Carlene

I tell them the truth, and by that I mean the WHOLE truth - that I had Lap Band surgery. Most people are fascinated. No one has been negative or judgmental so far, and it's been 2 years this month.

I especially love disaster stories - end of the world stuff. Anyone else read Alas Babylon? I liked the first of the Cavebear series, but not the last ones so much. And Watership Down....although none of those were sci fi, I don't think.

Make that three of us. I was the only girl in the Sci Fi Club in high school. My all time favorite was the Dune trilogy. Second most favorite - Farnham's Freehold. What's your favorite sci fi book?

We choose to stay home and bitch about foreign policy, the election, sex in the oval office, taxes, Rush Limbaugh's duplicity, etc. You volunteered to defend our right to do that - against people with guns, if necessary. Will you just be quiet and let us appreciate you? Please?

Gail... I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say that we do truly appreciate your brother's willingness to serve his country. Many of us have brothers who did the same, myself included. Mine did 3 tours of Vietnam. Thank God he survived, because today it's a vaction hot spot with KFC and souvenir stands on every corner. All that blood shed for nothing. What a waste. Anyway, our brothers are to be commended for their service. My DH also served, but did not see any combat, as luck would have it. My dad enlisted in the Navy after the start of WWII and my father-in-law was a Marine stationed at Pearl Harbor. We are a very patriotic bunch. There's a big old flagpole in my front yard and we fly Old Glory every day. But we don't agree with Bush or the war in Iraq. We are appalled at what we believe is the immorality of this war. We support bringing our troops home NOW. Because you can be a patriot and a veteran and still not agree with George Bush. You can be anti-war or anti-Bush or anti-anything....it doesn't matter. They still deserve every bit of homage and respect that any other Vet is entitled to. And that includes Geezer Sue. Who, by the way, is NOT always on the same side as Carlene. But that's okay. She's still a Vet and we still owe her.

Sue....you are at least half right. Vets who were already enrolled in the VA program prior to the implementation of the income test (approximately 4 years ago) are still eligible for VA services, even if they have no service connected injuries. My DH receives meds etc thru the VA, although he would not qualify if he applied today. Also, Vets who were in Vietnam, even for one day, receive more services. Almost anything is considered "service connected" if you were in Vietnam. My DH was not. He spent his entire enlistment in AZ, except for basic and jet training. Edited to add... * Enrollment Restriction: Effective January 17, 2003, VA suspended NEW enrollment of veterans assigned to Priority Group 8 (VA's lowest priority group consisting of higher income veterans). If you are a veteran enrolling for the first time on or after January 17, 2003, your income exceeds the current year income threshold, and you have no other special eligibilities such as a compensable service connected condition or recent combat service, you are not eligible for enrollment at this time. Veterans enrolled in Priority Group 8 on or before January 16, 2003, will remain enrolled and continue to be eligible for the full-range of VA health care benefits. New enrollees assigned to subpriority groups e and g, are not eligible for enrollment at this time.

If this is a contest, I win. I have a husband with a cold. Nothing is worse than being stuck in the house with a sick husband. God, they are such babies!

We do, too. If you're tired, go to bed. Stop wallering all over my brand new sofa! The other usage would go something like this... You best be careful or you're gonna waller that hole out and the screw won't fit. If you waller....you might be a redneck.

Gail... The Jihadists in Iraq are not the same breed of terrorists that flew the planes into the WTC. Foreign fighters make up a relatively small slice of the forces targeting the US military in Iraq. Most insurgents are native Iraqi Sunni Islamists or former members of the old Baath party regime. But for the sake of argument, let's say we drop an atom bomb on Iraq and kill everyone. Would that stop the terrorists? Of course not. There are pockets of Jihadists all over the world, and most of those cells are way more dangerous to Americans than Iraq's homegrown variety, who are unlikely to go anywhere else. There is no way to keep terrorists out of this or any other country, except wholesale discrimination against all Muslims/Middle Easterners. Would you advocate that? Doesn't matter because it ain't gonna happen. My point is, Iraq is no more the enemy than half a dozen other countries, and we aren't stomping thru their streets, killing the citizenry. Secondly, it is an over-simplification to imagine the Jihadists intend to conquer America or, in this generation, any other Western power. Their goal is to establish (they would say reestablish) a sphere of dominance — financed by oil, armed with nuclear weapons, governed under the laws of Islam — that includes as much of Ottoman Europe as possible, most of Africa and a good part of Asia. America has to be fought because it stands against this goal — a goal that unites Shiites and Sunnis, Wahhabis and Baathists, Nasserites and fundamentalists. Again, if the US is truly waging war against Jihadists and terrorists, then why aren't we going where the bad guys are? Why aren't we stomping the crap out of Pakistan? And what about the Saudis, our "enlightened" allies? Check out this article from the May 21st Washington Post... Saudi Arabia's public schools have long been cited for demonizing the West as well as Christians, Jews and other "unbelievers." But after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 -- in which 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis -- that was all supposed to change. The problem is: It didn't. A review of a sample of official Saudi textbooks for Islamic studies used during the current academic year reveals that, despite the Saudi government's statements to the contrary, an ideology of hatred toward Christians and Jews and Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine remains in this area of the public school system. The texts teach a dualistic vision, dividing the world into true believers of Islam (the "monotheists") and unbelievers (the "polytheists" and "infidels"). This indoctrination begins in a first-grade text and is reinforced and expanded each year, culminating in a 12th grade text instructing students that their religious obligation includes waging jihad against the infidel to "spread the faith".

We wish that was all they wanted, Green. In a taped message broadcast by al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahri, second in command to Osama bin Laden, said al-Qa'ida now saw "all the world as a battlefield open in front of us."" The Egyptian-born physician said the Hezbollah and Palestinian fighting against Israel would not be ended with "cease-fires or agreements." "The war with Israel does not depend on ceasefires ... . It is a Jihad for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahri said. "We will attack everywhere."

Gail....isn't the answer to your question obvious? Because "they", if you mean Muslim extremists, really, truly believe in their heart of hearts that non-Muslims (or even Muslims who don't agree with them) are filthy, unworthy, infidel dogs. "They" would not walk across the street to spit on us if we were on fire - literally. Osama bin Laden declared a holy war on the US in 1996, and in 1998 he called for all Muslims to unite against Christians and Jews worldwide. His stated goal is to annihilate us all....wipe us off the face of the Earth. Bin Laden is the leader and primary source of funding for al-Qeada. He and his cohorts were behind 9/11, the attack on the USS Cole, and many other terroristic acts. What he is NOT is this.....bin Laden is NOT in Iraq. So....tell me again why are WE there?

Exactly! That's why they call them "terrorists".

Bush pays attention to the polls, too. That's why Donald Rumsfeld no longer has a job.

Gail... What evidence do you have, other than political rhetoric, that Iraqis were ever "begging us to save them"? This whole liberate-the-poor-Iraqis idea came about because the WMD that prompted the invasion of Iraq simply were not there. So Bush had to come up with another reason for barging in and taking over someone else's territory. Someone that wasn't bothering us in the least. So now, instead of saving the world from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, we are over there to liberate its people. Nice save, George. Yes, many feared Sadam and he was a cruel dictator and a despot, but he was THEIR despot. The Iraqis, by and large, are not happy that we are there. They did not greet our troops with flowers and chocolate. We are infidels to ALL Muslims, not just the al-Qaeda. These people do NOT consider us their brothers. In their minds, we are filthy dogs. Try and remember that. And the popularity of the Bush administration regarding the war is NOT polarized at 50/50. Yesterday's AP poll put Bush's approval rating at only 31%. As for stopping Jihadists, how will our continued presence in Iraq do that? There are terrorists all over the world - far more in Pakistan, in fact, than there are in Iraq. Why aren't we stomping Pakistan into the ground, if freeing the world of Jihadists is our goal?

I can sip it very slowly, if I let it sit out and de-fizz a bit first. I can't chug-a-lug it, though, or it feels like I have a pouch full of Pop Rocks.

We aren't the only ones... From today's MSNBC news: A new Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted after the election indicates that Americans’ approval of Bush’s handling of Iraq has dropped to just 31 percent — the lowest level ever.

WALLERING???? I thought my mother was the only person in the world who used that word!!!! Are you my long lost sister, Wheets?

The first $2 million is exempt from estate tax, beginning in 2006, and will increase steadily to $3.5 million in 2009. It will supposedly be repealed altogether in 2010.

Notice the lack of ties to Iraq in the following list: Captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. A Kuwaiti who is the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. He is also believed to have personally executed Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in January 2002. Captured in Pakistan in March 2003. Abu Zubaida. A Palestinian born in Saudi Arabia, thought to have served as Osama bin Laden's field commander following the death of Mohammed Atef. Captured in Pakistan in March 2002. Ramzi Binalshibh. A Yemeni national and an alleged coordinator of the September 11 attacks, accused of involvement in attacks on the USS Cole in October 2000 and on a Tunisian synagogue in April 2002. Captured in Pakistan in September 2002. Omar al-Faruq. A Kuwaiti and an alleged link between al Qaeda and other militant Islamic groups in Southeast Asia. He was arrested in Indonesia in June 2002. Mohsen F. A Kuwaiti whose full identity is unknown, plotted unsuccesfully to blow up a hotel in the Yemeni capital, Sanaa. Arrested in Kuwait in November 2002. Hambali, aka Riduan Issamuddin. An Indonesian, reportedly a top strategist for Qaeda-linked Jemaah Islamiya in Southeast Asia. Captured in Thailand in August 2003. Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. A Saudi thought to be al Qaeda's chief of operations in the Persian Gulf. Captured in the United Arab Emirates in November 2002. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani. A Tanzanian suspected in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Captured in Pakistan in July 2004. Abu Issa al-Hindi. A British national born in India, allegedly a central planner of detailed reconnaissance of U.S. financial institutions. Captured in Britain in August 2004. Zacarias Moussaoui. A French citizen of Moroccan origin, thought by U.S. officials to be the "20th 9/11 hijacker." Reportedly prevented from participating in the September 11 attacks because he was in custody in Minnesota on an immigration violation. Mounir al-Motassadek. A Moroccan arrested in Hamburg in November 2001, the only person to have been convicted of a crime connected to the 9/11 attacks. In 2004, Germany's Supreme Court threw out the verdict. Currently being retried. Richard Reid. British-born, sentenced to life in prison in January 2003 for trying to blow up an airliner with explosives hidden in his shoes. Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. A Saudi believed to have been head of Qaeda operations in the Persian Gulf and linked to the August 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. Sentenced to death by a Yemeni court in September 2004 for the bomb attack on the USS Cole, which killed 17 U.S. sailors in October 2000. Currently in U.S. custody. Believed dead Amjad Farooqi. A Pakistani, allegedly helped organize two failed assassination attempts on Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and participated in the abduction and murder of Daniel Pearl. Reportedly killed by Pakistani security forces in September 2004. Mohammed Atef. An Egyptian believed to have been al Qaeda's senior field commander. According to the Pentagon, he was killed in Afghanistan in November 2001. Ali Qaed Senyan al-Harthi. A Yemeni suspected of involvement in the bombing of the USS Cole. Believed to have been killed in a U.S. counterterrorist operation in Yemen in November 2002. Abu Hazim al-Shair. A Yemeni and former bin Laden bodyguard thought to have been al Qaeda's chief of operations for the Gulf States and a key planner of the May 2003 bombings of Western residential compounds in Saudi Arabia. Reportedly killed in Riyadh by Saudi security forces in March 2004. At large Osama bin Laden. Sheikh Said. A Saudi, bin Laden's brother-in-law, and al Qaeda's financial controller. Saif al-Adel. An Egyptian who is bin Laden's security chief. Abu Mohammed al-Masri. An Egyptian who ran Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. Sulaiman Abu Ghaith. A Kuwaiti and Qaeda spokesman. Thirwat Salah Shirhata. An Egyptian and al-Zawahri's deputy in Egyptian Islamic Jihad, an Egyptian network founded in the late 1970s that effectively merged with al Qaeda in 2001. Abu Faraj al Libbi. A Libyan said to have become third in command of al Qaeda when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in 2003. Allegedly the mastermind of two failed attempts to assassinate Pakistani President Musharraf.

You're welcome. I just thought it should be pointed out that not everything that LOOKS like al-Qaeda really IS al-Qaeda. And it is virtually impossible to wage war against all the various terrorist groups, aligned with al-Qaeda or not. We tried...we failed....time to bring the troops home and try something else. Even Bush knows this; why else would he fire Rumsfeld? There is no "war on terrorism". It does not exist. It's just a rally cry for political cohesion. There was no "war on poverty", "war on drugs", etc. I think the next one should be a "war on stupidity".

SHAME on your husband!!!!!! Reading is never a waste of time.

Al-Qaeda has its origins in the uprising against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Thousands of volunteers from around the Middle East came to Afghanistan to defend fellow Muslims. In the mid-1980s, Osama bin Laden became the prime financier for an organization that recruited Muslims from mosques around the world. These recruits, which numbered in the thousands, were crucial in defeating Soviet forces. After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, bin Laden returned to his native Saudi Arabia. He founded an organization to help veterans of the Afghan war, many of whom went on to fight elsewhere (including Bosnia) and comprise the basis of al-Qaeda. Bin Laden also studied with radical Islamic thinkers and may have already been organizing al-Qaeda when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. Bin Laden was outraged when the government allowed U.S. troops to be stationed in Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam. In 1991 he was expelled from Saudi Arabia for anti-government activities. After his expulsion from Saudi Arabia, bin Laden established headquarters for al-Qaeda in Sudan. The first actions of al-Qaeda against American interests were attacks on U.S. servicemen in Somalia. A string of terrorist actions suspected to have been orchestrated by al-Qaeda followed, and in August 1996 bin Laden issued a "Declaration of War" against the U.S. Al-Qaeda also worked to forge alliances with other radical groups. In February 1998, bin Laden announced an alliance of terrorist organizations—the "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders". In 1994 Sudan—under pressure from Saudi Arabia and the U.S.—expelled bin Laden, who moved his base of operations to Afghanistan. Bin Laden was the "guest" of the Taliban until the U.S. drove them from power in Nov. 2001. Al-Qaeda set up terrorist training camps in the war-torn nation, as it had in Sudan. Al-Qaeda's leadership oversees a loosely organized network of cells. It can recruit members from thousands of "Arab Afghan" veterans and radicals around the world. Its infrastructure is small, mobile, and decentralized—each cell operates independently with its members not knowing the identity of other cells. Local operatives rarely know anyone higher up in the organization's hierarchy. Al-Qaeda differs significantly from more traditional terrorist organizations. It does not depend on the sponsorship of a political state, and, unlike the PLO or the IRA, it is not defined by a particular conflict. Instead, al-Qaeda operates as a franchise. It provides financial and logistical support, as well as name recognition, to terrorist groups operating in such diverse places as the Philippines, Algeria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kashmir. Furthermore, local groups may act in the name of al-Qaeda in order to bolster their own reputation—even if they are not receiving support from the organization. The principal stated aims of al-Qaeda are to drive Americans and American influence out of all Muslim nations, especially Saudi Arabia; destroy Israel; and topple pro-Western dictatorships around the Middle East. Bin Laden has also said that he wishes to unite all Muslims and establish, by force if necessary, an Islamic nation adhering to the rule of the first Caliphs. According to bin Laden's 1998 religious decree, it is the duty of Muslims around the world to wage holy war on the U.S., American citizens, and Jews. Muslims who do not heed this call are declared apostates (people who have forsaken their faith). . In response to the September 11, 2001, attacks on the WTC and Pentagon, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 to dismantle al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Al-Qaeda's infrastructure in the country was destroyed and their military commander, Muhammed Atef, was killed. Abu Zubaydah, another top operative, was captured in Pakistan. Bin Laden escaped and is presumed alive. In March 2003 the U.S. widened the war on terrorism by invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein and his Baath party. The decision to encompass Iraq in "the war on terror" has been highly controversial. Although President Bush asserted that there was a working relationship between Hussein and al-Qaeda, no solid proof of collaboration between them—specifically on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, or on any other terrorist activities—has emerged. In recent years, many of the most horrific bombings attributed to al-Qaeda—most notably Bali, Madrid, and London—are believed to have been carried out by terrorist groups linked more in spirit than in substance to al-Qaeda. Al-Zarqawi, the most active terrorist in recent years, for example, only officially joined al-Qaeda in the years after he initiated his reign of terror in Iraq. Al-Qaeda has been more than happy to take credit for the various bombings, but it is thought that it has offered philosophical motivation more than a direct support for the atrocities committed by these splinter groups. While al-Qaeda encourages its reputation as a vast global network, many experts believe that at this stage al-Qaeda itself has just a small core of adherents, but serves as the virulent inspiration to countless violent Islamic extremists.

Thanks, but my MIL sold her house 3 years ago when she came to live with us. She has savings that total about $400 K but I don't think my DH or his brother would ever consider turning that over to a nursing home. That just sounds crazy. Why would anyone do that? Anyway, my MIL has income (SS, pension and an annuity) plus long term care insurance that total about $3750 per month. Any additional expenses the "boys" plan to pay out of her assets. My BIL estimates those should not be more than $1000-$1500 per month, so she should have enough money to pay her own way for however long she might live in a nursing facility. She is almost 87 now. Medicare does not pay for long-term nursing home care. Are you sure you didn't mean to say Medicaid?

I quit smoking 11 years ago. I used the gum and it helped a lot. What really inspired me was watching someone I loved die from lung cancer. It took 18 months and was just horrible. She left a husband and 5 children. If you can't quit for yourself, quit for the people you love. Nothing will make you prouder than getting that monkey off your back.....I promise.

I can't eat rice of any description, at least not more than a tiny bit swimming in a lot of liquid.