Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2004

Texas BlogWire

« Bobwhites and field sparrows on the way out? | Main | New mayor of Helotes throwing wrench into establishment of town's first park »

June 23, 2007



If opponents of dpelvoeing new warheads are saying that the existing stockpile can be maintained indefinitely, that's not correct. Plutonium is radioactive, and it deteriorates. Eventually the warheads won't go boom anymore. As far as I can tell, the U.S. stopped producing new nukes after the Cold War. It stands to reason that unless we keep building new warheads, eventually we won't have any.Personally, that's fine by me. But if we want to not have nuclear weapons, we should say so. We shouldn't be going around with a bunch of duds. Otherwise some president is going to think and act like he has world destroying power under his sleeve, and as soon as other countries realize that our nuclear arsenal actually won't work they will test us to the limit. The worst possible position to be in pointing what you think is a loaded gun at someone, when that person knows that it is really empty.


I'm with you on 2.5 of your three items, Lisa. SEC Expansion = Pass. Conjoining the SEC E&W sounds like a bad idea.However I'm still a fan of the pyoalff system. But (wait for it) in conjunction with the BCS. Why not take your top 8 teams as determined by the BCS rankings and re-purpose the bowl games for the play-offs? Sure, you'd add two additional weekends onto the season (for your final 2 teams) and would need two new bowl games to be sanctified as BCS Bowls (Cotton & Citrus, maybe?), but I doubt that would be problematic. The fans would love it, the schools & conferences would make gobs of money and it would once and for all decide a national champion based on the top 8 battling it out in lieu of a computer calculation deciding the top 2.Just my $0.02.

The comments to this entry are closed.

December 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31