I wish you all the best, and hope your mom really does figure out that if you're the most important thing in her life, she's really doing it wrong.

I do have sympathy for her; I'm sure that like my daughter her choices aren't wholly under her own control, and that as hellish as it is to live with her, it's got to be a thousand times worse to be her. But that doesn't change the fact that close contact with someone like that wears on you in ways that you don't even realize until they're gone. My family is still recovering from the unbelievable tension and stress she put on all of us until she moved out. I didn't even realize until she was gone how irrationally snappish and defensive her brothers had gotten, but now I see it because they're finally unclenching their jaws. Me, too.

Your mother is mentally ill, and she needs help. But until she decides that, and decides that she needs to get help to change, or until she bottoms out in some way that legally removes all choice from her, it won't happen. Having compassion for her suffering is good... as long as you don't get sucked in, and that's really hard. I don't think I could bring myself to cut ties, but maybe it would be best. Nobody can tell you what's right, and odds are that whatever you do will bring some misery. It's balancing on razors and job #1 is not getting cut any more than you can avoid :-/

Its a good thing because states shouldn't be allowed to prohibit municipalities from installing/running their own infrastructure (whether it be water pipes, power lines, telecommunications infrastructure, transit systems or whatever else).

Medium.com: Because Small.com and Large.com don't exist.

Have some sort of system where there it something on the track that gets picked up by the train so that at any given time the train knows exactly what the maximum speed is at that point. Then engineer the train systems to ensure it never exceeds that speed (even if there is a throttle failure causing the throttle to be in the wrong place, the speed regulation system would be a separate system and clamp the speed anyway)
.
Now there might be failures in the speed regulation system but it wouldn't be able to make the train go faster, only slower (meaning the worst that could happen is a train going slower than it should be)

That's a popular theory, but it doesn't seem backed up by the evidence. It looks like Obama merely grabbed onto that as an excuse to leave. Check out this New Yorker article for example. From the reports, Obama was not pushing to leave troops, he was stalling and looking for a way out:

Obama seemed to affirm that fact when he was debating Romney. He said:

So it seems pretty clear Obama was against leaving a small force in Iraq.

Blaming the Bush timetable is silly.....he had several years to change the timetable (and not to mention that Bush was an idiot so doing anything because that is what Bush planned is utterly moronic. If Obama said, "I did this because Bush planned it" then I would have significantly less respect for him if he really meant that).

I see it as closer to "I wear a bullet-resistant vest that is immune to the particular models of bullet included in the most common black market ammo kits." In practice, do more intrusions use vulnerabilities whose existing patches an administrator just failed to apply or vulnerabilities for which a patch does not yet exist?

That's the defense that early video game cloners used, but courts ended up ruling that the copyright in a video game relates to those portions of the program's audiovisual output that are constant across runs.

I'm no lawyer, but I speculate that the legal theory is that advertisements are incorporated into the site's "collective work" under license from the advertisers.

The formula is MV=PQ, where PQ is the cost of everything in the economy, M is the money supply, and V is how quickly money changes hands. M has gone up dramatically (which you mention), but V has gone down just as dramatically, which means banks (or others) have not been spending their money, they've been keeping it.

Essentially what has happened with the federal reserve: keeping interest rates low has given banks free money. They needed money after the crisis, because otherwise they'd be bankrupt. TARP was the initial attempt to give them money, but that didn't work out politically so the Fed found another way to do it.

So, the Fed printed a lot of money, but it just ended up in banks who eventually will use the money to write off bad loans.

Hobbits don't wear shoon (or even shoes) for a different reason: thicker skin on the soles and hair on the rest of the feet. But wouldn't they get infected going barefoot all the time?

You have now. It's called Rhinitis medicamentosa or rebound congestion.

This is the part I'm most interested in. Did Chris really say these things or did the FBI want to hear a specific narrative and perhaps twist or misunderstand his remarks about what he believes is possible into "something he did"?

Chris isn't talking and I'm disinclined to accept FBI statements at face value. I will be very interested in hearing Chris's account of what he actually said to the FBI.