Skip Nav
Photography
50 Couple Moments to Capture at Your Wedding
Disney
These 30 Disney Princess Tattoos Are the Fairest of Them All
Women
43 Bangin' (and Beautiful) Tattoos

Front Page: Obama Gives States Power To Regulate Emissions

  • President Obama is set to allow states to regulate car emissions while pushing the federal government to set tighter fuel-efficiency standards. States like California will not need to get an EPA waiver before setting strict standards, as previously required by President Bush.— New York Times
  • Instead of attending his impeachment trial which begins today, Illinois Gov. Blagojevich is making TV appearances to plead his case. — CNN
  • Home Depot announced today that it will cut 7,000 jobs and close its high-end Expo business. — Bloomberg
  • A top EU official has blamed Hamas for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza while on a tour of the region. — BBC News
  • The mayor of Portland, OR, will not step down, after he admitted to having sex with an 18-year-old intern. — USA Today

Source

Around The Web
Michelle Obama Wearing a Plum Dress
9-Year-Old Syrian Refugee at State of the Union 2016
Becoming an Adult During Obama's Presidency
All-in-One Laundry Bombs
How to Keep Lemons Fresh Longer
Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee With Barack Obama
Paint Sample Crafts

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
:oy:
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
:oy:
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
Michelin, it's not enough because she says it's not enough! Isn't that enough? :ROTFL:
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
In reference to understanding the meaning of words, your point makes no sense, chat. If I thought the two words meant the same thing, I wouldn't need to argue that my statement was one and not the other.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Actually, I have a much greater knowledge of why I post things than you do. and, it wasn't directed at anyone specific.
Michelann Michelann 7 years
"Further, the rude and abrasive comment wasn't referring to anyone in particular, it was referring to the general attitude of several users on this site."That's only because it would be deleted had it been specifically directed at somebody. If we all pretend it was a general statement, the insult stands.
Michelann Michelann 7 years
"Further, the rude and abrasive comment wasn't referring to anyone in particular, it was referring to the general attitude of several users on this site." That's only because it would be deleted had it been specifically directed at somebody. If we all pretend it was a general statement, the insult stands.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Further, the rude and abrasive comment wasn't referring to anyone in particular, it was referring to the general attitude of several users on this site.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Mich, it's not enough to say it was implied because that doesn't prove that I made an incorrect statement. I understand that my wording was confusing. I don't blame Chaton for getting the wrong message. Actually, when she first questioned what I said I admitted that what I said was confusing and I even apologized for my poor choice of words. I understand the conclusion. What I don't understand is why someone would continue to believe that was what I meant even after I clarified that it was not what I meant.
Michelann Michelann 7 years
Lilkim, I'm not sure why it's not enough to say it was implied by your statement. Apparently that's not what you meant but you can't blame Chaton for getting the wrong message. Honestly I assumed you were mistaken too. But I'm not going to explain why that was the obvious conclusion because I don't want to be called rude and abrasive.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
Thanks lil! I didn't mean to insert myself a ref. I just honestly perfectly understood what she was saying and I'm having trouble understanding the opposite interpretation.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
Thanks lil! I didn't mean to insert myself a ref. I just honestly perfectly understood what she was saying and I'm having trouble understanding the opposite interpretation.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
By the way, I love the new avatar, pop! It makes me think of spring, even though it's snowing out.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Saying you don't think something should have happened doesn't necessarily mean that it did. But, I cannot explain logic to you.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
And actually, confusing and incorrect don't really even have similar meanings.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Chat, I don't need you to define words for me. You don't seem to understand that I did not state that Clinton was impeached for his affair. Please show me where I stated that. And saying it was implied is not sufficient.
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
Pop, I was reading with two other people, both of whom do know me, to be fair, and they both said "Wait, he wasn't impeached for his affair." or words to that effect. So it wasn't just my understanding. Yeah, I was abrasive in my later comments. Mainly to show her the difference, since she clearly has some issues with words which mean similar things not being synonyms.
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
The problem with your comment, lil, is that you said it's confusing. It's not confusing, it's incorrect. That's what you don't seem to understand. I'm done here, because clearly you don't understand that confusing=/=incorrect, and I cannot define words for you.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Chat, thanks for your diligence in keeping everyone's comments accurate, but there were no inaccuracies on my end. I admitted many comments ago that my wording in regards to Clinton's impeachment was confusing and clarified to clear up any confusion. I find it interesting that you would continue to focus on the initial comment, rather than being mindful of my later clarification. And, the statement about the relative ages in no way implies that there isn't a difference between your average 18-year-old and your average 22-year-old. I won't even concede that the wording is confusing on that one. I simply stated that 22 isn't much older than 18. I also think it's important to point out that there are plenty of 18-year-olds who are more mature than your average 22-year-old, just as there are plenty of 22-years who are less mature than your average 18-year-old. I'm guessing we have all known at least one 22-year-old who still resides with his or her parents and seems unmotivated to do anything other than watch tv all day and drink at a night. I'm also guessing we all know (or at least know of) one 18-year-old who entirely supports him or herself.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Chat, thanks for your diligence in keeping everyone's comments accurate, but there were no inaccuracies on my end. I admitted many comments ago that my wording in regards to Clinton's impeachment was confusing and clarified to clear up any confusion. I find it interesting that you would continue to focus on the initial comment, rather than being mindful of my later clarification.And, the statement about the relative ages in no way implies that there isn't a difference between your average 18-year-old and your average 22-year-old. I won't even concede that the wording is confusing on that one. I simply stated that 22 isn't much older than 18.I also think it's important to point out that there are plenty of 18-year-olds who are more mature than your average 22-year-old, just as there are plenty of 22-years who are less mature than your average 18-year-old. I'm guessing we have all known at least one 22-year-old who still resides with his or her parents and seems unmotivated to do anything other than watch tv all day and drink at a night. I'm also guessing we all know (or at least know of) one 18-year-old who entirely supports him or herself.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
chat, with all due respect, it was pretty obvious what she meant and I think you just interpreted her comment incorrectly. Obviously you will disagree with me, but I'm a fairly unbiased 3rd party as I don't know either of you and have no great need to back random people up online.And if you weren't rude and abraisive before, you certainly accomplished that with your latest comment. I'm not sure how you can represent yourself as an "adult" at this point...
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 7 years
chat, with all due respect, it was pretty obvious what she meant and I think you just interpreted her comment incorrectly. Obviously you will disagree with me, but I'm a fairly unbiased 3rd party as I don't know either of you and have no great need to back random people up online. And if you weren't rude and abraisive before, you certainly accomplished that with your latest comment. I'm not sure how you can represent yourself as an "adult" at this point...
CaterpillarGirl CaterpillarGirl 7 years
I know Chat, its totally wierd when people get offended over nothing.....
BRANDYNICOLE730 BRANDYNICOLE730 7 years
Yay for state emission standards!! If the auto companies do not want to be affected by this, maybe they should have began creating cars that are up to those (and future) standards back when they first realized what California was doing. Instead, they chose to spend that money to fight it, and are now not much further along than they were when this began. I do not believe this will result in the demise of Chevy and Ford, as Toyota did not go bankrupt creating the Prius.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I agree, pop, it is so arbitrary, but I have never really heard anyone propose a better way either. I have heard people mention ages other than 18, but with the way our society is structured now, with most people graduating from high school at 18, that seems just as good an age as any.
Latest Love
X