline isn't too far behind them. On a number of the social issues he probably could have been swayed but on gay marriage or abortion I doubt there was ever going to be movement given how religious he is. At the same time I was willing to give a pass to him on those since I doubted much head way would have been made in congress on social issues and felt that he would be good from the economic and financial issues. At the same time I do realize that I was in a rather unique spot in that I had known him for a long time as a teacher, later a friend (we would run into each other at the gym), and as my rep to the state house.