White House vs. Fox News

Fox News commentators like Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly have attacked the Obama administration for its aggressive posture toward the cable news network. On radio yesterday, Mr. Beck even compared the White House decision to shun his network to the seeds of the Holocaust. But it is notable that the White House is making hay of the network’s news coverage, not just its opinion programs.

Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, asserted in recent interviews that there is little difference between the news and opinion shows, save for exceptions like the White House correspondent Major Garrett and the anchor Shepard Smith.

After Fox covered the back-and-forth with the White House in a news report Monday afternoon, the White House raised an eyebrow. James Rosen, the reporter on the segment, was the State Department correspondent for Fox — until the channel shut down its bureau there recently.

Bill Burton, a deputy White House press secretary, said in an e-mail message, “Apparently covering the State Department at a time when there are two wars and important foreign policy issues that emerge every day, there are other things that Fox News thinks those reporters ought to be covering.”

Fox rebutted by saying that it moves resources regularly, “as any news organization would,” to follow the news.


Said Michael Clemente, the senior vice president for news, in a statement, “But when the top military commander is calling for more troops, and the White House is coming down on the military for putting out parts of the troops recommendations, why are they talking about where James Rosen hangs his hat each day, rather than about the strategy for Afghanistan?”

Fox noted that when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled abroad this week, it had a correspondent with her. CNN reassigned its State Department correspondent last year, according to reports at the time.

Separately on Tuesday, a White House representative said that “many stories” on Fox are false. Asked about the volley of volatile exchanges between the administration and the network at a press briefing, the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said, “I have watched many stories on that network that I have found not to be true.”


from the new york times

Schwarzenegger tells Shriver: Put down the cell phone

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is calling out his wife, Maria Shriver, for apparently violating a state law he signed — holding her cell phone while driving.

The celebrity Web site TMZ.com posted two photographs Tuesday showing Shriver holding a phone to her ear while she's behind the wheel. It says one was snapped Sunday and the other in July.

The Web site later added a video it said was shot Tuesday in Brentwood, where the family lives. It shows Shriver holding a cell phone to her ear while driving a large SUV that appears to be a Cadillac Escalade. She then puts the phone down while the camera is rolling.

The first lady's office said it would have no comment.

On his Twitter feed, Schwarzenegger wrote to TMZ.com founder Harvey Levin: "Thanks for bringing her violations to my attention. There's going to be swift action."

Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear says that by "swift action," the governor means he'll ask his wife not to hold the phone while driving.

In a note accompanying the video, TMZ responded to Schwarzenegger's tweet by saying, "... your scofflaw wife was at it again."

A law that took effect in July 2008 requires California drivers to use a handsfree device when talking on cell phones.

Since then, the California Highway Patrol has issued more than 150,000 citations. That figure does not include citations issued by local police.

Drivers who are spotted by law enforcement officers holding a cell phone to their ear are subject to fines of at least $20 for the first ticket and $50 for subsequent tickets, plus additional fees.

In Los Angeles County, where Brentwood is located, the Superior Court has set the cost at about $93 for the first ticket and $201 for the next one, meaning Shriver would owe at least $300 in fines and court fees had she been caught by police.

Schwarzenegger has previously praised the regulation and said he warned his then-16-year-old daughter that if she ever violated the law, "she'll be taking the bus."

by the associated press

Taliban criticize Obama's peace Nobel

ISLAMABAD — The Pakistani Taliban has criticized the decision to award Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize saying the U.S. president should have received a "villain of peace" award instead.

Taliban spokesman Azam Tariq said Wednesday the president who has beefed up the U.S. military presence in neighboring Afghanistan did not deserve the peace prize.

Tariq said Obama's "hands are tainted with the blood of thousands of human beings."



by the associated press

Change of plans

Ok , I am going to hawaii , however I have to push back my vaction. I already called the Hotl and the Airline .
The reason why i am pushing it back by a couple a mouths , ia my mom . My mom's house needs to have work done . A lot of work , like the plummimg , Water and Gas .

And I am trying to get her bathroom and kitchen , worked on aswell. I am the only son , and I have to try to take care of my mom , before I pack my bags and go on vaction .

So have you ever had to put off , your plans for your mom and dad ?

Pirates attack French military flagship

NAIROBI (AFP) – Somali pirates attempted to storm the French navy's 18,000 tonne flagship in the Indian Ocean after mistaking it for a cargo vessel, the French military said on Wednesday.

The crew of La Somme, a 160-metre (525-foot) command vessel and fuel tanker, easily saw off the brazen night-time assault by lightly armed fighters on two lightweight skiffs and captured five pirates, a spokesman said.

"The pirates, who because of the darkness took the French ship for a commercial vessel, were on board two vessels and opened fire with Kalashnikovs," Admiral Christophe Prazuck said in Paris.

La Somme is the French command vessel in the Indian Ocean, overseeing French air, sea and land forces fighting Somali pirates and hunting terrorists under the banner of the US-led Operation Enduring Freedom.

Officers on the ship have directed commando operations to free French hostages in the hands of Somali pirates.

The pirates tried to flee when they realised their mistake but were pursued by French forces who, after an hour-long chase, caught one of the skiffs, Prazuck said.

On it they found five men but no weapons, water or food as the pirates had apparently thrown all of the boat's contents overboard, the spokesman said.

A Western official at sea in the area, speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity, said that there had been an exchange of fire between the warship and the pirate launches.

"One of the skiffs managed to get away in the night because La Somme was busy with the first pirate boat," he said.

"Despite the arrival of other vessels, they haven't yet managed to find the second boat," he said, adding that many warships in the area were busy hunting another group which attacked a cargo ship off the Seychelles on Sunday.

The world's naval powers have deployed dozens of warships to the lawless waters off Somalia over the past year to curb attacks by pirates in one of the world's busiest maritime trade routes.

La Somme was operating 250 nautical miles (460 kilometres) off the Somali coast, on its way to resupply fuel to frigates patrolling shipping lanes as part of the European Union's Operation Atalanta anti-piracy mission.

This was not the first time that Somali pirates have mistakenly attacked a French naval vessel. Several pirates were captured in May when they attempted to board a frigate in the area.

Somalia has had no proper government since it plunged into lawlessness after President Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown in 1991.

The country is riven by factional fighting and pirate gangs operate freely from several ports along its Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden coasts.

According to the environmental watchdog Ecoterra International, at least 163 attacks have been carried out by Somali pirates since the start of 2009 alone, 47 of them successful hijackings.

Last year, more than 130 merchant ships were attacked, an increase of more than 200 percent on 2007, according to the International Maritime Bureau's Piracy Reporting Centre in Kuala Lumpur.

Pirates have in recent weeks resumed attacks with the end of the monsoon season. Last week Somali gunmen captured Spanish fishing boat The Alakrana with 36 crew members in the Indian Ocean.

The US Maritime Administration warned last month that the end of the monsoon season was likely to bring an increase in piracy off Somalia and urged shipping companies to be vigilant.

Calmer waters allow pirates, who often operate in small fibreglass skiffs towed out to sea by captured fishing vessels, to hijack freighters, trawlers and private yachts. Cruise vessels have also been attacked.

from yahoo news

Feds limit Arizona sheriff's immigration powers

PHOENIX — An Arizona sheriff known for aggressively cracking down on illegal immigration has been stripped of some of his special power to enforce federal immigration law, and he claims the Obama administration is taking away his authority for political reasons.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose office faces racial profiling allegations over crime and immigration sweeps in some heavily Latino areas of metro Phoenix, said officials from Washington won't let him renew a deal that let his deputies make federal immigration arrests.

"Let them all go brag that they took away the sheriff's authority. Let them all do that. That doesn't bother me. I don't have an ego. I will continue doing the same thing," the Republican sheriff said, noting he can still enforce state immigration laws. "What has changed, other than the politics and the perception emanating from Washington?"

The U.S. government, which does most of the nation's immigration enforcement, is changing its rules for allowing local police to enforce more expansive federal immigration laws. Nationally, more than 1,000 local police and jail officers have been granted the power since 2002 to make immigration requests and speed up deportations.

Arpaio has more officers with the special powers than any other local police agency in the country. For more than two years, 100 of his deputies have made immigration arrests and another 60 jail officers have identified inmates who are illegal immigrants.

Even though federal officials declined to let the sheriff keep making immigration arrests, Arpaio last week renewed a deal that will let his jail officers determine inmates' immigration status.

Arpaio said federal officials offered no explanation of why his powers were cut in half.

Vinnie Picard, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which grants the special powers, declined to comment on the curtailment of Arpaio's powers or whether any of the other 62 participating local agencies across the country have been denied renewals.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement will make no final decisions on the agreements until Oct. 14, which is the deadline for renewing the agreements. So far, at least three agencies have dropped out of the program.

Giving federal powers to local police helps supplement the small staff of federal agents who enforce immigration laws in the country's interior, said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which favors tougher immigration enforcement.

He said it's hard to tell whether the limits on Arpaio's authority will extend to other agencies and would hamper the movement for local police to confront illegal immigration.

"I suspect there is some effort there to send a warning to other police departments: Don't get too aggressive with this, because we will yank it out from under you," Mehlman said.

Joan Friedland, immigration policy director for the National Immigration Law Center, said the federal government wasn't making a serious attempt to rein in Arpaio, because his jail officers still have the power to question jailed people about their immigration status.

"All he has to do is get people to the jail, rather than being able to question them about their immigration status on the street," said Friedland, whose group advocates for low-income immigrants.

For his part, Arpaio said he plans to continue cracking down illegal immigration by enforcing state laws that prohibit immigrant smuggling and ban employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

Arpaio said his deputies can still detain suspected illegal immigrants who haven't committed state crimes, as long as his officers call Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to pick them up.

Critics say some of Arpaio's deputies racially profiled people during immigration sweeps. Arpaio maintains that people pulled over in the sweeps were approached because deputies had probable cause to believe they had committed crimes.

His office is being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice over allegations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures.

A September 2008 audit by Immigration and Customs Enforcement said the relationship between that agency and the sheriff's office was good, but noted that most rank-and-file patrol deputies who had the special training and who weren't part of a special smuggling unit had rarely used their federal powers, because they didn't have the experience — or didn't want to take the time — to process illegal immigrants.

The review also noted that the local FBI office received no complaints against officers with the special training.

Arpaio's approach to immigration has frustrated other public officials.

The mayor of Mesa complained in 2008 that Arpaio didn't warn his city of raids by deputies who were looking for illegal immigrants working at his city's library and City Hall.

And as Arpaio's sweeps began to draw heavy criticism in 2008, then-Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, cut off immigration enforcement dollars to his office.

Napolitano, who as the country's homeland security secretary now oversees the federal government's immigration agencies, had said it wasn't an attempt to change Arpaio's approach to cracking down on illegal immigration. Rather, she said the funding was reallocated to try to clear a backlog of thousands of outstanding felony warrants across the state.

by the associated press

AP Top News

WASHINGTON — The fever has broken. The patient is out of intensive care. But if you're President Barack Obama, you can't stop pacing the waiting room. Health care overhaul is still in guarded condition. The latest Associated Press-GfK poll has found that opposition to Obama's health care remake dropped dramatically in just a matter of weeks. Still, Americans remain divided over complex legislation that Democrats are advancing in Congress.

by the associated press

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to discuss teen violence

CHICAGO — U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Education Secretary Arne Duncan are set to discuss youth violence in Chicago in the wake of the beating death of a 16-year-old honor student whose attack was caught on cell phone video.

Holder and Duncan plan to meet privately Wednesday with students, parents and school officials. They'll hold a news conference later with Ron Huberman, who replaced Duncan as chief executive officer of Chicago Public Schools.

President Barack Obama sent the two federal officials to Chicago after images emerged of the fatal beating of high school sophomore Derrion Albert. Four teenagers have been charged in his death.

by the associted press

Court hears arguments on cross on park land

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is taking up a long-running legal fight over a cross honoring World War I soldiers that has stood for 75 years on public land in a remote part of California.

The cross, on an outcrop known as Sunrise Rock in the Mojave National Preserve, has been covered in plywood for the past several years following federal court rulings that it violates the First Amendment prohibition against government endorsement of religion.

The justices were to hear arguments Wednesday in a case the court could use to make an important statement about its view of the separation of church and state. The Obama administration is defending the presence of the cross, which court papers describe as being 5 feet to 8 feet tall.

A former National Park Service employee, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, sued to have the cross removed or covered after the agency refused to allow erection of a Buddhist memorial nearby. Frank Buono describes himself as a practicing Catholic who has no objection to religious symbols, but he took issue with the government's decision to allow the display of only the Christian symbol.

Easter Sunrise services have been held at the site for decades.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has repeatedly ruled in Buono's favor. Congress has intervened on behalf of the cross, prohibiting the Park Service from spending money to remove the cross, designating it a national memorial and ultimately transferring the land to private ownership.

The appeals court invalidated the 2004 land transfer, saying that "carving out a tiny parcel of property in the midst of this vast preserve — like a doughnut hole with the cross atop it — will do nothing to minimize the impermissible governmental endorsement" of the religious symbol.

Veterans groups are on both sides of the case, with some worrying that other religious symbols that serve as war memorials could be threatened by a ruling in Buono's favor. Jewish and Muslim veterans, by contrast, object that the Mojave cross honors Christian veterans and excludes others.

The administration wants the court to rule that Buono had no right to file his lawsuit because, as a Christian, he suffers no harm from the cross. His main complaint is that others may feel excluded, the government says.

Alternatively, the administration says the land transfer took care of any First Amendment problem.

The case is Salazar v. Buono, 08-472.

by the asssociated press

Obama weighs Afghanistan options

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is gathering his national security team for another strategy session on Afghanistan after signaling that a troop withdrawal is not under consideration.

Obama's White House session Wednesday comes eight years after the war started and amid new poll statistics showing that support for the conflict in this country is waning.

Obama, who inherited the war when he took office last January, is examining how to proceed with a worsening combat situation that has claimed nearly 800 U.S. lives and sapped American patience. Launched after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to defeat the Taliban and rid al-Qaida of a home base, the war has lasted longer than ever envisioned.

House and Senate leaders of both parties emerged Tuesday from a nearly 90-minute conversation with Obama with praise for his candor and interest in listening. But politically speaking, all sides appeared to exit where they entered, with Republicans pushing Obama to follow his military commanders and Democrats saying he should not be rushed.

Public support for the war now stands at 40 percent, down from 44 percent in July, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll. A total of 69 percent of self-described Republicans in the poll favor sending more troops, while 57 percent of self-described Democrats oppose it.

Obama said the war would not be reduced to a narrowly defined counterterrorism effort, with the withdrawal of many U.S. forces and an emphasis on special operations forces that target terrorists in the dangerous border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Two senior administration officials say such a scenario has been inaccurately characterized and linked to Vice President Joe Biden, and that Obama wanted to make clear he is considering no such plan.

The president did not show his hand on troop increases. His top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has bluntly warned that more troops are needed to right the war, perhaps up to 40,000 more. Obama has already added 21,000 troops this year, raising the total to 68,000.

Obama also gave no timetable for a decision, which prompted at least one pointed exchange.

Inside the State Dining Room, where the meeting was held, Obama's Republican opponent in last year's presidential race, Sen. John McCain, told Obama that he should not move at a "leisurely pace," according to people in the room.

That comment later drew a sharp response from Obama, they said. Obama said no one felt more urgency than he did about the war, and there would not be nothing leisurely about it.

Obama may be considering a more modest building of troops — closer to 10,000 than 40,000 — according to Republican and Democratic congressional aides. But White House aides said no such decision has been made.

The president insisted that he will make a decision on troops after settling on the strategy ahead. He told lawmakers he will be deliberate yet show urgency.

"We do recognize that he has a tough decision, and he wants ample time to make a good decision," said House Republican leader John Boehner. "Frankly, I support that, but we need to remember that every day that goes by, the troops that we do have there are in greater danger."

What's clear is that the mission in Afghanistan is not changing. Obama said his focus is to keep al-Qaida terrorists from having a base from which to launch attacks on the U.S or its allies. He heard from 18 lawmakers and said he would keep seeking such input even knowing his final decision would not please them all.

Obama's emphasis on building a strong strategy did not mean he shed much light on what it would be. He did, though, seek to "dispense with the more extreme options on either side of the debate," as one administration official put it. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details of the closed-door meeting.

The president made clear he would not "double down" in Afghanistan and build up U.S forces into the hundreds of thousands, just as he ruled out withdrawing forces and focusing on a narrow counterterrorism strategy.

"Half-measures is what I worry about," McCain, R-Ariz., told reporters. He said Obama should follow recommendations from those in uniform and dispatch thousands of more troops to the country — similar to what President George W. Bush did during the 2008 troop "surge" in Iraq.

The White House said Obama won't base his decisions on the mood on Capitol Hill or eroding public support for the war.

"The president is going to make a decision — popular or unpopular — based on what he thinks is in the best interests of the country," press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters.


by the associated press

Great, photo a hit for Westminster birder

Pat Gaines actually felt sorry for the red-tailed hawks at Bonny Lake State Park this summer.

Despite their aggressive reputation, loud screams and fierce, piercing looks, the red-tailed hawks at the park north of Burlington, just west of the Colorado-Kansas border, were being bullied when Gaines saw them.

"I've never seen red-tails harassed so much. They all seemed hoarse. I felt kind of sorry for them," said Gaines of the sight of dozens of little birds dive-bombing the hawks.

The hawks were minding their own business, Gaines recalled.

But the western kingbirds at the park were upset.

Highly territorial, the kingbirds felt the hawks were intruding on their space, said Gaines, a Westminster scientist who helps develop vaccines and tests used in veterinary medicine.

Gaines had focused his camera on one red-tailed hawk because the bird had been screaming. As he followed the hawk across the sky, a kingbird dive-bombed the hawk.

The hawk, which is not a predator of the kingbird, flew as fast as it could from the kingbird. For a moment it appeared the kingbird had stopped attacking. But then it began the pursuit again and — to Gaines amazement — landed on the hapless red-tail's back.

"He rode the hawk for 25 yards. The hawk was not trying to fight back — it was just trying to get out of there," said Gaines.

As the kingbird rode bareback on the hawk, it pecked away at the hawk's head.

"They (the kingbirds) are not afraid of anything," said Gaines. "Until this happened, I had never seen one perch on a hawk's back."

Gaines posted his photo at the Colorado Birder website last month, where he is a frequent contributor.

Other sites, including some in the United Kingdom, have picked up the photo.

The comment posted by Colorado Birder Sarah E sums up the reaction to the image: "Awesome photo!"

from the denver post.com

Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin

ROME (Reuters) – An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ's burial cloth is a medieval fake.

The shroud, measuring 14 feet, 4 inches by 3 feet, 7 inches bears the image, eerily reversed like a photographic negative, of a crucified man some believers say is Christ.

"We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud," Luigi Garlaschelli, who is due to illustrate the results at a conference on the para-normal this weekend in northern Italy, said on Monday.

A professor of organic chemistry at the University of Pavia, Garlaschelli made available to Reuters the paper he will deliver and the accompanying comparative photographs.

The Shroud of Turin shows the back and front of a bearded man with long hair, his arms crossed on his chest, while the entire cloth is marked by what appears to be rivulets of blood from wounds in the wrists, feet and side.

Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business.

But scientists have thus far been at a loss to explain how the image was left on the cloth.

Garlaschelli reproduced the full-sized shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages.

They placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. A mask was used for the face.

PIGMENT, BLOODSTAINS AND SCORCHES

The pigment was then artificially aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed it from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. He believes the pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries.

They then added blood stains, burn holes, scorches and water stains to achieve the final effect.

The Catholic Church does not claim the Shroud is authentic nor that it is a matter of faith, but says it should be a powerful reminder of Christ's passion.

One of Christianity's most disputed relics, it is locked away at Turin Cathedral in Italy and rarely exhibited. It was last on display in 2000 and is due to be shown again next year.

Garlaschelli expects people to contest his findings.

"If they don't want to believe carbon dating done by some of the world's best laboratories they certainly won't believe me," he said.

The accuracy of the 1988 tests was challenged by some hard-core believers who said restorations of the Shroud in past centuries had contaminated the results.

The history of the Shroud is long and controversial.

After surfacing in the Middle East and France, it was brought by Italy's former royal family, the Savoys, to their seat in Turin in 1578. In 1983 ex-King Umberto II bequeathed it to the late Pope John Paul.

The Shroud narrowly escaped destruction in 1997 when a fire ravaged the Guarini Chapel of the Turin cathedral where it is held. The cloth was saved by a fireman who risked his life.

Garlaschelli received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics but said it had no effect on his results.

"Money has no odor," he said. "This was done scientifically. If the Church wants to fund me in the future, here I am."


from Reuters

Thinking About Moving

Thinking About Moving.

Now , i have posted a few weeks ago , that I was planning to take a vaction in Hawaii. Now , i am thinking about moving to Hawaii.

I can a job transfer their and all , I have to is having enough money to get into a place their.
I have looked into a bedroom Condo . They start of around $98,000 , so i am thinking why not ?

i am still very young , and I want to travel . So why not ?

Well it is food for thought.

Now , that I am making real money , from Buying Stocks and ETF's.

I can do it. I just want to make sure that Hawaii , is where I want to live.

Top Reason why Men Break-Up with Women

I was flipping through a Women's Health recently (I admit it), and I noticed an interesting poll. Women cited the following as the most common breakup reasons:

He changed
We weren't compatible
He cheated on me
When I was little, it drove me crazy when my parents supported "no" with "because I said so." I always wanted a reason. I'm not sure if knowing why always helps, but perhaps if you know common reasons guys break up with girls, you'll at least be able to see it coming. So, here are mine:

I Got Bored: I've read many different hypotheses on attention span, but my favorite is (Wikipedia):

"Continuous attention span, or the amount of time a human can focus on an object without any lapse at all, is very brief and may be as short as 8 seconds. After this amount of time, it is likely that an individual's eyes will shift focus, or that a stray thought will briefly enter consciousness."

My attention span (unless it's a football game or a song) may be worse. I know a relationship is not supposed to be exciting all the time, so getting through those flatline moments between the sparks is critical. If I start having more fun with other activities, the relationship is doomed.

One of Us Was Too Serious: This could be as simple as she wanted to see me three times a week, and I only wanted to see her once a week. If she's flirting with other guys, flighty, or not as into it as I am, then I'm too serious for her.

Burnout: I'm a big believer in pacing and rhythm in dating. A relationship can suffer burnout if certain milestones occur too fast: Being exclusive, sex, meeting parents. When that happens, I get that feeling the colonists must have gotten after they won the Revolutionary War: "Ok, we did it...so now what?"

I Was Tempted To Cheat: I do my best not to cheat, so when I have recurring urges to cheat on my girlfriend, I figure it's time to break up with her. I don't need to go through with cheating; the constant urge is enough for me to end things.

All My Friends Broke Up With Their Girlfriends: This is by far the most immature reason on this list. While my girlfriend and I are curled up on the couch watching "The Devil Wears Prada," my newly single guy friends are out shredding the karaoke waves with Journey's "Don't Stop Believin" and tearing up the town. That conflict gives me wanderlust. It's much easier when we are all in for a quiet Saturday night with the significant others.

Divergent Lives: If someone moves to another town, or work is taking over, or other life changes are driving you apart, sometimes it's best to end it.

Feeling Selfish: Dating is selfless because you're giving your time and yourself up to a relationship. "Me time" is necessary at some point to work on career/living situation, travel, or whatever. When I'm in a "selfish period," it's tough to participate in a relationship.

I "Misread" My Feelings: This is the most unfair of all the reasons. Both genders make this mistake—you get into a relationship and everything seems so great. Then, a few weeks later, you realize you got wrapped up in something for the wrong reason, dated for the sake of dating, or whatever, and you need to get out.

My Friends Or Family Didn't Like Her: I pay close attention to friend/family opinions because they know me best, and they've earned the right to have their say. Also, friends and family may be able to see things inside the relationship that I'm too blinded to see.

I Took Her For Granted: Great relationships should be easy, but there has to be some tension too—especially in the beginning. If it's too easy, there's a lack of challenge. If I feel like I could have her heart any time any place, sometimes I'll let her go. This almost always ends up coming back to haunt me later, though. I never learn.

She Was Too Negative: All too often, I end up with the brooding, depressed, uptight type who is constantly complaining. I don't expect someone to be happy all the time, but if she makes me unhappy every time I see her, why stay with her?

What reasons have guys used to break up with you, and which make you most angry? What reasons have caused you to break up with guys? Which reasons do you think are the most common cause of breakups- do they differ for guys and women?

from Shine , Yahoo