Doesn't this guy write for firedoglake? or was it Huffpo?

As I understand this,

1. Prez Urkel and his goons believe that Americans are engaging in tax fraud via UBS, though they have no evidence that that is the case.
2. They believe this tax fraud is substantially different than that committed by his Sec. of the Treasury, Charlie Rangel, Chris Dodd, Tom Daschel, and other democrats and members of his administration.
3. As a result, he has worked out a deal with the Swiss Gov't, forcing UBS to hand over the banking records of 4500 US citizens so that he can search for supposed tax fraud.
4. The Swiss courts have said the deal violates their constitution (or whatever they use as a founding document), and therefore the bank does not have to submit to Prez Urkel's thuggish, economic terrorism.
5. As a strong-arm tactic, Prez Urkel has threatened to close down UBS in the US, knowing this would force a bank collapse.
6. The Swiss gov't official is wringing her hands b/c she believes the Swiss should "pay" for protection by throwing UBS's US clients under the bus, not realizing that this would make Swiss banking no different than any other type of banking.

In short, Prez Urkel has declared war on US citizens and the Swiss while he continues to pander to, make excuses for, and fight for the "rights" of islamic terrorists. What if the jihadis could be charged with tax fraud? Would that finally convince this kooky administration to fight them?

Why doesn't Urkel just go after those account holders for whom there is credible evidence that they've engaged in wrongdoing? Better yet, why doesn't he put Geithner, Rangel, Daschel, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Schumer, Frank, Corzine, Franken, Landreau, Nelson, Waters, Lee, Boxer, and the rest of his party in jail. They're all a bunch of crooks--every one of them.

The ONLY thing I like about all of this is that I KNOW with absolute certainty that if there are tax cheats at UBS, the vast majority will be major contributors to the Democrat Party. Having said that, given how corrupt this administration is, I have no doubt they'll find a way to cover up the crimes of their biggest donors. As Urkel would say, they'll do "a little sumpin' sumpin'" for their friends--just like the did for ACORN, SEIU, & Goldman Sachs.

She sounds like she's on the payroll of the DNC.

The problem is not Jews and blacks, it's progressives of any variety.

The kid probably thought he was doing his homework from sex ed class. In CA, they really aren't into "book learnin'"; they prefer an experiential education.

Who will play Tiger Woods in the upcoming adult film called "Tiger's Wood?"

kinda dumb.

The incentive I referred to was a future career in an industry that pays higher than average wages. The university should not give you incentives, your future is your incentive. Otherwise, why go to college--unless it's for the drugs, alcohol, degrading sex experiences, and delayed responsibility?

The fact that many students from foreign countries study engineering is irrelevant. Many of them are going to school because their gov't pays for them to go to school abroad and they're not going to invest in a worthless degree.

Your comment about USC is stupid and naive. Every major research institution is awash in grants from corporations. If you were studying petroleum engineering and Chevron was willing to fund research into deep water drilling, would you turn down the funding? If so, does that mean you're only willing to scam taxpayers for your politically motivated research? If so, you're either very immature or too politically motivated to be of much use to companies that make the world a better place. If you think the gov't and NSF isn't filled with special interests, you're naive.

The point of all of this, however, is that the taxpayers of CA are subsidizing your education to a large degree. You'll benefit many orders of magnitude more than they will for their largesse. Moreover, most of the taxpayer subsidies in higher education are nothing more than sunk costs. Rather than whining, college students in CA should be grateful--especially if their in the UC system.

If you could buy a $30,000 asset for $5,000, would you buy it? If you didn't have the money, would you borrow it? Those schools are EXTREMELY expensive because that's how much a university education costs. CA students need to realize that even with the rate increase, the UC system is STILL a bargain. You might say that you'll graduate w/too much debt. So what?!? That will incentivize people to study high paying disciplines in science, engineering, and professions such as accounting. Californians pay too much for people to graduate with degrees in majors like English, Philosophy, Film, La Raza Studies, Anthropology, etc., etc.

If you think that graduating from a university means that you're not a dummy, you need to spend more time with university graduates. A university is not dummy insurance.

This biggest problem with Lie To Me is that it's stupid. It's based upon the deception research of Paul Ekman, which isn't bad, but anyone who believes is demonstrates unequivocal non-verbal cues of deception has been deceived. The whole show is pure kookery. I watched one episode and immediately thought of gullible hollywood writers who read Telling Lies and were intrigued, but since they never took a statistics class they never understood how weak the correlations were that the research is based upon. The same goes for that "body language expert" that O'Reilly occasionally has on his show. It's insulting.