taks

sex and death 101. very strange, albeit funny movie. in fact, there were a few scenes that had me laughing loudly at 5:00 this a.m. a guy gets an email that lists 101 women he is going to bed. winona ryder plays a serial killer that also got some sort of strange email prediction. their paths are destined to cross. can't say more w/out spoiling, but the lead up to the ending (last 20 minutes) is pretty funny. taks

no fine? cool... personally, i'm not into giving the government an interest free loan for a year, at least, not one that big. this year the loan is mine, i.e., i am going to owe about $600. my mortgage interest shot way up, but the HELOC interest actually went down and my wife worked the whole year instead of only 3 months, all of which totally changed our tax picture. we need to adjust our deductions, a task that is difficult to do when your income changes drastically from one year to the next. i probably ought to simply put more towards retirement, which helps with the tax liability anyway... taks

again, windows is not a "standard," it is proprietary software. what is being discussed in this article is an open architecture, not unlike the various bus standards, communications standards, etc. i understand your meaning, you simply don't understand the concept. ? it is. i get 6-8 Mb/s on a standard link and now have access to 20 Mb/s (fiber came to town!). taks

you're the one that brought up ex-post facto, not me. look up the definition of impeachment. it is the government analogy to indictment. while you're at it, try to read CAREFULLY what i said... i only said he MIGHT have a legal case, but i wouldn't count on it. at most i think his treatment was unfair. really, are any of you idiots capable of actually debating what i said, not what you think i said? really, it is a shame. taks

not sure what you mean by that, but strawman arguments are your favorite. one of these days you might actually understand what that means, but i won't hold my breath. show me where i EVER said anything about ex-post facto as my argument? really, show me. also, while you're at it, show me how blago's argument has anything to do with ex-post facto. really, i'm curious. taks

um, no, not even close. clearly, based on this post, you do not understand what a standard is. because, if it is a standard, anybody can design to it... at that point, market forces will drive who is successful. taks

apparently you don't understand the concept of a standard... it's not just "the consumer's wish," nor are what they talking about is a single provider. it took all of 30 seconds of reading to figure that out. lose your pre-conceived notions. standards abound in our lives. the cell phone calls you make are all done through a standard, mostly CDMA in the US, some form of GSM in europe, etc. standards make things easier for developers because they don't have to design for a billion sorts of hardware or meet a myriad of communication protocols. PCs have the PCI bus and its newer variants, SATA, firewire, and RS-232 interfaces, DVI for your monitor, etc. standards all. taks

it's not just about "losing your job." he is an elected official, not just some guy hired to work for GM. the guys that sealed his fate are the lawmakers, so it sort of serves to reason that they would abide by the same sorts of procedures they recommend when legal issues arise. those procedures are in place because they make the process fair. they, of all people, should strive to provide the same level of fairness, particularly when they are deciding on the fate of someone elected by the people. taks

then why did you bring it up when i never said anything about ex-post facto laws nor does it have anything to do with this situation? either you don't understand the terms as well as you think, or you don't understand what i said. and no, it's not "part of a larger" anything. ex-post facto is an entirely different argument, completely unrelated to blago's complaint. taks

somehow such a response from you does not surprise me. taks

and the point is that is known as ex-post facto, not due process. you're conflating the two since they have nothing to do with each other nor anything anyone has said. where on earth you got that i have no idea. look up the definitions. sheesh. taks

amazing, ain't it? last time i can remember anything like that was a recent US senate vote of, coincidentally, 95-0. ^enoch: maybe. but i think the deeper point was that the legislature let fitzgerald run the show, which was clearly designed to improve his trial case. the irony here (well... sorry gromnir) is that everyone bashed blago for trying to sway the jury to his side while ignoring what fitzgerald was doing. hehe... politicians, gotta love 'em. personally, i've never heard of any that weren't corrupt... oh wait, GD. but he quit because of what it requires as i recall. taks

that's not what i said though the point was more along the ethical rather than legal argument. yes, it does matter because the illinois constitution is the legal document that defines illinois procedure. you're conflating ex-post facto laws with due process. you said something about "laws coming out of the hearing cannot be used against him" which is a completely different issue than anything any of us have discussed, nor possible anyway (laws don't come out of impeachment hearings). i'm sure they would, but realistically, they didn't, fitzgerald did. maybe, maybe not. depends upon what comes out in the criminal trial, really. i mean, in the off chance that ALL of this is really a context issue and NONE is actually evidence of wrong-doing, then there will be some serious accountability issues on the way they conduct business, as well as lawsuits, whether he gets his job back or not. really, really big IF, i might add. i don't expect him to get acquitted, but i do afford him the opportunity of innocence before being proven guilty, which this process has not given him. taks

that doesn't make it right, and they are talking about using evidence presented during the hearing in his criminal trial. not if you read the IL constitution. due process is not tied to criminal proceedings. you're conflating two totally different issues. besides, there are no laws coming out of the hearing. except that the IL house did not conduct the investigation as set forth by the IL constitution... so, no, it was not the appropriate process. i don't think so. the only reason this one merits attention is his connection to obama, and that's probably part of the reason even the dems are quick to respond. 59-0 is a pretty strong statement that "you're a goner." he's got a tough fight in his trial, and the only way he could remotely have a lawsuit is if he wins there. really, i don't know what his argument will be, but then, i don't know what he knows, either, nor do i know the context in which he made the statements he made on the wiretaps. if it were one stray comment made in jest things wouldn't be so bad, but apparently there are numerous incidents. taks

the IL constitution also explicitly states that the house is supposed to handle any and all investigations, which seems to me to be some major modifications, no? i mean, the very guy that was in charge (sort of) the senate hearings got to pick and choose the evidence from his stockpile saved up for the criminal trial. at best it is unethical. he is attempting to sway public opinion prior to the actual trial, i.e., contaminate the jury pool. it worked, since everyone across the country thinks this guy is guilty. personally, i don't see how he could ever mount a legitimate federal case anyway. what i think could happen is that he could end up with a fat lawsuit for having his name, reputation, and career ruined IF (very big if) he wins any criminal case against him. taks

legal precedent where? illinois? their constitution is sufficiently vague, i.e., due process is not specified to criminal cases alone, to leave open plenty of wiggle room. the fact that evidence that will be used in a criminal trial was marched out without any opportunity for blago to contest it seems to be on pretty weak ground, too. indeed, i agree that this is his best argument. keep in mind, i also agree that i don't think he will get anywhere, just that i think he has a case to be made, albeit not the best on the planet. this bit, btw, is almost like a non-compete clause in an employment contract. i've signed plenty, and they mean almost nothing simply because such contracts cannot prevent me from seeking an income from my stated profession. taks

even worse... taks

um, no, apples and oranges. this is an impeachment and senate hearing, the government office equivalent of an indictment and trial. what was being used was evidence that is expected to be put forth in a criminal trial to follow. i'm not sure why you say the former is not a protected right under due process? either way, overall, due process was what i was getting at. ^hurlshot: that's pretty much what i was saying... he may have some legal standing in this issue. even the illinois constitution seems to have been violated a bit, though i'm not in a position to say how. apparently the house is supposed to do the investigation, but what happened is fitzgerald did it for them, and used evidence that blago has not yet been allowed to examine for himself. very, very bad, IMO. taks

you could still do that, but you had to redefine "transfer" to "create a new ranger character and name him minsc." taks

not my point... he's being deprived of his liberty (his job) without due process. certainly that doesn't help his case, but he knew he wouldn't be able to defend himself before the trial began, so i don't buy this argument as very convincing, either. but he's already fried, particularly in the media, and his career is over. what happens if he gets acquitted? what happens if it turns out he's right? doesn't make it right and people that believe in the concepts of "innocent until proven guilty" and "due process" should be appalled at such actions. his whole impeachment is a political statement. taks

i'm curious how everybody "knows" he "abused his power" when he was not even allowed to call his own witnesses or offer evidence that is contrary to what was presented? while i understand the wiretaps are damning, that's not an excuse to avoid due process. the due process clause in the illinois constitution does not limit itself to criminal trials and the excuse that the illinois senate rules are looser than criminal laws is abhorrent. the fact of the matter is that once this got out, the dems were in a hurry to save face and "do the right thing" and the prosecutor (fitzgerald) was in a hurry to bolster his career by taking down such a high level politician. travesty that we have come this far but sank so low. taks

there's gonna be some legal issues with this... taks

hmpf. mom says probably no relation. our ancestors came straight over from ireland (though they were not purebreeds!) to settle in missouri, changed their names (removed the O') and formed "<insert name here> Town." apparently their cemetary is haunted now. mom thinks the name is actually a common last name, btw. taks

my cousin is a mormon. as a result, we have an incredibly well researched family tree on my mother's side. he even researched a bit on my father's side, but they came over from hungary in the early 1900s so there isn't much of a tree to report on. kiwinkidentally, my wife was talking to one of her residents (she works in an assisted living facility) the other day and got some information highly relevant to this topic. this woman's mother had the same maiden name as my mother. she's in her late 70s, and her mother is no longer living, but would probably be late 90s, which puts her in the same generation as my grandfather, brother of my cousin's father. sooo, now i need to hunt down the extensive book of names my cousin gave me several years ago (goes back to the late 1700s for a few folks) to see if there is a relation. the name, btw, is actually a very common word, but not common for a last name. taks

a quick read makes me think you are mis-interpreting what they are talking about... not a monopolistic provider, but a standard platform with (potentially) multiple providers. this is not unheard of. taks