Time out for a second. That wasn't supposed to happen. Do you see that thing that fell out of me? What is that? It's not the surprise. I've never seen it before! Never mind, it's a mystery I'll solve later...

sure, your arms are safe, but what about your face?

yeah, no mention of wasteland? what supreme jerks!

not who; what. i get pissed when bad things happen to nice people. i may even turn my anger to constructive use, but this should not be construed as finger-pointing.

are you asking why i had an emotional reaction to this news, or do you really not know that in many cultures solemnity is the appropriate reaction to news of someone's death?

and i also wouldn't have shown my respect by wishing her a speedy recovery from chemotherapy.

that is correct, coward.

i will correct the common misconception that she died from a seizure no matter how tragic it is. i want candles to burn twice as bright AND twice as long, and i'm not afraid to say it.

she didn't die because she was burning twice as bright. she died from complications after they made an incision to insert a breathing tube into her trachea. that means she didn't have to die, and it was an incredible tragedy that she did. i am both sad and angry at this terrible news.

Apotheker

no, that's not the HP way. i expect they'll be unloaded by HP for $99, then flipped on ebay for a fat profit.

Picking up terrorist demographic with patent for "Hand Grenade System to Power a Portable Computing Device".

Fine. I've got "Fuel Cell System to Power a Sexual Empowerment Device" and "Fuel Cell System Coupled to a Sexual Coupling Device".

I'm going to be rich.

i looked at the real fcat, and while i think the test would have been pretty difficult for my 10th grade self, the idea that an "educated" person could not correctly answer any of the questions except by guessing is wildly implausible. i strongly suspect that mr. roach wasn't taking the test seriously, and if instead the circumstances were that his career was on the line, he would have scored far better.

as to the question of the politics of standardized tests, while i don't believe that school funding should be tied to standardized test results to the exclusion of all else, i don't think it's unreasonable to expect more of our children than was expected of us. remember that we are living in a world of increasing globalization, and our children face more competition from the rest of the world than we or our parents did. so, our power over the question of how much and what kind of education is "good enough" will be diminished in the face of globalization. further, if we get the answer wrong, the ability to legislate money to a program will also diminish as the money finds a home in another, more competitive nation.

it looks like crystal cox went out of her way to criticize obsidian, to the point of obsession. she registered numerous domain names like obsidianfinancesucks, bankruptcytrusteefraud, and oregonshyster, tried to hide her ownership of them, and gamed search engine results so that the first page was filled with her efforts. is this what you call blogging?

can i duct-tape my iphone to an ak-47 and call myself a journalist?

well, it wasn't sweet at all for lehman. perhaps we need a few more big failures to remind the finance industry that the fed window isn't just a teat to suckle on. rather, it's a rope.

this is a nice sentiment, but understanding how our financial system works requires a little more effort than, say, driving a car; and, even that is not a right.

big deal. isn't that what one would expect from a financial institution? or, should they just stick the money under a mattress? rather than focusing in on the fact that banks made a tiny profit by putting their bailout money into safe investments (i'm looking at you, jon stewart), maybe we should be asking if ensuring confidence in our financial system was worth the $7.7 trillion price tag.

answer: no. regulation and transparency would have done the job for much cheaper. and, if we still don't have the R-word and the T-word in our financial markets, then we're just going to spend $ trillions more in another bailout at some point in the future.

i can think of one justification for borrowing money to close the deficit between revenue and spending: to prevent an unforeseen economic disaster and facilitate recovery. naturally, you want to pay off this debt during times of economic prosperity. unfortunately, this last bit doesn't seem to be happening. see page 2, last column.