how in the world an education institution supposed to recover 100% costs? Esp Public Universities? It doesn't make sense? How can you quantify value on teaching and research? You can certainly charge tuition and cover it that way. But what about a class like Intro Psyc? With 1000 students and one professor and a bunch of bubble sheets that a computer scores to evaluate and grade students? How does that compare to a hands on graduate level class using instruments (NMR/SEM) that might have 10 students in it? Equipment that Costs hundreds of thousands to acquire and then tens of thousands a year to maintain can't be compared to a single professor that may or may not be a temporary person getting paid $800/credit hour when the students pay $400/credit hour for the Intro Psyc AND the same for the Advanced SEM Class?
I dunno... what happened to many whole "expensive" research areas? They've been eliminated from the US and are now exclusively say in Europe or elsewhere. Where is that technology being applied? Certainly not here in conservative corporate greed land.
Sure lets vote to raise our own salaries 7 out of 8 years in a row, but the minimum wage? Nah... lets keep that super low, we don't want those millions of women and low income people to come up above the poverty line, that wouldn't be fair to the buisnesses exploiting them, not fair at all.
Now i hear Hunter S Thompson didn't shoot himself, its a right wing conspiracy to shut him up. He was too dangerous, his new book exposed too much, he was too close to breaking open the whole underground corporate mind control game the GOP is playing. Now don't go off and label me some liberal wacko, but i do favor individual rights over corporations, i favor protecting the environment over profit margin (but mostly because its a long term conservative approach), i favor choice but find abortion wrong, guns are great... if you hunt and enjoy it as a hobby, war is almost always the cowards way out of a problem, it is generally started by people who have nothing to loose personally by tossing their armies at another force, defending one's territory is different than "spreading democracy" with bombs and guns, and the root cause of nearly all war and violence is religious idealism, hitler, bush, Osama... You name em... they ain't no different, all egomaniacs, all killing/ed lots of misguided people who blindly (or not so) follow orders in the "name of the cause"
Was Gonzo on the trail of something more compelling and irrefutable than F 9/11? We'll never know i guess. Maybe he did cash in his chips himself, maybe not, maybe he's been unsuccessful at doing it with less dramatic ways (drugs, alcohol, motorcycles) and finally went the way the warden did in Shawshank...
Whadda ya say to someone who doesn't see the wrong in USA policy? How can anyone believe a slim majority is a "mandate"???? Regan had a "mandate" 'cause he blew the election away in a landslide... little Dumbass Dubya, the curious George president, certainly thinks he has one... flabbergasting...
Now another subject that gets people all worked up... photography of the human figure, generally naked. Now sure, i've been known to click on a few free 'nrop' sites (nrop, cause i donna wanna put the proper spelling in so no webcrawling buggers pick it out - and this is a second change now its just spelled backwards). But then where do you draw the line between nrop and art? For me i've not had a problem deliminating, from the artistic POV, there is nothing more compelling than a female figure as a subject, in photography, in sculpture, or in painting... Black and White photographs tend to be much less prone to the stereotypical "nrop" label, but there are boundaries. Now where would Palybyo (misspelled on purpose) fall? its certainly closer to the border, but in the intent and color and subject with emphasis on certain anatomical parts or expressions pushes it over, in my mind at least. I think everyone has to draw the line somewhere.
Take Picasso's sketch books. I saw the exhibit in LA at the museum there, what about 16-18 years ago maybe now. And i would certainly label many of his sketches in his notebook pages as 'nrop'... why? well the perspective and attention to the focus and the fact that they appeared to be grouped as specifically/explicitly just the female genetalia, now sure - its a sketch, pencil or pen, done by a master Picasso... but does it blur the line effectively?
anyway - there's art and there's pron and there's a different view on where the distinction falls... find the line for yourself, if for nothing more than you know where it is or so you know when you cross it...
sheesh... whadda day
and anyway who the hell is H. C. Hoffman:
