Of course he should. Michael Vick is an awesome quarterback and dog fighting is not that serious of a crime. I think the Redskins should pick him up and oust Campbell.

I personally support a laissez-faire type of goverment industry relationship. I think that in order to stay on top, American companies need to compete successfully globally, now more than ever. If our cars (like many other things) are being outsourced or simply out-done by foreign companies so be it. Americans basically started the auto industry and now the rest of the world can have it. We need to stick to what we're good at. Mainly, thinking of new ways, new innovations, and forms of travel for this new century. I think that instead of bailing out the auto industries the FED should use the money to re-vamp public transportation systems, mainly amtrak, in order to be more appealing to a larger number of commuters. If the trains were cutting edge and faster more people would commute with them. Also, put some of that money into the education systems. As American students fall more and more behind globally in the areas of math and science our future will lose its ability to create and innovate these new industries (i.e. alternative energies), something we've been good at in the past and something that we will need to continue to be good at in the future in order to maintain our status as the global superpower. Whether you agree or not, 34billion dollars is a lot of taxpayer money and the FED could do a lot of other, more beneficial, things with it. Bottom line; I dont want my tax dollars going to private industries because it makes the $US lose its value globally, which is exactly what we've been seeing over the past couple of years.

Well, I know Thom wouldn't appreciate it but I think that Zeppelin, the Beatles, Sublime, Outkast and Bob Marley & the Wailers are all better and more influential groups than Radiohead. That's just my opinion. Take it with a huge grain of salt.

First of all, we need to take a step back and realize that "right" and "wrong" are human constructs. For example, killer whales capture baby seals on the beach, take them out to sea and toss them around until they're dead. Then they eat them. To humans this might seem "wrong" as it increases or prolongs the amount of pain and suffering for the seal. Why don't the whales do the "right" thing and eat them immediately? Well, the answer is obviously because the whale doesn't consider the act as a sin. Moral constructs are human undertakings that usually aim to minimize human pain and suffering. If more humans suffer then it is probably a sin. If human suffering is decreased by an act then it is probably "right". This has to do with the philosophical argument of the greatest happiness principal which says if a happiness among us is increased then it is a good "right" thing. And, vice versa. As far as "sin" goes, it IS a concept related to the "wrong" course of action, that is, one that increases human suffering and/or pain. However, there is a large gray area in this argument. Some "sins" may be viewed as increasing the overall happiness of people. For example, sex out of wedlock is considered as a "sin" by many religions but no real harm (discarding unwanted pregnancies) comes from it. In fact, it may increase the overall happiness of both individuals. This category, "sins of the flesh" among others encounter much debate. Therefore, it can be concluded that sin is a matter of personal opinion not facts that distinguish whether an act is "right" or "wrong", or in the words of Andre 3000 "Sin all depends on what you['re] believing in, faith is what you make it..." My argument is posted as being in agreement with the "yes" side of the debate but, I would have placed it in the "other" category if there was one.

I agree and think a boycott would be the best way to get America's message across to OPEC. DON'T DRIVE ON SUNDAY MAY 18th!!

Reggae, it has the most positive message out of any music ever. I'm not talking about that Sean Paul Synth-Pop gangsta reggae crap, I'm talking about Bob Marley, Peter Tosh, Eek-a-Mouse, et al. Just listen to the lyrics ie. "life is worth much more than gold","one good thing about music [is that] when it hits you feel no pain", "Have no fear for atomic energy, cause none of them can stop the time"...etc. Bob is undoubtedly one of the best musical artists of all time & reggae is spiritually uplifting. Everything he says is so true and the genre he helped create is my favorite.

AWESOME BAND!!! I've got two tickets for their May 11th concert, can't wait!! but best ever?? that's pushing it.

It's just that so many people consider God and science to be opposite means of explaining the same thing. I don't think it's right to do so either.

This will be my first time in the FDI and I think that the only way to regulate fair play is to pick teams at random, ie. names in a hat. My 2 handicap will ensure our team's victory regardless of my teammates. However, with moonshine and a birthday weekend taken into consideration our winning chances drastically decline. Seems a fair bet after all.

Drugs are here and they're not going to leave... ever. It is human nature to experiment in all areas of life including alternate forms of consciousness. Whether it's a cancer patient taking a pain killer or a temporary shaman delving into an ayahuasca dream, it's a fact that well over half our country's population has experimented with one form of illegal drug in their lifetime. Essentially the American government has criminalized most of their population. This is the worst thing a Democracy could ever do. That being said, we need to progressively think about our drug policy. Stages of legality isn't the answer for how to deal with drug users. I believe that the only way to cure the drug epidemic, that is, stopping problematic drug use, is to adopt a harm reduction policy similar to Switzerland's. If an individual is addicted to a particular substance it should be within reason and law for a doctor to prescribe the abuser their drug, in declining increments. These declining increments will progressively allow the user to manage their rate of use with the ultimate goal of ending dependence all together. This will help society in the long run by reducing the number of recurring addicts and social users. Drug use will fade out or become viewed as something done on a rare occasion in the safety of one's own household without disturbing others. There is a considerable amount of trust that has to be placed in your fellow man for this system to work but I believe one day in the future it won't be a problem. I also retain the belief that it should continue to be the policy of the US government to criminalize those who use drugs and operate machinery simultaneously or simply put, those who endanger the well being of others while under the influence.