Wrong time and place for your comment. Most "dog lovers" do not point out the benefits of poisoning dogs or the appreciation for part of the outcome. You're just encouraging who ever did this, if it was not you. That's like someone shooting a panhandler and then another commenting "I sure do appreciate the outcome of the shooting - less panhandling." As a dog owner and dog lover who lives near the park, your comments should be focused on catching who ever did this and not justifying their actions in part. Furthermore, law abiding dog owners are completely at risk, so it makes no sense that you are voicing implied support for the poisoner. Yes, your words are implied support by voicing the "benefits" of the poisoning.
In other headline news, local Boulder employers such as Level 3 and Ball Aerospace have added Romaine Lettuce to the salad bars in their cafeterias in addition to the Iceberg Lettuce that was already offered. Company representatives say that workers will be healthier and a lot more productive thanks to this change. One cafeteria executive was quoted as saying, "We knew Romaine would cost us a lot more, but with the return on investment, the decision was a no brainer."
(Sarcasm induced by the fact that School Lunch has captured the front page.)
I agree with all of the opinions above. Corporations and households are tightening their spending, not increasing it.
Instead of trying to figure out how to spend more money, the school districts should try to figure out how to be more efficient with the resources they already have.
For those individuals that want to spend more on their own children's education, they are free to purchase additional resources and to hire additional professionals.
He gets disgusted and sickened over a mobile billboard? I can see how someone can get disgusted and sickened over torture, rape, murder, famine, abused animals etc. . . But a mobile billboard? It really does not take too much for some people to get disgusted and sickened.
Macon Cowles gets no time for tax evasion (cheating Boulder county out of rightfu propertyl taxes) and this guy gets three years for jumping in a toilet. I would have thought that the act of jumping in a toilet was punishment enough.
I am not sure why a man in his 40s, who previously broke a femur, and appears to be an avid trail runner, has no or inadequate health insurance coverage. It just does not seem prudent. I am presuming he had a successful book tour and that he might have had the funds to pay for it.. Some Boulder folks spend their cash taking exotic trips, but then have no cash to pay for health insurance. I am not really a fan of obamacare, but maybe mandatory health insurance coverage is a good thing.
Notwithstanding his injuries and their finanical bills, the couple seems to have a great attitude, and I am sure that they will do just fine. I wish him a speedy recovery.
This is kind of silly. While I believe Cyclists should be able to use the road, they don't have a constitutional right to bicycle on all public roadways or greater rights than motorists. Governments can and do ban bicycles from roadways for safety reasons (e.g., they are banned from some expressways and they were banned from hwy 66 when it was under repair). The Supreme Court would not find that cyclists have a constitutional right to bicycle on all public roadways, so therefore it is not a constitutional right. While there is a constitutional right to travel, there is not a constitutional right to all means of travel (e.g., you can't drive go carts on the highway or taxi your plane down pearl street) While I support cyclist rights, arguing the constitution is ludicrous.
And how many Boulderites decide to vacation locally instead of going to Nepal, Costa Rica, Africa, or Hawaii? It seems like all the folks I know that are "pro environment" are constantly on jet planes. These folks are environmentally conscious except to the extent it affects their travel desires. As an fyi, greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87% between 1990 and 2006. See the world and you will be contributing to polluting it at the same time.
Probably so, but no more so than your standard american business loves your standard customer. Except for a few items I buy, WF is probably making at most 10 - 20% margins on me. I presume that's what they make on most items except for prepared foods, cheese, meats and seafood. Compare that to soda sold in cups at Mcdonalds or almost any restaurant or store for that matter. Perhaps those business make 500% margins. The same goes for any bar. in terms of Alcohol sales - more than 100% margins. As I mentioned above in response to another comment, I think I would likely have a similar bill at safeway. Fresh fruits and produce cost a lot almost everywhere you shop.
I can't believe I am defending WF because I do do like to make fun of them, but you can get some ok buys at WF. Sandwich at Subway approx $7. Compare that to a Sandwich made at WF on a real baguette and much better quality - approx $7. On Fridays they have $10 Pizzas. It all depends what you buy and how you shop at WF. If I shop at Safeway instead of WF, it is still going to be a somewhat comparable bill because of they type of food I buy.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Joint