DISQUS

About the time he mentioned "fish drowning," I figured out that he's joking.

I called it: Chinese.

Do you think hummingbirds get arthritis?

"...it’s quite simple and intuitive to add new search engines to the list..."

This is another one of the things that Chrome does for you automatically. Any site you visit with a properly coded search field is automatically added by Chrome as a quicksearch. That's why you'd need to modify the keyword in your Chrome--the ones it already shows in the list are from sites you've visited.

The default way of searching using this feature is to type the domain name of the site into your browser, space, then your search terms. As soon as you start typing in more words after the space, the browser changes to let you know you're searching.

Nice, nice, nice.

I can also build my "custom" quicksearches in Chrome like I can in Firefox. You just need to modify the URL for the quicksearch. Twenty times a day, I need to find a client's NetCommunity site. So, what I need is a Google search that already has the term "netcommunity" entered when I use the keyword "n."

I create a new quicksearch, copy in the URL from my Google quicksearch, and add,
"netcommunity%20." (The %20 enters a space after netcommunity.)

Like so:
http://www.google.com/search?q=netcommunity%20%...

Guff about Chrome...

Minor stuff. Stuff I can step around. Click a folder in your bookmarks bar, and the focus doesn't follow you if you hover over another folder. You have to click off to lose that focus. And, yeah, I think there should be an option on the right-click context menu that lets you add keyword searches manually, like in Firefox.

I did not know, myself. I beseeched the almighty Google, sending forth my praise and thankfulness for my query-base existance. In return, I was rewarded with much grain and hyperlinks.

I did not know, myself. I beseeched the almighty Google, sending forth my praise and thankfulness for my query-base existance. In return, I was rewarded with much grain and hyperlinks.

"...Bejtlich’s and Ranum’s opinions..."

"...Bejtlich’s and Ranum’s opinions..."

So, after saying Obama is a decent person, McCain apparently got booed (maybe a different instance than the one you're posting about--not sure).

Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/apon</e...>

When McCain himself has to correct the ignorance of his supporters, even if he does it poorly, I think this shows something about his supporters. I also think it has to occur to McCain just how frightening this ignorance is.

So, after saying Obama is a decent person, McCain apparently got booed (maybe a different instance than the one you're posting about--not sure).

Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081010/apon</e...>

When McCain himself has to correct the ignorance of his supporters, even if he does it poorly, I think this shows something about his supporters. I also think it has to occur to McCain just how frightening this ignorance is.

Palin gave a (well rehearsed) speech. There just happened to be a debate going on while she did it.

Palin gave a (well rehearsed) speech. There just happened to be a debate going on while she did it.

Was that McCain stepping near her? What's that about? Reason would say he should be distancing himself from her. I think he was about to mercy-punch her into unconsciousness if she didn't stop.

Was that McCain stepping near her? What's that about? Reason would say he should be distancing himself from her. I think he was about to mercy-punch her into unconsciousness if she didn't stop.

In summary, "it's the molecules, stupid."

In summary, "it's the molecules, stupid."

"I don’t know–I think McCain looked more aggressive and more confident..."

I read the opposite--defensive and insecure. No eye contact, uncomfortable, constant grin. Obama pummeled him with fact--the sworn enemy of Christian conservatives.

Obama's arguments were more sophisticated in construction. He repeatedly refuted McCain's central points. McCain retreated to virtual name calling (e.g., "naive," or, about the same, "Sen. Obama doesn't understand"), and he outright misconstrued Obama's actions on bills, etc. It's easier for viewers to hear McCain call Obama "bad" than it is for them to understand Obama refuting McCain's basis for doing so.

Obama won the debate from a logical standpoint, on all of the topics. When it came to Iran, he virtually repeated what you yourself wrote not long ago--that he would try discussion first and the army last, and that was the only way to have the trust of other nations in our actions.

It's unfortunate, but name-calling is a very effective tactic. I think McCain started so many of his points with it because it gave him time to construct a retort in his head. I also think that many of his supporters believed what he was saying--that Obama just "doesn't get it."

I think McCain was visibly shaken when he left that stage last night. And I don't think he's going to be any more prepared for future debates. He's got an ace up his sleeve, though, and it's the raw emotion of calling Obama names and distorting Obama's stance--if anything, I think he's going to play that card even more.

On another note, I think Palin would stand as little chance of winning her debate if Biden let a 5th grader stand in for him. Maybe less of a chance.

"I don’t know–I think McCain looked more aggressive and more confident..."

I read the opposite--defensive and insecure. No eye contact, uncomfortable, constant grin. Obama pummeled him with fact--the sworn enemy of Christian conservatives.

Obama's arguments were more sophisticated in construction. He repeatedly refuted McCain's central points. McCain retreated to virtual name calling (e.g., "naive," or, about the same, "Sen. Obama doesn't understand"), and he outright misconstrued Obama's actions on bills, etc. It's easier for viewers to hear McCain call Obama "bad" than it is for them to understand Obama refuting McCain's basis for doing so.

Obama won the debate from a logical standpoint, on all of the topics. When it came to Iran, he virtually repeated what you yourself wrote not long ago--that he would try discussion first and the army last, and that was the only way to have the trust of other nations in our actions.

It's unfortunate, but name-calling is a very effective tactic. I think McCain started so many of his points with it because it gave him time to construct a retort in his head. I also think that many of his supporters believed what he was saying--that Obama just "doesn't get it."

I think McCain was visibly shaken when he left that stage last night. And I don't think he's going to be any more prepared for future debates. He's got an ace up his sleeve, though, and it's the raw emotion of calling Obama names and distorting Obama's stance--if anything, I think he's going to play that card even more.

On another note, I think Palin would stand as little chance of winning her debate if Biden let a 5th grader stand in for him. Maybe less of a chance.

@Derek

Please look at this page illustrating "how to write strong arguments." What you did is called contradiction because you state an opposing case and provide no supporting evidence. It may be in the middle of the pyramid, but that's only because so many types of arguments are poor.

@Derek

Please look at this page illustrating "how to write strong arguments." What you did is called contradiction because you state an opposing case and provide no supporting evidence. It may be in the middle of the pyramid, but that's only because so many types of arguments are poor.

"...from a non-querty Blackberry..."

There's a reason qwerty is spelled with a 'w.'

"...from a non-querty Blackberry..."

There's a reason qwerty is spelled with a 'w.'

"You claim that you passed the exam BY breaking rules."

I believe breaking the rules got me a higher-than-passing score.

"I’d say that the goal should be to know ALL the rules that apply to any writing that you will use."

This, from the math professor, of course. ;)

I'm all for writing better, though, and I think it's probably the single most important skill a person can develop. Writing for others, and one's self, is an amazing way to develop or communicate knowledge on any subject. People need to construct knowledge for themselves. Writing, having to cultivate and express an idea, is the ultimate raw material for constructing knowledge.

"You claim that you passed the exam BY breaking rules."

I believe breaking the rules got me a higher-than-passing score.

"I’d say that the goal should be to know ALL the rules that apply to any writing that you will use."

This, from the math professor, of course. ;)

I'm all for writing better, though, and I think it's probably the single most important skill a person can develop. Writing for others, and one's self, is an amazing way to develop or communicate knowledge on any subject. People need to construct knowledge for themselves. Writing, having to cultivate and express an idea, is the ultimate raw material for constructing knowledge.

Ugh. Too many thoughts on this.

Carl: It's a question of precision or threshold. What rules are acceptable to not know? Why say that some are important and others aren't?

Y'all. I love this word--it's useful. Let people from elsewhere in the country knock it all they want. The truth is that some form of it exists in every region. However, this word is my peeve. Southerner's love it, but can't spell it worth a damn. I'm tired of seeing "ya'll" written on signs throughout the South. If you're going to be proud of it, at least learn where to put the damned apostrophe.