Bob

Yep, an impressive ceremony and speech. And some hope for a lot of needed change.

You know, I had a really great argument to make against that thesis but I have simply forgotten what I wanted to say!

Our Bushie proudly proclaims that somehow by his strong actions he has prevented another terrorist attack here in the US during the last 7 years (a rather facetious argument, of course, almost like me arguing that my humming "Blue Moon" for the last decade has prevented an alien attack - see, it works!). But at what cost? A trillion dollars or more, maybe a couple of hundred thousand dead, a substantial loss of civil liberties, etc. And the net result? Well, probably a million or more people in the world now that would like to blow the shit out of us. So too, the Israelis. By killing a few hundred Hamas fighters (and many more innocent civilians), they have probably made hundreds of thousands of more enemies in the Arab world that will gladly try to blow the shit out of them in the future. What a great victory (not). Nobody seems to learn anything from history.

If that's the mood of the times, probably wise to wear a hardhat when walking by any of the high rise buildings in Pattaya these days!

Hmmm.....exactly how I felt when I was in the Tawan bar in Bangkok one time!

Geez, I hope this contest ends soon so I don't have to continue wading through the thousands of posts about nail polish, Chinese bunions, and all the other "need-to-know" topics....haha.

Touche (they suck! - then again, they always suck!). You probably didn't hear about the one incident this year, though. It was in the fourth quarter with 6 minutes to play and a train was going by the football stadium. When the train blew its whistle, the other team (probably the Seattle Chickenhawks...), figured it was the end of regulation and simply left the field. It took the Lions 19 plays to score!

Likely? In Detroit, it's already happened (within the city proper itself, the unemployment rate is estimated at over 14%)! The drop in the City population over the last 50 years (it's currently less than half of what it was) hasn't helped, of course. Because of the massive borrowing by the federal government, I have no doubt at all that the US dollar over the long term will substantially depreciate. I'm just not sure how you play this investment-wise (and I'm not all that optimistic that other countries won't eventually follow the same self-destructive economic path). Perhaps in 20 or 30 years, most people will be fondly remember the "good old times?"

Okay, Khor Tose, I'll take the Steelers for 5 baht. You game? We can pay off when we first meet in Chaingmai or elsewhere sometime.

While it's likely in this case that the referees screwed up, it's possible that's not the case. What you watch on television is not the offical timekeeping but the network's (or the guy running the scoreboard) version of it. I've seen many cases where "official" time expires 1-2 seconds before or after the television/scoreboard version of it. P.S. The scoreboard timer starts when the person sees the timing ref move his arm in a downward motion. I'd guess that its (the scoreboard or television version) is never identical to the exact time that the ref actually pushes the button on the hand timer he carries.

The best legal advice he'll get here!

GB, take a look here: 32 or 64 bit?

Ol' Bernie is going to prison for the rest of his life and the only issue there is how long it'll take to complete the criminal process against him. Just too much money stolen (people will be lining up at the sentencing to denounce this guy). The question to me is how many others are directly involved. There is no way this guy did this on his own. A lot of people were handling the money, accounting for it, allegedly auditing the deals, sending out reports, etc.. A dozen or more people? Maybe, and I hope Fitzgerald gets them all.

Impeachment and the "trial" in the Illinois Senate has nothing to do with conviction of a crime. It's a political process provided for the the state consititution (similar to the other states but more expansive than the federal requirement of "high crimes and misdemeanors") and, while a criminal act could form a basis for impeachment and conviction there, it's not necessary at all. As for the criminal case against Blago, that's being handled in federal court by the US Attorney (Fitzgerald). No need to wait or wonder. There is zero (yep, zero) chance he won't be convicted by the Illinois Senate. This guy is toast and it'll happen in 30 days or less.

Rather silly debating this issue. As an alternative, why not stand outside the establishment, douse yourself with gasoline (or gasahol if you're "green"), and threaten to immolate yourself unless the smoking stops? You'll probably help lower the smoke level in the establishment for at least a few minutes because I'd suspect at least a few lit stoggies will come flying your way (if not, I could test my Bic?).

Are you really serious? Are you, with a straight face, really asking if it is "possible" that the BIB take bribes to overlook things in Thailand? If so, that's way beyond a "naive" question (i.e., it's crossed over to the humorous level). The odds of any true investigation of police bribes involving the Santika fire is rather slim in my opinion (and, if any investigation actually occurred, it's probably even worse odds that any facts about it would ever see the light of day). Of course, this being Thailand, why not have the police investigate it? That'd be so "Thailand."

Somewhat my initial reaction (i.e., if it happened to me, it'd hardly be a roaring bonfire! ).

Long live Aung San Suu Kyi! And screw the petty Burma dictators.

Well, since you asked, no, I wouldn't have accepted the appointment from slimeball Blago. Integrity and and the appearance of integrity are important values and anyone who might be offerred an appointment from Blago during this time period sure as hell ought to know that it would be natural (regardless if "right" or "wrong") that a substantial portion of the public would associate some of the taint with you. It would be natural (again, regardless if "right" or "wrong") for many to wonder what "quid pro quo" was offerred or discussed and that the end result would be at least partially demeaning to the notion of being an honorable Senator.

As I understand it, one of the basic requirements is that the Secretary of the State of Illinois must sign a document to certify the appointment and, so far, the Secretary has refused to do that. That issue is apparently before the Illinois Supreme Court and my guess is they may have no choice but to order the Secretary of State to sign the form. Once/if that happens, I think they have to seat the guy regardless of the smell emating from Blago. Blago is the legal governor, he has the constitutional power to make the choice, and there doesn't appear to be any solid legal reason why the Senate could reject him. Some have suggested the Senate can use it's constitutional power (to determine the qualifications of the appointee) to refuse to seat Burress but I can't see how that holds any water as (1) the qualifications for a Senator are spelled out in black and white and Burress does meet those qualifications and (2) the rule relates to the qualifications of the appointee and not the appointor. According to all counts, Burris is a decent guy. My only issue with him would be his wisdom (or lack thereof) in accepting any appointment from slimeball Blago.

Fastest way home? I suppose that's possible but it doen't sound very "Thai." I'd also bet that a direct bus wouldn't take 10% longer than a car (bus from Bangkok Ekamai to Pattaya bus station generally took about 2 hours and 20 minutes whereas you normally did that in a car in 2 hours). Perhaps you could just buy them a car?

GT, I'd bet a dozen donuts that nobody here has ever done that so they wouldn't know. Up to you (yea, I know cost isn't likely a big factor for you) but I'd bet they'd be happy as clams taking an air-conditioned bus back home.

Considering Nietzsche's view of the space-time continuum, we actually aren't sure the clock was ever there at all! [This post and GB's post may be living proof that we aren't here either...or maybe shouldn't be! ]

Frankly, an idiotic response. The thread moved to the related subject whether you recognize it or not. As to your contention that a US citizen is not be subject to the long arm of US law outside of US borders, you are simply wrong. As to your contention that "No nation would ever allow the US government to enforce law in their nation", I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you mean that the US Marshalls or FBI can't arrest in Thailand or that the US Courts can't prosecute in Thailand, you're right; however, if you mean that the US can't get Thailand to extradite a US citizen from Thailand due to that citizen being indicted in the US for breaking US laws in Thailand (or any other country), you are wrong again.

Sure they can and they've done it for years mainly in other areas (income tax laws, trade secret laws, etc.). And the Courts have largely upheld the constitutionality of the laws. There's been little issue with these laws by US citizens (and, if you're not a US citizen, then it doesn't affect you at all).