virgil

I've provided for myself and as such am not dependant on others to provide those things for me. It's easy to have that perspective when you're fortunate enough to be able to afford your principles. How about if you were young and starting a family and had a child with special needs and astronomical expenses beyond your means. Do you let your child suffer? I don't disagree that something should be done to root out the people who abuse the system. But, it's too easy to make believe that everyone receiving any form of assistance is lazy or abusive. This is the myth that is used to make selfish people feel principled.

I'm complaining but I'm complaining because the government is TAKING my money and freedom. I don't need or want them to take care of me, I'm a grown man and can stand on ny own two feet without the government robbing from somebody else to give it to me. The government isn't helping anyone they are only controlling them. If you were sick and needed expensive medical care that you couldn't afford, would you go to the hospital, or die at home with you principles?

Well said, Greaybeard.

Local long island sweet corn; homemade lemonade, salsa, and guacamole; pizza on the grill.

I just cooked up a breast from my first ever turkey from this past spring yesterday. Couldn't believe how good it was. Barely any different from any other turkey breast I've ever tasted.

thanks mbucks.

I usually leave mine in long enough for them to get stolen. Hoping to buy one of the 'blackout' versions because I think the flash gets too much attention- anyone have a recommendation on a make/model?

· Opening all of Suffolk County for the special January firearms season, subject to local discharge ordinances. This change will simplify options for hunters, should local municipalities change ordinances to allow discharge of bows or firearms. The statement above is from the DEC press release regarding 2012 rules changes. I don't understand exactly what it means and was hoping someone could clarify.

Hasn't this issue been sett'ed? The announcement was made yesterday. Maybe that one DEC office hadn't heard the news yet.

I'd recommend going to your local bow shop and looking at used bows. A lot of them sell used bows- there are a lot of guys who buy new bows every year or so and sell their old bow back to the shop for credit. You can probably get a good deal on a relatively new bow and get a better bow for your money.

Virgil, I know it's it's hard to see the whole picture when you have your head in the sand. If you believe enabling and coddling those that cannot perform is the way to prosperity, than so be it. I disagree with bailouts by our government. You act like we all think Bush is our hero or something. When I said "they'' came up with the bailout, I did not mean liberals created the bailout. I meant how in my experiences, liberals claim we needed a bailout. Do you honestly think it's a good idea to keep getting the government involved in private enterprise? How's your summer going buddy? My head is in the sand?... why, because I assumed that what you wrote is what you actually meant? OK, my bad. You assumed an awful lot from by five-word post. The rest of your post is a bunch of baseless assumptions intended to drag me into another silly debate- so, I'm gonna ignore them. Summer's going well, though. Thanks for asking.

Woofer, I'm sorry that you're not impressed. I was just trying to point out the fact that the claim was ridiculous. Sorry that facts can occasionally get in the way of a good story.

I love how libs use buzz words like "crisis" when denouncing free market enterprise. Then they claim that capitalism doesn't work, that's why they came up with the bailout. In reality, the bailout interrupted the free market from correcting itself. Let the strong survive and the weak fail. What we are ending up with is a nation of weak. George Bush was a liberal?

I think the mandate to make people take responibilty for their own health insurance is GREAT. This is a conservative Republican idea that was brought foward by the Heritage Foundation ( a very right wing consevative group)years ago, YES make people take responsibilty, a very conservative virtue. Mitt Romneys health plan put in place in Massachusettes 2006 is the same exact thing word for word. The truth is the Republicans biggest fear is this new health care law might actually work.. Lets see how it goes and it can always be repealled down the road if it turns out to be a total failure. Maybe now our congress can work on getting our economy back on track. I agree. The response to this legislation is a product of the Republican agenda to sabotage the current administration. This has been their stated goal since the day Obama was elected. Ensure the failure of any efforts made by the current administration and then blame them for it during the next election campaign. It's comical- this plan was considered visionary by many when the current Republican nominee created it. Now, it's the end of the world as we know it.

Can you show me where you got the $40K amount from? I read on Kiplingers site and others that it is: 11. A new tax on individuals who don't obtain adequate health coverage by 2014 -- this is often referred to as the individual mandate. The tax is to be phased in over three years, starting at the greater of $95, or 1% of income, in 2014, and rising to the greater of $695, or 2.5% of gross income, in 2016. I might have misinterpreted the $40k statement. But, the line in you post is referring to the penalty on individuals, not businesses.

This society is doomed. Wait until you see what Obamacare will cost this country and how much taxes will increase to pay for it. Employers are already starting to think about dropping their private health plans and paying the fine for not having one because it will be cheaper not to. That's ridiculous. Have you seen what the fines actually are- something like $40k.

But I quit smoking, moderate my junk food intake, and walk up that hill so that I don't have to see the doctor that often so why should I be paying for those who wants to those vices? Seriously, you mean they get to enjoy all those vices and have someone else pay the financial consequences of it? This is the big misperception. The truth is that you have always been paying for the care given to people who don't take care of themselves. The Affordable Healthcare Act does not change that. My honest feeling is that in the coming years, insurance companies and employers will start charging higher premiums for people who knowingly put themselves at higher risk- smokers, obese, etc.

Romney is already spouting that if elected he will repeal the mandate on day one of office. Promises . . . Promises . . . What do you all think? I think that Romney will promise to do whatever it takes to get elected- even if it means promising to repeal a plan that he came up with in the first place.

have you considered a climber?

Each of these things that you're listing refer to individual entities, not international organizations. If the leadership of any individual institution is involved in a coverup, that's awful. When the leadership of an international organization that represents thousands of individual institutions is involved in or aware of a coverup, that's far worse. I can't tell where you're coming from on this one. You seem to be clearly aware that the original statement about child abuse and coverups in the church is true, but want to partially excuse it by pointing out that the church is not the only place where abuse occurs.

OK, scratch the word 'policy' and insert the word 'habit'.

What i posted didn't specifically reference either criminal or civil cases. The point was that the archbishop acknowledged rampant child abuse and admitted that there had been a concerted coverup and failure to report abuse. Yes, maybe the percentage of priests committing these crimes is comparable to the general public. The point of the matter is not to say that priests are more likely to commit these crimes than non-priests. The point is that the Catholic Church has had a policy of protecting known abusers.

Allegations of and convictions for sexual abuse by clergy have been subjects of public debate in many countries (see Roman Catholic sex abuse cases by country). After the United States, the country with the next highest number of reported cases is Ireland. A significant number of cases have also been reported in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and countries in Europe, Latin America, Africa and Asia.[9] In 2001, lawsuits were filed in the United States and Ireland, alleging that some priests had sexually abused minors and that their superiors had conspired to conceal and otherwise abet their criminal misconduct.[10] In 2004, the John Jay report tabulated a total of 4,392 priests and deacons in the U.S. against whom allegations of sexual abuse had been made. Although the scandals in the U.S. and Ireland unfolded over approximately the same time period, there are some significant differences between them. In the United States, most of the abusers were parish priests under diocesan control.[citation needed] While there were also a significant number of abuse cases involving parish priests in Ireland, another major scandal involved criminal abuse committed by members of religious orders working in Catholic-run institutions such as orphanages and reform schools.[citation needed] In the United States, the abuse was primarily sexual in nature and involved mostly boys between the ages of 11 and 17; in Ireland, the allegations involved both physical and sexual abuse, and children of both sexes were involved, although a large majority were male.[citation needed] In a statement read out by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi in September 2009, the Holy See stated "We know now that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases", adding that this figure was comparable with that of other groups and denominations.[11] A Perspective on Clergy Sexual Abuse by Dr. Thomas Plante of Stanford University and Santa Clara University states that "approximately 4% of priests during the past half century (and mostly in the 1960s and 1970s) have had a sexual experience with a minor" which "is consistent with male clergy from other religious traditions and is significantly lower than the general adult male population which may double these numbers".[4][12] Additionally, according to Newsweek magazine, the figure in the Catholic Church is similar to that in the rest of the adult population.[13] This is from Wikipedia:

Wow. i wasn't aware a priest was criminally found guilty, didn't do time and was left in the Preisthood and moved to a defferent area. What preist was that so I can read up on it. Good point. What I should have said was that if a school district was found to have withheld evidence of abuse or was found to have covered up abuse.....

Let's take it further. Are we supporting and condoning child abuse in our schools since our tax money supports teachers that committ child abuse? Only if the teachers are found guilty and then face no discipline other than being transferred to another school.