I would certainly be nice if this message could be communicated to Detroit. Those boneheads cannot figure out that being anti-business leads to high unemployment.

Unless my understanding is completely off base, I disagree with your assertion that it will remove the burden of proof. The prosecution will still be required to prove that the defendant is guilty of assaulting the victim. It is adding a more harsh punishment depending on the victim of the crime.

This is certainly a violation of the constitution, though I would argue the most grievous being the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. An assault on a healthy white straight Christian male is no longer equally punished as against the special classes defined in hate crimes, and therefore the non-protected classes are not equally protected under the law.

About 2 ore disks of the original '70s version to watch and we'll be starting the new version too. I'm interested in what the differences will be. I read a few comments a while back on Dirk Benedict's blog that he didn't much care for the new one.

I'm glad that we found something we agree on.

However, if abortion opponents realize that abortion will happen regardless of the legality, then what is their intent with regards to outlawing it?

Are you seriously arguing that we ought to make murder and tax evasion lawful? Whether you realize it or not, that is your argument.

I would say that murder and tax evasion have more in common with each other than either does with abortion.

And hence why you are on my foes list. I hope I never become stupid enough to think ending a life, within the mother or not, is even remotely on the same scale as tax evasion.

And I do not see how your thought that laws should only be made if they won't be broken is congruent with a lawful society.

Abortion will occur regardless of the legality. Murder will happen whether it is illegal or not. Tax evasion is unlawful, but it still occurs.

Well said.

I don't really care what your position is on abortion. You may think it is a good thing, but as Isaiah 5:20 points out, it is nothing new.

To address your question, yes Obama's goals are to expand the number of abortions:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/23/obama.abortion/index.html
This year he reversed the "Mexico City policy" which prevented federal funding to NGOs promoting or providing abortion services. This will increase abortions provided and on the tax payer dime.

While no link, with Obama pushing for nationalized health care in the US, is there any doubt that under the Obama administration abortion will be an approved procedure, which again will be paid for by tax payers.

There are two solid examples of how Obama has been working to expand abortions. His rhetoric says he wants fewer, but providing the monies to allow them doesn't follow. Also, I haven't mentioned the numerous cases where he had the option to limit abortions which he voted "present" or "nay". The man has a 100% NARAL rating for a reason.

Don't take my word for it, as a layman. Search the scriptures. Paul covers the topic multiple times.

This here is the problem.

The scrummaster (who should have learned this in his training) is a team member who's job is to organize the meetings and help "enforce" scrum practices. The scrummaster is not the product owner who sets direction for the team. The scrummaster is just another developer on the team.

In our implementation of scrum the scrummaster's only real job is the setup the meeting announcements. He is also usually the first one to reign us in during standup to keep the meeting to keep it short, though any of the team can mention to take it offline after the standup. Similarly with the planning, review, and retrospective meetings he'll usually be the first to remind everyone of the purpose of the meeting, but anyone on the team can do that.

In my view a scrummaster is only needed to get a scrum team started up to keep things on track instead of letting everything degrade into chaos. After an scrum team is up and running and into a good groove any member of the team can help provide scrummaster-ish direction.

Wrong, the correct answer is that the color of a person's skin has nothing to do with representation.

But how exactly did you get the image into your journal entry? I don't think I've seen that used before...

The Honking

Did you really take the time to yell at everyone who equated Bush to Hitler? Or do you just bat for one team?