My address is kent(at)yourarcade.com send me an email when you get a chance and I'll explain about the pictures.

I don't think we need to go the reconciliation route yet. But if we do, there is nothing dishonorable about it. And it would be completely valid unless the Senate decides to change their rules ... which would be a screwed up move if made in response to the rules finally being used to advance a progressive agenda. You don't win by refusing to use tools at your disposal because you didn't like it when someone else used them. That's not honor, that's weakness.

But you are right ... carts before horses. Proof will be in the pudding. One thing for sure, Reid is correct to keep his mouth shut at this point. I think there's an argument to me made that keeping the HELP plan out of the senate bill and merging the better house plan in it's entirety might be a better move if Pelosi and Reid can work the caucuses in harmony. It's almost to the point where we really are at the mercy of leadership's desire and ability - the public part of the battle has pretty much reached a climax. There is potentially one more round of helpful public outrage if they take the no HELP route to give them the political impetus to get the house version in the final bill.

IMO, lending a voice is really a matter of if you want to fight for what you believe is right - or fight to keep your political heroes from taking any guff.

IMO, most egregious policies of nations ultimately track back to corporate influence (or a particular nation's analogue). In the modern world, it's a cop-out to try and separate the two. When corporations control the government they also control the nuclear arsenal by default ... it's pretty tough to imply they have clean hands.

"href" does not apply to the <img> tag at all - it applies to the <A> (action) tag which is used to make the image a clickable link. For a list of all valid <img> attributes, see here.

IE8 has the same problem that every IE has had since the beginning: they have their own unique definition of standards compliance. Now it's even more of a pain in the ass because you have to code special for both IE6/7 and IE8 in addition to the other browsers that all seem to work in the same standards-compliant fashion. Security has nothing to do with it.

Start with a new blog, click on the little icon at the far right of the tool bar that looks like <A> ... paste the above HTML code in the empty box. Then click on the underlined "A" icon on the tool bar to get back to the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) view. You should have your picture with a blank line above and below the image that you can use to proceed to fill in text around it. One note, I sometimes have to push the "Tab" key to get my cursor to appear when switching back to the WYSIWYG mode (that might just be a Firefox thing).

You can use that snippit for other pictures by simply replacing the URL of the "src=" attribute. I know your original question was about WinWord ... I can't help you there, but that should at least get the thing into your blog. If you want to change the size of the image, just change the % value in the "height=" and "width=" attributes (note: make sure not to accidentally delete the "%"). Obviously, change the "alt=" text to whatever you want.

Geek Note: The MovableType platform really sucks out of the box. I'm not sure where Josh got the idea it's "state of the art" ... TPM could probably make it much better by simply installing a plugin or two but don't seem to feel the need.

This was simply a nonsense question. How can you demand a "clear" answer to a nonsense question? An affirmative answer is predicated on the GOP regaining the house, Bohner being reelected (twice), no scandals between now and then, and Bohner standing for the leadership post in the event all other variables were affirmative. If the question was genuinely about support for Bohner in leadership, it was clearly and honestly answered. If the reporter wanted her prediction over the GOP regaining the majority in 2010, he should have asked but didn't. If he wanted to know if the candidate would switch parties rather than face a primary, he also didn't push on that question either - this was a *stupid* and nondefinitive way to approach the issue if that was his intent.

Ultimately, when the reporter didn't get the response he wanted he ended up publishing a story that essentially lied about the candidate's position. The guy is a second-rate shill playing gotcha. Not playing along is politics, yes, but accurately relaying the response of a campaign to specific questions is *reporting* not stenography. This guy should never confuse himself with a journalist.

The guy did what he had to do.

It doesn't make me feel much better that the whole thing is classified as a national secret ... only lobbyists allowed to see it. Great.

IMO, tort reform won't fix a damn thing - there is nothing that ensures "savings" will be passed on to the consumer. The CBO estimates seem to assume that the $5.4 billion per year in potential savings might be passed on, but I don't see much evidence in the real-world management of the health industry that would justify that assumption. In my world, an executive getting an extra $2 million (the most likely outcome for any reduction in overhead) doesn't really represent much improvement.

But the decision to script a concept for air - to a mostly juvenile audience - is certainly an indicator of her judgment. There's no way in hell the republicans would ignore the issue with a democratic candidate who had made similar programming decisions.

Of course it isn't real, someone had to think "this is a GREAT idea, let's write a storyline that has rape in it!". Not sure how that makes it better.

But Bulldog's belief that securing one's weapons is a bad thing indicates why the NRA has become a danger to society. They didn't used to be that way. Years ago, they were at to forefront of safe gun ownership with a serious program providing trigger locks (for example) and a huge PR campaign showing that the short time it takes to unsecure a weapon was well worth avoiding a completely preventable accidental death - and didn't significantly reduce effectiveness in a home invasion situation. The group is no longer about responsibility, it's about using the platform to attack anything seen as liberal - no matter what. There isn't a braincell in the bunch anymore.

The sad thing is that those who fail to act responsibly - or worse, argue for the right to act in a dangerously irresponsible fashion - open the door to regulations that I feel are not in the overall best interest of America.

Besides, her premise was completely undermined by the fact that Biden's advice has been articulated in the public sphere as the debate is occurring. The reasoning she uses is that we would have been better off had republicans in disagreement with Bush spoken up (or stepped down in her frame, which in her defense, would be required for a republican who wanted to voice a public position that was not in harmony with the administration). Biden doesn't *have* to step down to make his opinion known, we already know it. Just as we know he's going to back up the president if his advice doesn't carry the debate and be just as candid next time a topic comes up.

The piece was based on poorly grounded logic and designed to be incendiary.

I'm a bit more critical of the whole banking thing than you. The bonuses are just a byproduct of the banks themselves robbing us blind - of course after a trillion-dollar ripoff there's plenty of money around. And it's not just dirt-cheap capital driving profits, they have also jacked consumer interest rates through the roof and tripled every fee imaginable to squeeze the profits they desire out of the "lower" class. In theory, the dirt cheap capital and bailouts were supposed to be used to drop consumer credit costs (including small business capital investment) and get things moving in the real economy before everyone lost their jobs - but instead the bankers are using it to feather their personal nests.

IMO any payroll tax holiday should be accompanied by something like an 85% tax on executive compensation in excess of $1M. It's only fair considering a huge part of our deficit is a result of the trillions spent to ensure profits in the financial sector. But I'm skeptical of tax cuts as a consumer benefit at this point, the real economy is too battered for that to cut it. I'd prefer to see a solution that also directly benefits people who are now below the poverty line(growing daily).

Classic.

More than 1,500 civilians have been killed by violence in Afghanistan so far this year, the United Nations said last week.
.
It said 68 percent of the civilian killings were a result of militant attacks, while 23 percent were caused by Afghan and foreign troops led by NATO and the U.S. military.

Folks are acting like the award means something it doesn't.

There are hundreds of plugins for MovableType that could add many functions that people discuss with a simple install. I'm puzzled at how rudimentary the configuration is ... I can't figure out if it's a lack of skill or will. They don't even update the latest patches.