	[x] Posted via EE Mobile
	Search, ask, and monitor your questions on the go with EE Mobile. Visit Experts Exchange from your mobile device and never be out of touch again.
Question
	[x] Attachment Details
[x]
The Solution Rating System
With so many solutions, how can you tell which solutions are most likely to help you and which ones are not? To provide you with a tool to use, we rate our solutions based on various elements that most accurately determine if a solution is a quality solution. To explain what factors affect the solution rating, here are the elements we take into consideration when formulating our solution rating.
The Grade of the Solution
The Zone Rank of the Expert Providing the Solution
The Number of Author and Expert Comments
The Number of Experts Contributing
The Feedback of the Community
Your Input Matters
Because of the way the system is set up, the most important variable in this equation is you. As a member of Experts Exchange, you are able to cast your vote on the quality of the solutions in regard to how complete, accurate, helpful and easy to understand each solution is. When you provide your feedback, each rating is adjusted accordingly. So, if you see a solution that has a poor rating that you think is a good solution, let us know by rating it. As you do, the rating will be adjusted and will become more accurate for other members of our site.
If you have any suggestions that you would like to make for our rating system, please ask a question in the Suggestions Zone of Community Support.
Thank you!
8.4
CSS Code - drop down menu question

Asked by jdharm66 in Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), Firefox Web Browser, Web Development

Tags: CSS, web page development

I'm having trouble with the Links drop down menu. My website is www.truepolitics.us, I'm using CSS code.

In IE the menu drops down behind the text. I've tried using z-index, but can't get it to work. Also, the menu disapears if you try to move down the list.

In FireFox the menu works great, but when it opens it moves all the text on the page down instead of appearing on top of it.

Please go to the site at hover over Links on the horizontal menu to see what the problem is in both Internet Explorer and FireFox.

The entire code for the website is below. I'm using inline CSS stylesheets.

Thanks!
Get your answer NOW
         
           
             1:
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:
32:
33:
34:
35:
36:
37:
38:
39:
40:
41:
42:
43:
44:
45:
46:
47:
48:
49:
50:
51:
52:
53:
54:
55:
56:
57:
58:
59:
60:
61:
62:
63:
64:
65:
66:
67:
68:
69:
70:
71:
72:
73:
74:
75:
76:
77:
78:
79:
80:
81:
82:
83:
84:
85:
86:
87:
88:
89:
90:
91:
92:
93:
94:
95:
96:
97:
98:
99:
100:
101:
102:
103:
104:
105:
106:
107:
108:
109:
110:
111:
112:
113:
114:
115:
116:
117:
118:
119:
120:
121:
122:
123:
124:
125:
126:
127:
128:
129:
130:
131:
132:
133:
134:
135:
136:
137:
138:
139:
140:
141:
142:
143:
144:
145:
146:
147:
148:
149:
150:
151:
152:
153:
154:
155:
156:
157:
158:
159:
160:
161:
162:
163:
164:
165:
166:
167:
168:
169:
170:
171:
172:
173:
174:
175:
176:
177:
178:
179:
180:
181:
182:
183:
184:
185:
186:
187:
188:
189:
190:
191:
192:
193:
194:
195:
196:
197:
198:
199:
200:
201:
202:
203:
204:
205:
206:
207:
208:
209:
210:
211:
212:
213:
214:
215:
216:
217:
218:
219:
220:
221:
222:
223:
224:
225:
226:
227:
228:
229:
230:
231:
232:
233:
234:
235:
236:
237:
238:
239:
240:
241:
242:
243:
244:
245:
246:
247:
248:
249:
250:
251:
252:
253:
254:
255:
256:
257:
258:
259:
260:
261:
262:
263:
264:
265:
266:
267:
268:
269:
270:
271:
272:
273:
274:
275:
276:
277:
278:
279:
280:
281:
282:
283:
284:
285:
286:
287:
288:
289:
290:
291:
292:
293:
294:
295:
296:
297:
298:
299:
300:
301:
302:
303:
304:
305:
306:
307:
308:
309:
310:
311:
312:
313:
314:
315:
316:
317:
318:
319:
320:
321:
322:
323:
324:
325:
326:
327:
328:
329:
330:
331:
332:
333:
334:
335:
336:
337:
338:
339:
340:
341:
342:
343:
344:
345:
346:
347:
348:
349:
350:
351:
352:
353:
354:
355:
356:
357:
358:
359:
360:
361:
362:
363:
364:
365:
366:
367:
368:
369:
370:
371:
372:
373:
374:
375:
376:
377:
378:
379:
380:
381:
382:
383:
384:
385:
386:
387:
388:
389:
390:
391:
392:
393:
394:
395:
396:
397:
398:
399:
400:
401:
402:
403:
404:
405:
406:
407:
408:
409:
410:
411:
412:
413:
414:
415:
416:
417:
418:
419:
420:
421:
422:
423:
424:
425:
426:
427:
428:
429:
430:
431:
432:
433:
434:
435:
436:
437:
438:
439:
440:
441:
442:
443:

           
           
             <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
<head><title>True Politics</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=iso-8859-1"></meta>
<meta name="keywords" content="Politics"></meta>
<meta name="description" content="True Politics"></meta>
<meta http-equiv="imagetoolbar" content="no"></meta>
<style type="text/css">
/*stylesheet*/
/* Global*/
body {
	background: url(img/watermark.gif); 
	text-align: center; 
	color:  #49515C; 
	}
/*Container*/	
#container {
	width: 888px;
	border: medium solid rgb(102, 102, 102);
	text-align: left; 
	}
/*Header*/		
#header {
	background: url(img/header.jpg) no-repeat 100% 0;
	border: 3px solid rgb(102, 102, 102);
	padding: 107px;
	text-align: center;
	}	
/* Nav*/
#nav {
	background: rgb(102, 102, 102) /*#49515C*/; 
	font-family: Berlin Sans FB Demi; 
	border-bottom: 3px solid gray;
	margin: 0;
	height: 2.1em;
	}
 
#nav li {
    position: relative;
	list-style-type: none;
	display: inline; 
	line-height: 19px;   
	}	
	
#nav ul {
    list-style: none;
    margin: 0;
    padding: 0;
    cursor: default;
    width: 129px;
    float: left;
    border-left: 3px solid gray; 
    
    }
    
#nav li a { 
	text-decoration: none;
	color: #ddd; 
	padding: 6px 40px 6px 40px;
	font-size: 1.06 em;
	float: left;
	}
#nav div 
{
    display:none;
}
    
#nav li a:hover {
    background-color: rgb(102, 0, 0); }
#nav li a.on {background-color: rgb(0, 0, 50);}
 
#nav .clear {clear:both;}
 
div #nav ul ul,
div #nav ul li:hover ul ul
{
    display: none;
    top: 2px;
    left: 230px;
    border-left: 0px solid gray; 
    background-color: rgb(102, 102, 102);  
    z-index: 100; 
    }
 
div #nav ul li:hover ul,
div #nav ul ul li:hover ul
{
 display: inline;
 width: 230px;
 z-index: 100;
 }
 
 
/*Side Bar*/
#sidebar 
{
	float: right;
	width: 300px;
	position: relative;
	text-align: center;
}
 
/*post*/
#post 
{
    float: left;
    font-family: Verdana;
	width: 538px;
	position: relative;
	line-height: 20px; 
	text-align: left; 
	word-spacing: 2px;
	padding: 30px 30px 80px 20px;
	border-bottom: 2px solid rgb(102,102,102);
	z-index: 500;
}	
#post div { background: transparent url(img/para_bg2.jpg) repeat-x; }	
/*Footer*/
#disclaim {
    float: left; 
    font-family: Berlin Sans FB Demi; 
    font-style: italic; 
    color: rgb(102,102,102);
    padding: 10px 0px 20px 2px;
    font-size: 0.8em;}
#footnav {
	text-align: center;	
	color: gray; /* #49515C;	*/
	font-family: Berlin Sans FB Demi;
	font-size: 1.1em;
	padding-top: 10px;
	line-height: 16px;
	clear: both;
	}
	
#footnav a { text-decoration: none; color: rgb(102,102,102); font:italics}
#footnav a:hover {color: rgb(102, 0, 0); }
#update {font-style:italic; color: rgb(102,102,102);}
#info {float: right; 
       font-style:italic; 
       font-size: 0.6em; 
       color: gray; }
/*end stylesheet*/
        .style1
    {
        font-size: small;
        font-style: italic;
    }
        </style>
        <base target="_blank"></base>
    </head>
<body>
Please excuse any random code fragments or strange formatting while the website is under construction.  Thank you.
<div id="container">
 
<div id="header">
</div>
<div id="nav">
<ul>
<li><a href="http://truepolitics.us" title="TruePolitics.us" class="on">Home</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://truepolitics.us/forum" title="Talk about it">Forum</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://truepolitics.us" title="Sites of Interest">Links</a>
    <ul>
    <li><a href="http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/" title="Becker-Posner Blog">Becker-Posner Blog</a></li>
 
    <li><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/" title="Cato @ Liberty">Cato @ Liberty</a></li>
    <li><a href="http://federalism.typepad.com/" title="Crime & Federalism">Crime & Federalism</a></li>
    <li><a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/" title="First Read">First Read</a></li>
    <li><a href="http://www.asil.org/insights.cfm" title="Insights">Insights</a></li>
    <li><a href="http://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/" title="Mirror of Justice">Mirror of Justice</a></li>
    <li><a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/" title="SCOTUSblog">SCOTUSblog</a></li>
 
    <li><a href="http://sports-law.blogspot.com/" title="Sports Law Blog">Sports Law Blog</a></li>
    </ul>
</li>
</ul><ul>
<li>
<a href="mailto:truepolitics@yahoo.com" title="Email Me">Contact</a></li>
</ul><ul></ul>
</div>
<!-- Begin Sidebar -->
<div id="sidebar">
<br />
<!-- Begin PolitiFact Code -->
<script src="http://www.politifact.com/media/js/politifactwidget5.js">
 
</script>
<!-- End PolitiFact Code -->
<br />
<!-- MSNBC Code -->
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://wgtclsp.msnbc.com/o/475cfb3039f9920b/48cb96c9c2a72d5f/47d92b00166e3461/e88b63ae" id="W475cfb3039f9920b48cb96c9c2a72d5f" height="440" width="300">
<param value="http://wgtclsp.msnbc.com/o/475cfb3039f9920b/48cb96c9c2a72d5f/47d92b00166e3461/e88b63ae" name="movie"/><param value="transparent" name="wmode"/><param value="all" name="allowNetworking"/>
<param value="always" name="allowScriptAccess"/></object>
<!-- End MSNBC Code -->
<br /><br />
<!-- BEGIN WebSTAT Activation Code -->
<script type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript" src="http://hits.nextstat.com/cgi-bin/wsv2.cgi?113042"></script>
<noscript>
<a href="http://www.webstat.com">
<img src="http://hits.nextstat.com/scripts/wsb.php?ac=113042" border="0" alt="Web Metrics and Site Analytics by NextSTAT" /></a>
</noscript>
<!-- END WebSTAT Activation Code -->
</div>
<!-- End Sidebar -->
 
<!-- Enter next post below this line -->
 
<div id="post">
<h3>01-05-2009:  Harry Reid doesnt understand the economy</h3>
<p>
I enjoy reading these quotes from politicians about the economy.  Theyre nonsensical  pure silliness.  Im not just singling out a certain party, either.  Last year, I called out Sen. John McCain, Gov. Sarah Palin, and President George W. Bush for making statements about the economy that made absolutely no sense.  That might have made people think I was only picking on Republicans, but Ive got a Democratic name today: Sen. Harry Reid.
</p><p>
It really disappoints me that Americans didnt pay more attention to the presidential candidates who really understand the economy  Mitt Romney (Republican) and Bill Richardson (Democrat).  Of course, Richardson now might have a minor bit of trouble to deal with and has stepped down as President-elect Barack Obamas appointee as Secretary of Commerce.
</p><p>
With America going with President-elect Obama, well have a smart, educated president, but I dont know how well he understands the economy.  A couple of people he will be working with, Rep. Nancy Pelosi and the aforementioned Sen. Reid, do not appear to understand the economy either.  Sen. Reid was on <i>Meet the Press</i>, and he made some comments that were just garbage.  
</p><p>
Just like Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin leading up to the election, when pressed to answer questions about the economy, Sen. Reid just said a bunch of words somewhat related to the economy and hoped nobody noticed his answer made little sense.  That kind of answer always reminds me of when I was in school and I didnt know the answer to an essay question.  I would just write a bunch of words I remembered overhearing in class and hope the teacher gave me partial credit.
</p><p>
Reading Sen. Reids answers in the <a href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28493781/page/3/>transcript</a> for Sundays <i>Meet the Press</i>, it looks like the U.S. Senator from Nevada has heard all of the Democratic talking points on the economy but doesnt really understand any of them.  He knows to criticize deregulation while praising future bipartisan efforts, but other than that he doesnt quite grasp the details.  When host David Gregory asked Sen. Reid when a stimulus package might be passed, Sen. Reid gave an answer that included saying the people voted for change, that we need lithium batteries, that Nevadas housing is in the toilet, that we need to be secure, and that women arent being treated for breast cancer.  
 
</p><p>
Um, what?  If Sen. Reid was Gov. Palin, the <i>Saturday Night Live</i> writing team could take the rest of the week off.  When you need to write a political comedy sketch and a politician mentions sewage systems, lithium batteries, toilets, and breast cancer all in one answer, the sketch is already written.  
</p><p>
Sen. Reid wasnt done there.  A few moments later, Gregory asked Sen. Reid what should be done with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Reid responded with a partially incoherent diatribe against deregulation and then a recommendation for more regulation, but he gave absolutely no details as to what that regulation would include.  Sen. Reid then finishes his answer with the statement, And the Securities and Exchange Commission should be ashamed of itself for what they've let happen with the guy in New York, Maddow, and the meltdown all over this country.  
</p><p>
When Sen. Reid said Maddow, I am assuming he meant Bernie Madoff, a man accused of running the largest Ponzi scheme ever.  Maddow, as far as I know, is an MSNBC political commentator.  I dont read minds, but I suspect Sen. Reid was just saying stuff about regulation and Madoff because he knows that is what he is supposed to say, but he couldnt even get the name right.
</p><p>
Hopefully, there is something to learn in this story.  We want our government leaders to bail the economy out.  But, they dont understand how the economy works.  When the government passes bailouts and we later find out that the money from the bailout isnt being spent as expected, we shouldnt be too surprised.  These pieces of legislation are very long and complicated.  Senators dont actually read the legislation, and even if they did, they wouldnt understand it.  That means other people are writing the legislation and then giving the politicians a one-page overview of the major concepts contained in the legislation.  
</p><p>
The American people would be shocked if they knew who was writing the details in those pieces of bailout legislation.  Theres a reason the saying is, the devil is in the details.
</p></div>
 
 
<div id="post">
 
<h3>01-04-2009:  Quotes from the Huffington Post</h3>
<p>
<a href=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/04/elder-bush-jeb-should-run_n_155073.html>Yahoo! ran a story from the Huffington Post today</a>.  The story is about George H. W. Bush saying he thinks Jeb Bush should run for the presidency some day.  After that, all the crazies on the Internet post their thoughts about the story in the comments section.  If you've ever wondered why I don't have a comments section on my page, this is why.  Here is a sampling of some of my favorite quotes from just this one story's comment section.
</p><p>
<i> -And so it goes... George W. Bush hasn't even left Office and his father is already PLANNING a run for his son, Jeb. As I said, they cannot be sated. Transferring our assets and wealth to Bush Inc. w/no risk is better than?</i> -- renatam
</p><p>
<i> -my posts about the nwo are being censored here ...gez i wonder why?</i> -- trentf
</p><p>
<i> -What u think kennedy was assinated by some peed off russian sympatheser guy, lol....inside job anyone for the people get's quickly done away with.?</i> -- trentf [repeat offender]
 
</p><p>
<i> -The ad says geo Bushs IQ is 118...That is Rubbish <br />
my dog is smarter than him?</i> -- kingkongphoto [Note: This comment struck me as unusually ignorant given that a study in 2004 showed that President George W. Bush?s IQ is probably in the 120s and probably higher than Sen. John Kerry?s.]
</p><p>
<i> -Wasn't his grandfather a N@zi?! Doesn't that answer a lot of our questions about who these people really are...? </i> -- LisaO8
</p><p>
<i> -Ge0rge and B@rbara Booosh are as guilty of war crimes as their son and C'heney.?</i> -- Beninn
 
</p><p>
<i> -I will go with before Obama. Now. It is after Obama. Not this time.?</i> -- HappyIdiot2008
</p><p>
<i> -Unbelievable. This is probably the largest and most lethal crime family the U.S. has ever seen, and with any luck and some spine by Congress, at least one of them will be tried for war crimes.?</i> -- sasper
</p><p>
<i> -dont forget, its Jeb who publicly called for Rethugs to form a shadow gov to dismantle and destroy the Obama white house.?</i> --loki
</p></div>
 
<div id="post">
<h3>01-03-2009: Stimulus makes no sense</h3>
<p>
President-elect Barack Obama has said the economy needs another stimulus package.  Most likely, we'll see another stimulus package the first few months into his administration.  His economic team is probably already working on it, and the Democratic-lead Congress will be eager to pass President-elect Obama's legislation in his first one hundred days.
</p><p>
I'm not sure why people still think stimulus packages are the way to go.  Before the 2008 stimulus package was passed, I wrote on this website that such packages have historically been unhelpful in fixing the economy.  As you can see, we've had a stimulus package, and the economy is still struggling.
</p><p>
The government is still bailing out the economy to the tune of roughly $1 trillion, and the economy is still struggling.  Despite the prevailing wisdom going into the government spending spree, it turns out that giving money to struggling companies so they can continue to struggle isn't a good idea.  The fact that some of these institutions aren't accounting to the public regarding the public monies they've received is somewhat insulting.  
</p><p>
Let's also just ask ourselves what a stimulus package and a government bailout are. These are just terms for accelerated forms of government spending.  During the President George W. Bush administration, the federal government has ballooned.  It's spending has continued to increase.  A stimulus basically is an argument to accelerate the kind of irresponsibility that was in part responsible for the current recession. 
</p><p>
President Bush's administration has ripped through the economy like a knife.  In a time when we should be discussing what kind of suture the economy needs, President-elect Obama is proposing we use a bigger knife.
</p></div>
 
 
<div id="post">
 
<h3>01-02-2009:  NFL wild card round</h3>
<p>
Four NFL teams are about to get some really bad news ? I'm picking them to win this weekend.  When the jinx in overdrive lately, the four teams I pick to lose this weekend can probably go ahead and uncork the champagne.
</p><p>
The first game tomorrow is in my view the least interesting of all four games.  The Arizona Cardinals will be at home against the Atlanta Falcons.  The Cardinals stumbled into the postseason and have only a 3-7 record outside their own conference.  The Falcons are a resurrected franchise, led by strong running from Michael Turner, who had nearly 1700 yards rushing this year.  Rookie quarterback Matt Ryan has acquitted himself quite well, and the Falcons get solid defensive efforts from guys like Keith Brooking and John Abraham.  I'm picking the Falcons to win on the road, 20-13.
</p><p>
Later Saturday night, the Indianapolis Colts go on the road to face the San Diego Chargers.  Like the Cardinals, the Chargers went 3-7 outside their division and only made the playoffs by virtue of winning a bad division.  The Colts, led by NFL MVP Peyton Manning, have won nine straight games.  I'm also picking the Colts to win on the road with a 24-7 victory.
</p><p>
The first game Sunday features the Baltimore Ravens traveling to face the Miami Dolphins.  The experts all have the Ravens winning this one.  That makes sense given that the Ravens defeated the Dolphins 27-13 earlier in the season.  The Dolphins are playing well, having won their last five games.  Bill Parcells has done a nice job of turning around a franchise that won only one game last year.  Ironically, that one win was against the Ravens.  Of the two teams, the Ravens have played more consistent football.  All five of their losses came to playoff teams.  The Dolphins dropped some games to beatable teams.  In view of all of this, I'll join the experts and pick the Ravens to win, 27-17.
</p><p>
The final game Sunday features the Philadelphia Eagles on the road against the Minnesota Vikings.  The teams have similar records, with the Eagles having a tie in lieu of a tenth win.  It's always dangerous picking all four road teams to win, but since Andy Reid benched Donovan McNabb in week twelve and reinserted him in week thirteen, the Eagles have defeated their opponents by a combined score of 145-46.  The Vikings also will be without Ray Edwards, and whether Pat Williams will play will be a game-time decision.  While the Vikings do have league-leading rusher Adrian Peterson (1760 yards), I don't expect that to be enough.  I'm picking the Eagles to win this one 30-7.
</p><p>
Changing subjects, let's remember Clairborne Pell.  The Democratic U.S. Senator from Rhode Island is immortalized as the architect of the Pell Grant.
</p><p>
Clairborne de Borda Pell, 1918 - 2009.
</p></div>
 
 
<div id="post">
<h3>01-01-2009:  Resolve to show us original programming</h3>
<p>
The people responsible for television programming should make a New Year's resolution.  They should resolve to create original programming.  Far too many shows on television right now are built around the same stock character placed in different settings.
</p><p>
<i>House</i> is about a doctor who uses his super skills of logical reasoning and astute human observation to solve medical mysteries.  <i>Bones</i> is about an anthropologist who uses her super skills of logical reasoning and astute human observation to solve murder mysteries.  <i>Psych</i> is about a fake psychic who uses his super skills of logical reasoning and astute human observation to solve criminal mysteries.  <i>The Mentalist</i>, which has reached first place in the ratings, is about a'well, you get the point.
 
</p><p>
To be fair, some shows change up the formula a little.  <i>Numbers</i> is about a guy who uses super skills of logical reasoning and mathematics to solve criminal mysteries.  The various incarnations of <i>CSI</i> are about entire teams of scientists who wield firearms, perform interrogations, laugh in the face of the fourth amendment, and use very expensive lab equipment along with super skills of logical reasoning and astute human observation to solve murder mysteries.  
</p><p>
Given the market saturation for this kind of programming, producers at all of the networks and cable channels should probably be able to come up with something original.  I seriously doubt anyone would do something as derivative as creating a new show called <i>Lie to Me</i> and have it focus on a psychologist who uses super skills of logical reasoning and astute human observation to solve criminal mysteries.
</p></div>
 
<div id="post">
<h3>12-31-2008:  No respect for Christian right</h3>
 
<p>
I stumbled across some evidence supporting my claim that neoconservatives and the Christian right currently enjoying an uneasy alliance, with the Christian right being the more anti-intellectual of the two.  The evidence I speak of comes from comments by aides in the President George W. Bush administration.  <a href=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_advisers_speak_out_6> They were speaking with interviewers compiling information for a piece in the February issue of <i>Vanity Fair</i></a>.
</p><p>
The aides denied that the Bush administration was run by the Christian right.  Instead, the aides painted a picture of an administration made up mostly of neoconservatives.  Those neoconservative begrudgingly listened to the nonsense of the Christian right because they needed the votes.
</p><p>
One aide said, -The reality in the White House is ? if you look at the most senior staff ? you're seeing people who aren't personally religious and have no particular affection for people who are religious-right leaders."  He went on to say, "In the political affairs shop in particular, you saw a lot of people who just rolled their eyes at ... basically every religious-right leader that was out there, because they just found them annoying and insufferable. These guys were pains in the butt who had to be accommodated."
</p><p>
I don?t think the average member of the Christian right understands this reality.  Most conservative Republicans at the national level simply tolerate these voters.  Unlike the voters, the politicians don?t believe these nonsensical e-mails about President-elect Barack Obama being a Muslim, Kenyan, or communist.  The politicians don?t hate homosexuals, Arabs, or any other group the Christian right has targeted with its wrath.  The politicians simply put up with it to stay in power.  
</p><p>
As neoconservative breathes its last breath over the next couple of months, and the Christian right continues to be little more than a joke amongst most educated Americans and nearly everyone else in the western world, the Republican Party will need to choose a direction.  Will it follow the modern, rational approaches to politics of the libertarian and moderate wing of the party?  Or, will the GOP continue to bow to the craziness of the Christian right and its neoconservative enablers?
</p></div>
 
 
<div id="post">
<h3>12-30-2008:  Matt Miller loses his mind</h3>
<p>
The folks over at the Cato Institute caught <i>The New York Times</i> making things up.  On December 27th, Matt Miller, writing in the newspaper of record, argued for more federal control over public schools.  For whatever reason, Miller decided to simply make up facts to fit the premise of his article.
</p><p>
Miller <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/opinion/28miller.html>claims</a> that the poor school districts located inside big cities spend about $10,000 per student.  He sees this as unfair given that wealthy, suburban school districts are able to spend around $17,000 per student.  Miller doesn't tell us where he gets these numbers from, but the tone of his article hints that he's just asking us to stipulate that poor districts spend less money per student than wealthy ones.  Thus, the federal government should intervene and make things fair.
</p><p>
Andrew J. Coulson at the Cato Institute <a href=http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/12/29/first-assume-im-right/>was good enough to point out</a> that Miller basically just made up numbers.  Coulson reveals that the poor school districts in question spend about $9,901 per pupil.  The wealthier suburban school districts spend about $9,455 per pupil.  That means not only was Miller wrong about his numbers, but the real numbers are actually a reversal of Miller's theory.  Poorer urban schools are spending slightly more money than the wealthier suburban ones. 
 
</p><p>
As with too many federal programs, Miller is asking for another one to be created for a problem that doesn't exist.  With the trouble the economy is currently experiencing, throwing money away on imagined problems is dangerously reckless and irresponsible.  </p><p>
Miller does have some meritorious ideas.  He argues for deferring or eliminating tenure, removing bad teachers, tying teacher incentives to student success, and paying higher salaries to teachers in subjects where there is a shortage of teachers, such as math and science.  However, Miller goes to the extreme in suggesting some public school teachers should be paid as much $150,000 per year.  Let's not get carried away.  Let's also try not to stray too far from the facts in the future.
</p></div>
 
<div id="post">
<h3>12-29-2008:  Entertainer of the Year</h3>
<p>
The Associated Press named Tina Fey the "Entertainer of the Year."  I can understand that.  She sort of looks like someone more famous than her, and she stars on <i>30 Rock</i>, a program that currently ranks roughly 44th in the television ratings.  She also starred in <i>Baby Mama</i>, a film that opened to lukewarm reviews and solid if not spectacular box office numbers.
</p><p>
Fey had a reasonably good year, but I don't think we should let politics cloud reality.  The runner up on the AP list was the real entertainer of the year.  That person is Robert Downey, Jr.  After years of being little more than the punch line for cocaine jokes, Downey is now one of the biggest names in Hollywood.
 
</p><p>
Downey starred as Tony Stark, the main character in the highly successful <i>Iron Man</i>.  That film received nearly unanimous praise from professional critics and was the fifth highest grossing film of the year.  
</p><p>
Downey's performance in the comedy <i>Tropic Thunder</i> was simply stunning.  It's one of the greatest performances I've ever seen on film.  He's been nominated for best supporting actor by the Screen Actors Guild and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (Golden Globes).  I would suspect that an Academy Award nomination will soon follow.
</p><p>
<i>Entertainment Weekly</i> named Downey the entertainer of the year.  I'm going with its judgment over the AP on this one.  Downey climbed to the top of the box office twice while winning praise from critics and winning award nominations.  Fey had a good year, but Downey's was better.  
</p></div>
 
 
<div id="post">
 
<h3>12-28-2008: Sports make me sad</h3>
<p>
If you think your predictions in your favorite sports stink, let me make you feel better.  Sure, during the preseason I picked the Los Angeles Lakers and Boston Celtics to return to the NBA Finals, and right now that appears to be quite realistic.  Everything else I've predicted has come undone.
</p><p>
My preseason prediction for the Super Bowl is just laughable now.  I had the Dallas Cowboys losing to the New England Patriots.  Those teams didn't even bother to make the playoffs.  
</p><p>
At least my prediction for a resurrection in the fortunes of Miami professional sports teams has proven accurate.  After winning only one game last year, the Miami Dolphins are in the playoffs this year.  They had some of the talent already, but once they brought in Bill Parcells, I figured that team would turn things around.  
</p><p>
The Miami Heat also has a winning record, and it'd make the NBA playoffs if the regular season ended today.  With a healthy Dwyane Wade and a solid draft, I was confident the Heat couldn't be any worse than last year.  
</p><p>
I wish I could say things were as good in Oklahoma City.  The people of Seattle are getting what they deserve, and the owners of the OKC Thunder are getting what they deserve.  Seattle didn't support its team until it was too late, and now that team is gone.  The new ownership arguably hoodwinked the folks in Seattle to get an NBA franchise, and now they're stuck with the worst one in the league ' possibly the worst one of all time.  But, what did the players on that team ever do to deserve such a fate'
</p><p>
Of course, if we're talking about the worst NBA team of all time, we also have to talk about the worst football team of all time.  The 2008 Detroit Lions sucked.  What can we say about Detroit?  Its companies need a bailout.  Its former mayor is in jail.  Its football team is the worst ever.  Shall we move on?
</p><p>
I made some predictions for Saturday night's <i>UFC 92</i>.  I predicted four fights and only got two of them right.  Cheick Kongo defeated Mostapha al-Turk.  Rashad Evans defeated Forrest Griffin to become the new light heavyweight champion.  I predicted both of those correctly.  
 
</p><p>
The other two didn't go quite as well.  Quinton "Rampage" Jackson knocked out Wanderlei Silva so badly that people are already calling for Silva to retire.  Silva has lost four of his last five fights, and three of those losses were by knockout.  Maybe Silva should evaluate his future carefully.  
</p><p>
In the other fight I missed, Frank Mir destroyed Antonio "Minotauro" Rodrigo Nogueira.  Mir had only knocked out one other previous opponent, and Nogueira had never been knocked out in his career.  It didn't matter.  Mir crushed Nogueira.  There was never a point in Saturday night's fight where it looked like Nogueira had a chance.  After repeatedly getting knocked to the ground, Big Nog was finally rescued by the referee in the second round.  
</p><p>
Mir's victory sets up a rematch with Brock Lesnar, which will probably take place early in 2009.  The first time they met, Lesnar nearly ripped Mir's head off, but Mir trapped Lesnar's leg with a kneebar, allowing Mir to escape with the victory.  I'm sure I'll have an incorrect prediction for that one when the time comes.
</p><p>
I'll probably write something up on another day about the team that I predict will win the BCS National Championship Game.  Unless an Oklahoma Sooners fan can break my fingers between now and the big game, a five-paragraph, 500-word jinx is probably forthcoming.
</p></div>
 
 
<div id="post">
<h3>12-27-2008: Stock characters and mythological characters</h3>
<p>
If I've got the facts straight, a Republican operative has distributed a CD that includes a song about President-elect Barack Obama being a magical negro.  The song is performed by a conservative who does political satire, and the dissemination of the song is being denounced by Mike Duncan, the Republican National Committee Chairman.  You can read about the facts of the story <a href=http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081227/pl_politico/16876>here</a>.  
 
</p><p>
I'm not too interested in analyzing the story in any great detail.  Though I must say if the Republicans wonder how their party has become out of touch and out of office, they need look no further.  Rather than just look at the political story, this bit of news got me thinking about race-related stock characters in general.  I can think of two specifically that I'm ready to see disappear.
</p><p>
Since we're on the subject, I might as well start with the character of the magical negro.  There was a time when such a character was well-intentioned, but now the character is an insult to black people and places strange stereotypes in the minds of a younger generation.  The magical negro still routinely appears in Hollywood productions, and some of them are actually good movies.  Michael Clarke Duncan has mystical powers that allow him to save white folks in <i>The Green Mile</i>.  I like the film, but from a more critical standpoint, the character is a dangerous cliché.  It's time for Hollywood to move on.
</p><p>
It's also time to do away with the white savior.  This character strikes me as far more perverse than the magical negro.  The entire premise of the character assumes that black people need saving and only a white person can do it.  In its historical form, the character is colonial, suggesting white people can make the world a better place for the lesser races.  In its modern form, the character is statist, suggesting there is an intelligent and benevolent person who, if given authority, can make better decisions for people than the people themselves.  
</p><p>
In this category of character, the recent film <i>Freedom Writers</i> comes to mind as an especially sinister take on the white savior.  It's the same formula of the white teacher going to make the black kids learn stuff.  Under the colonial model, critics would instantly recognize this film as racist and assign it negative reviews.  Under the statist model, the white savior somehow becomes acceptable.  For whatever reason, modern critics and intellectuals have taken the position that the white man Christianizing the savages is far more evil than the white man educating the negroes.
</p><p>
If the Republican establishment had even an ounce of intellectual ingenuity, it might realize that President-elect Obama's mythology isn't just that of the magical negro.  For the old liberal movement, President-elect Obama's mythology is also that of the white savior.  Under the big state proposals of his mythology, the government will educate you, heal you, and employ you.  
</p></div>
 
<div id="post">
<h3>12-26-2008:  <i>UFC 92</i> predictions</h3>
<p>
<i>UFC 92: The Ultimate 2008</i> is Saturday.  On paper, this should be the best card the UFC has delivered this year.  Before going back to boring you with politics, I'll bore you today with my thoughts on some of the major fights tomorrow night.
</p><p>
First, in a fight between two heavyweights, I expect Cheick Kongo to defeat Mostapha al-Turk by second round TKO.  Kongo's fights are notoriously boring, so it's a bit disappointing that the main card isn't going to feature Yushin Okami vs. Dean Lister instead.  That middleweight fight has been lowered to the preliminary card.  I suppose the winner of the Cheick Kongo vs. Mostapha al-Turk fight can be declared the best fighter with a really cool name.
</p><p>
In the big grudge match of the night, I've got Wanderlei Silva over Rampage Jackson by knockout in the first round.  Silva has already defeated Jackson twice, and my rule of thumb in mixed martial arts is that whoever wins the second fight in a trilogy wins the third fight also (Liddell/Couture, St. Pierre/Hughes, etc.)  It doesn't matter who won the first fight, the guy who won the second fight wins the third.  Jackson has shown trouble with Muay Thai fighters, a fact Forrest Griffin exploited when he defeated Jackson earlier in the year.  Silva is probably the very best Muay Thai fighter at light heavyweight.  He'll defeat Jackson again.
</p><p>
The interim heavyweight title is on the line tomorrow, also.  In that fight, I'm picking Minotauro Nogueira to defeat Frank Mir by unanimous decision.  Mir is a good fighter, but he has no moves with which he can defeat Nogueira.  Mir has only defeated one fighter by knockout in his career, and Nogueira has never been knocked out.  So, it's highly unlikely Nogueira's first lost by knockout would be to Mir.  Nogueira has also never lost by submission.  So, even though Mir has won a majority of his fights by submission, the odds of Mir defeating a Brazilian Jiu-jitsu black belt like Nogueira by submission are also quite remote.  Mir usually has poor striking and conditioning, I expect that to result in him wearing down during the fight, taking significant abuse in the last few rounds, and losing by unanimous decision to Nogueira.
 
</p><p>
The light heavyweight title is also on the line Saturday night, and most numbers I have seen have Forrest Griffin as the favorite to defeat Rashad Evans.  I don't see that happening.  I think Evans will defeat Griffin by TKO in the second round.  Evans's teammate Keith Jardine has already defeated Griffin in the past.  Training with Greg Jackson, perhaps the best coach in mixed martial arts, and Jardine, I'm inclined to believe Evans will have an excellent strategy for defeating Griffin.  Plus, I believe Evans to be underrated.  He's undefeated, yet people still argue there are gaps in his game.  He has defeated Michael Bisping and Chuck Liddell and fought Tito Ortiz to a draw.  Evans has excellent striking and wrestling, and he rarely gets seriously hurt during a fight.  I expect him to be able to take Griffin down and use ground and pound to force the referee to stop the fight.
</p><p>
Those are my picks for tomorrow night's fights.  I'll try to get back to politics tomorrow.  
</p></div>
 
 
 
<!--Posts above this line -->
<div id="disclaim">*Posts more than 10 days old are not 
    archived on the website's front page.</div>
<div id="footnav"> <a href="http://truepolitics.us" title="TruePolitics.us">Home</a>  
    |  <a href="http://truepolitics.us/forum" title="Political Discussion">Forum</a>  |  <a href="mailto:truepolitics@yahoo.com" title="Email me">
 
    Contact</a>
    <br />
    <br /> 
<!--Begin Last Modified Date Code-->   
    <div id="update"> Updated: Monday, January 5, 2009</div><br />
<!--End Last Modified Date Code-->
    <div id="info"> Maintained by sekinj</div> 
   </a>
 
</div>
</div>
 
</body></html>

           
         
	Title
1	CSS bug for IE6 of a horizontal menu
2	css rolloever navigation bar in Firefox
3	Adding inline text to jQuery Accordian …
4	Is there a way round putting a scroll fa…
5	css errors check
6	IE-7, CSS and lists not displaying inline
CSS Code - drop down menu question

Asked by jdharm66 in Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), Firefox Web Browser, Web Development

Tags: CSS, web page development

About this solution
