Old Geezer

"Has anyone here been able to overcome such a problem? I would love to find a solution to it." yes, the people here have been able to handle that problem quite nicely for me JK you may want to research "dysgraphia" and see if anything effective has been developed. Or if you know an occupational therapist, they may be able to suggest some hand exercises. but from what I agather the research on this is not very strong. But most likely the cause is just "your mind thinks much faster than your ability to write" however if you feel that there is a cause beyond this and you feel it is interfering with your coursework, you are eligibile for testing accomodations under Fedaral disabilities laws. (Such as taking the exam on a computer, or orally replying to questions) information about ADA, Section 504 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and other such laws is available from the appropriate school official. Now you may or may not have scruples about making use of these legal entitlements. And that is fine. But you are eligible. At the very least you may want to consider whether your professor might be open to approaching him about alternative ways of proving your cold knowledge of the material. Finally, you may solve the problem as I have done by becoming rich and hiring an assistant to do all that handwriting stuff.

Yikes, I hope not, If I am right about something, I'd rather it be this week's powerball numbers. Where's the razor tongue???

I Question to what extent this is true in today's situation (about many people supporting such a president turning down pork) Farmers might not protest when indivudal welfare is not passed , but they certainly will when their own subsidies are not passed. Nuke operators might not protest when expanses of federal land are sold, but they certainly will when their own insurance subsidy is not passed. The lobbying industry is so big precisely because businesses have grown dependent on pork. On a more individual level, people may be living pay-check to paycheck BECAUSE of government intervention, but this has created a situation where many vote strictly to ensure their family's more immediete needs. Which leads to a situation where people are quick to dismiss "pork" when it doesn't effect them, but not so quick when it does.

AUTO, Do you know of any good Architectural books that would be good background reading for someone who is going to re-read the Fountainhead?

ERANDOR; You may want to check out "The Mother Tongue" which while not as structured as the books Betsy mentioned is certainly worth reading. (But not for a serious study, although its references are pretty well established) Its the type of book you might keep in the bathroom or bring to the beach. (Its got a whole chapter on the origins of curses and phrases etc but if I recall correctly it also goes into the roots of the language)

This strikes me as an inherently subjective experience, and thus one which varies from relationship to relationship. The reasons why people value their property vary from person to person. Thus their willingness to actually exercise their "property rights" varies according to the property in question, and its value to that person. If some peice of property (such as a diary) is valued because of the appeal of its privacy, then it "should" be under the complete control of the owner. But if a rural couple values a car because of its ability to help them both get to work, then at the very least it seems counter-productive for one person to assume the rights and responsibilities that come with ownership. This is not to say that people don't retain their property rights when they enter into marriage. But if they are marrying the right person, they presumably have a good understanding of what property is "off limits" and property rights will not even need to be addressed. Anyone who will infring upon your right not to have your doorknob collection messed with if you so choose, gets a red flag in my book. On the flip side, anyone who is not willing to value the relationship more than the pieces of property each brings to the relationship also gets a red flag.

Try not to spend too much time on discussion boards

It has been my experience that most of the time when people feel that they are in "the heat of the moment when an action is required" is THE MOST IMPORTANT TIME not to react immedietly. When I feel rushed to make a decision or react to something that is usually a red flag for me to slow down and re-think everything. Take some instances; a girlfriend offers an ultimatum "either you marry me within the month or I'm out" a potential employer says "well we need to know right now if you will take this job" certainly one has feelings in these situations and may not feel one has time to to reality check those feelings. But this is precisely the time to make such time a priority. If people are not able to be somewhat accomodating under such circumstances then I find myself hesitant to even interact with them, as they clearly do not recognize or value the importance to me of taking time to think about things..

The first step for me is to label the emotion one is trying to trace. If one is unsure about this, a first step can be becoming conscious of one's physical response. The various emotions tend to signify various needs your mind is trying to address. Anger is usually brought about by a sense of injustice as well as a compulsion to do something about it (and generally not knowing what to do) Depression might be brought about by a feeling of loss of control over something which we value. Anxiety might be brought about by uncertainty about the future etc etc. Once labeling the emotion, it becomes much easier to ask yourself which unmet need your body is trying to address.

RC, I liked the Idea a lot... How about a character who "wins" his arguments with the direct threat of force???(Uh sure, Saddam, I like your plays... )

This (Labeling the war on terrorism as a war against fundamentalist Islam, if thats what you are doing) strikes me as a short term conceptualization of the problem. There may currently be more Terrorist acts coming from "Islamic" sources. But it seems to me as if a long term approach to the War on Terror recognizes that technology and globalization make it much more possible for a small minority of people to do a great deal of harm. I'm not arguing against G or T, just pointing out that Law Enforcement etc.. Is Currently adjusting to the new reality. Whether its a Anti-Globalist Luddite crashing a plane into a building or a Muslim makes no difference to me. Those who support them must be caught and dealt with. The problem is the assholes who support Terrorism, not the guise they support it under.

why do you define physical dependency as that which you could die from withdrawel? Headaches, tremors etc are not chosen behaviors and can not be changed by "thinking differently"

DPW Do you have a link for this? I'm interested.

I guess that I think that what I am arguing is that incremental decriminalization will come first you won't see people out advocating Complete legalization for quite some time thats what I am saying, at present, there is no sure way to tell on the scene of a car accident if somebody is under the influence of marijuana (perhaps if they are bombed, but not always). The signs just aren't always that overt, and absent private roads, or a reliable testing device, that means that prosecution would be very difficult.

Yikes! Considering the health effects of cocaine (In comparison to Marijuana which has never killed a soul) I'm not sure I would risk saying that. I would have to say their are several confounding variables. One of them is the route of administration. If cocaine is smoked in the form of crack, its very dangerous (because of how quickly it gets from the lungs to the brain) yet some cultures (largely agrarian) chew on cocaine leaves during the workday to increase their output. Similarly, THC brownies are less disastorous both in their perceptual and lung consequences. Another is the interaction between somebodies personality/genetic makeup and the particular drug. Giving cocaine to somebody who is manic is probably not the best Idea, and giving marijuana to somebody who is not in control of their anxiety isn't a good idea either. Roads are still public, and reliable usable tests have not been developed for determining if someone smoked Marijuana a day ago vs. a month ago. (which would mean that It couldnt easily be determined if they were "under the influence" if they killed a family of 6) Since Marijuana slows reaction times significantly, it would not be moral to sell Pot to someone whom you could not trust not to endanger others with. If Marijuana was first Decriminalized (making it only an offense fineable by a small fine, and allowing research) it is likely that a freer market would allow for companies to develop a test that takes more reliable and accurate samples. At the very least it would save a shitload of money.