Apparently Online Dating Decreases Commitment. Here's Why ...

OK, maybe I haven't been on a million first dates, like the title of a recent Atlantic article, or even 50 first dates, like that Adam Sandler-Drew Barrymore movie. But ever since I starting online dating, I have been on a ton of them. And rarely a second one. And almost never a third.

50 first dates? Feels like I've already been there, done that.

Why?

In that Atlantic article, the CEOs of online dating companies hypothesize that because online dating presents me so many options, I'm less likely to commit to one girl. They may be right. I mean, if I go on an uninspired date, I just jump back online and message a few more people. It's not that I'm even that attractive, but the nature of online dating (especially here in New York City) reassures me that it won't be long until I make another connection. ?As we become more secure and confident in our ability to find someone else, usually someone better,? says one executive, ?monogamy and the old thinking about commitment will be challenged very harshly.?

That sounds ominous until you consider the ?old thinking about commitment? is prone to sustaining some unsatisfying and unhealthy relationships. The article describes how one guy's ?desire to be with someone, to not have to go looking again, had always trumped whatever doubts he'd had about the person he was with.? As in, he almost married the wrong girl because he would have rather stayed with her than faced that ?mourning period, where you stare at your wall thinking you're destined to be alone.?

Kind of de-romanticizes the whole idea of commitment, yeah? Sticking around because you?d rather be with anyone than no one is a pretty unhealthy reason to prolong a relationship. I have mine, too: an idealist and a bit of a romantic, I've been known to stay with a girl not because I really liked her but because I wanted to really like her. In trying to convince myself of that, I lied to her and lied to myself, all the while wasting both our time. Now aware of the Internet?s seemingly endless supply of potential alternatives, it negates a certain level of desperation that would have previously kept me in an unfulfilling or even toxic relationship.

These days, if I?m on a second or third date with a girl, it's because we both deliberately and definitively want to be. It?s like we're quoting Jay-Z to each other: ?Thanks for coming out tonight. You could have been anywhere in the world, but you?re here with me.?

Without (even the subconscious) fear that I won't find someone else, I feel self-assured and therefore more honest with my intuition and with my heart. I don?t have to settle for unexceptional companionship merely because it beats a lack thereof. Instead, I can be patient. I can base my feelings on how I actually feel. I can wait for those unmistakable sensations of physical gravity, emotional alignment, and spiritual nirvana I?m supposed to experience when I find someone who's truly right. I won?t settle for anything less, even if it takes a million first dates.

Do you think online dating makes us less likely to commit? Or does it make us less likely to settle? How have your experiences with online affected your romantic outlook?

Photo: Everett Collection

Source: http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/blogs/smitten/2013/02/apparently-online-dating-harms.html

weather chicago swizz beatz mpaa south carolina debate lauren scruggs william shatner seattle weather

YC-Backed Swish Makes Selling Simpler For Inventors And Creators

It?s never been easier for would-be inventors to take a harebrained concept and turn it into an actual, sellable product, but the process of getting those products to the masses could still use a little work. Sure, crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo have helped laid the groundwork for a revolution in how these passionate folks sell, but the team at YC-backed Swish feel like there are even better ways to do it.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/bTJNNBOAI6c/

benjamin netanyahu storm shelters nick lachey chevy volt christina hendricks lifelock camp david

Hagel emerges with solid Dem support for Pentagon

Republican Chuck Hagel, President Obama's choice for defense secretary, testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Republican Chuck Hagel, President Obama's choice for defense secretary, testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., second from left, asks a question of former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, second from right, President Barack Obama's choice for defense secretary, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, during the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on his nomination. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., left, and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., right, listen. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Sen. Lindsey Graham, D-S.C., holds a copy of a congressional letter urging the European Union to blacklist Hezbollah as he questions former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, President Barack Obama's choice for defense secretary, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, during the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Hagel's nomination. Hagel refused to sign the 2006 letter when he was a Senator urging the European Union to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., center, flanked by Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., left, and the committee's ranking Republican Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., right, asks a question of former Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel, President Barack Obama's choice for defense secretary, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013, during the committee hearing on Hagel's nomination. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., questions Chuck Hagel, a former two-term GOP senator and President Obama's choice for defense secretary, during his confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. Hagel faced strong Republican resistance and was forced to explain past remarks and votes even as he appeared on a path to confirmation as Obama second-term defense secretary and the nation's 24th Pentagon chief. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Bruised and battered, Chuck Hagel emerged from his grueling confirmation hearing with solid Democratic support for his nomination to be President Barack Obama's next defense secretary and relentless opposition from Republicans who repeatedly challenged their former GOP colleague.

Mathematically, Hagel has the edge as he looks to succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as the nation's 24th Pentagon chief. Democrats hold a 14-12 advantage on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said the panel could vote as early as next Thursday, contingent on Hagel's prompt response on some lingering questions.

Levin expressed optimism about Hagel's prospects and praised his performance in nearly eight hours of testimony Thursday.

"I think his answers were honest and forthright and he did very well," Levin told reporters. "I hope that there will be some, who maybe were skeptical but who are undecided before this hearing, will maybe now look at him in a more favorable light. But I think there are a whole lot of folks who basically decided before the hearing that they were going to vote against him."

Unclear is whether Republicans will try to block the nomination of a Cabinet choice, especially when they have argued ? when a Republican occupied the White House ? that presidents should have their nominees.

Hagel struggled at times as GOP senators challenged him on issues ranging from Israel and Iran to his support for a group that advocates the elimination of nuclear weapons, repeatedly pressing him on past statements, votes and even letters he declined to sign. Refusing to show any frustration or anger, Hagel defended his record.

The former two-term Republican senator from Nebraska described his views as mainstream and closely aligned with those of Obama, the Democrat who nominated him. But several GOP members of the committee sought to portray him as radical and unsteady. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., called his ideas "extreme" and "far to the left" of Obama.

Hagel said he believes America "must engage ? not retreat ? in the world" and insisted that his record is consistent on that point.

He pointed to Iran and its nuclear ambitions as an example of an urgent national security threat that should be addressed first by attempting to establish dialogue with Iranian rulers, although he said he would not rule out using military force.

"I think we're always on higher ground in every way ? international law, domestic law, people of the world, people of the region to be with us on this ? if we have ... gone through every possibility to resolve this in a responsible, peaceful way, rather than going to war," he said.

He pushed back on the notion ? first raised by one of his harshest Republican critics, Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma ? that he favors a policy of appeasement.

"I think engagement is clearly in our interest," Hagel told Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., who denounced the idea of negotiating with a "terrorist state."

"That's not negotiation," Hagel said. "Engagement is not appeasement. Engagement is not surrender."

The nominee's fiercest exchange came with Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a fellow Vietnam veteran and onetime close friend. Politics and Hagel's evolving opposition to the Iraq war caused a split between the two men that was on full display.

McCain suggested that Hagel and his critics were not quibbling over small matters.

"They are not reasonable people disagreeing; they are fundamental disagreements. Our concerns pertain to the quality of your professional judgment and your worldview on critical areas of national security," he said.

McCain pressed Hagel on whether he was right or wrong about his opposition to President George W. Bush's decision to send an extra 30,000 troops to Iraq in 2007 at a point when the war seemed in danger of being lost. Hagel, who voted to authorize military force in Iraq, later opposed the conflict, comparing it to Vietnam and arguing that it shifted the focus from Afghanistan.

"Were you right? Were you correct in your assessment?" McCain asked.

"I would defer to the judgment of history to sort that out," Hagel said as the two men talked over each other.

"The committee deserves your judgment as to whether you were right or wrong about the surge," McCain insisted.

Unable to elicit a simple response, McCain said the record should show that Hagel refused to answer. And he made it clear that he would have the final word ? with his vote, which he said would be influenced by Hagel's refusal to answer yes or no.

"I think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you're on the wrong side of it," he said.

Responding to criticism from outside GOP-leaning groups, Hagel repeated his regrets about using the term "Jewish lobby" to refer to pro-Israel groups. He said he should have used another term and should not have said those groups have intimidated members of the Senate into favoring actions contrary to U.S. interests.

"I'm sorry and I regret it," Hagel said. "On the use of 'intimidation,' I should have used 'influence,' I think would have been more appropriate."

At one point, Hagel mistakenly said the Obama policy toward Iran is "containment" even though the former senator has said all options, including military force, should be on the table. He was handed a note and corrected himself.

Hagel, 66, would be the lone Republican in Obama's Cabinet, the first Vietnam veteran to be defense secretary and the first enlisted man to take the post.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2013-02-01-US-Hagel/id-51f41d52f4de4c27bbb77b29a1700020

OJ Murdock Olympics Live Mens Gymnastics Allison Schmitt Olympic Schedule Kyla Ross Ryan Lochte

Informant in Galleon insider-trading case gets a year in prison

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Roomy Khan, a one-time technology company executive who became a key FBI informant in the insider-trading case against hedge-fund manager Raj Rajaratnam, was sentenced to 12 months in prison on Thursday.

Her defense lawyer had sought five years of probation for Khan, 54, who pleaded guilty in 2009 to securities fraud, obstruction of justice and conspiracy. U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan also ordered her to forfeit nearly $1.53 million.

"As I reflect back, I am horrified by the choices I made," Khan said.

Khan is one of only a few women who have been charged in the government's broad insider-trading crackdown, which has involved money managers, traders, consultants and lawyers.

Her cooperation helped U.S. authorities in the Rajaratnam prosecution. Rajaratnam, founder of the Galleon Group, was convicted by a federal jury in May 2011 and is serving an 11-year prison term.

She was also called as a government witnesses at the insider trading trial of Doug Whitman, a California hedge fund manager and founder of Whitman Capital LLC who was sentenced last week to two years in prison.

Prosecutors said Khan also obstructed the investigation, alerting co-conspirators that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had contacted her and deleting email communications.

Khan, whose voice broke up during her sentencing, said she was sorry, not just to the court but also to her daughter, husband and parents.

She said she lied to the government to protect herself, her friends and family and that she engaged in insider trading to "protect my life and status."

Since August 2009, federal prosecutors in New York have charged 76 people with insider trading and have landed convictions against 71 of them.

By the end of Thursday, 42 of them will have been sentenced. Jason Pflaum, a former analyst at the hedge fund Barai Capital Management who cooperated in the Justice Department's probe of expert-network firms, was sentenced later on Thursday to time served plus two years probation.

Prosecutors said Khan met Rajaratnam shortly after landing a job as a marketing executive at Intel Corp in 1995. They contend that when Rajaratnam started Galleon, she began giving him non-public information about Intel.

The FBI in San Francisco approached soon after. She was sentenced in 2002 to three years probation after pleading guilty to a count of wire fraud and reaching a cooperation agreement.

Khan worked at Galleon but left to manage her and her husband's personal portfolio.

Prosecutors said in a sentencing memo filed on Friday that beginning in 2004, Khan again began soliciting non-public tips and trading on them. They said she also began exchanging her tips with other contacts and that she gave tips to Rajaratnam and Whitman.

Prosecutors attributed Khan's insider trading to personal financial difficulties. Her lawyer said in a court filing on Monday that she lost $49.6 million of her money when the Internet bubble burst.

She began cooperating with the government in 2007 after the Federal Bureau of Investigation approached her. Her assistance led to a 2008 wiretap of Rajaratnam's cell phone, which prosecutors said led to further evidence.

Stanislao German, Khan's lawyer, acknowledged "bumps along the way" with regard to her obstruction of the investigation.

"For self-serving and other reasons she tried to be double-faced," Rakoff said. "That's not a very sympathetic thing."

Rakoff also sentenced Khan to three years supervised release following her prison term. She previously agreed in 2010 to pay $1.86 million to settle an SEC civil lawsuit.

The case is United States v. Khan, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 09-991.

(Reporting By Nate Raymond in New York; Editing by Martha Graybow, Gary Hill and Bob Burgdorfer)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/informant-galleon-insider-trading-case-gets-prison-000815909--sector.html

bulls california earthquake california earthquake tyson chandler tyson chandler stephen hill draft tracker

Colombia rebels seize oil workers, kill four soldiers

BOGOTA (Reuters) - Colombia's FARC rebels kidnapped three oil contractors and killed four soldiers in the nation's south, military sources said on Thursday, in a sign the group is stepping up pressure during peace talks.

The kidnappings and other violent incidents on Wednesday came days after the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, made clear during peace negotiations in Cuba that it would continue to capture armed forces, possibly muddying the talks.

The workers, contracted as engineers by Canada's Gran Tierra Energy, were laboring near the border of Cauca and Putumayo provinces in southern Colombia when they were seized, according to the company and the Colombian air force.

The air force was hunting for the contractors, it said in a statement. They were believed to be Colombians.

There have been several kidnappings of civilians in recent months that are suspected to have been at the hands of the FARC, but the group has never claimed responsibility.

Last year, Gran Tierra quarterly profit fell nearly 59 percent in the second quarter as production was hit by pipeline disruptions. The FARC regularly attack oil lines.

President Juan Manuel Santos' government and Marxist rebels have been engaged in peace talks in Havana since November, trying to reach an end to a decades-long war that has killed tens of thousands and defied all past attempts for resolution.

In the southwestern Narino department, a key drug route to the Pacific ocean, FARC rebels killed four soldiers in combat in the municipality of Policarpa.

Narino department is representative in many ways of the major security challenges facing Colombia - rebel groups and drug gangs sometimes fight or collude to move shipments of cocaine where the government's presence is weak.

At the start of talks in November, the FARC declared a two-month unilateral ceasefire, which ended on January 20 with the rebels attacking oil and mining facilities, including two pipelines and a coal rail line.

The government refused to join the ceasefire, calling it a sham by the FARC to gain international attention. The army kept attacking the group and carried out several aerial raids that killed at least 34 rebels.

KIDNAPPINGS AND INFRASTRUCTURE ATTACKS

The FARC, the biggest and oldest armed group in Latin America, seized two police patrolmen in a southwestern province last weekend - the first kidnapping of security forces since April, when it released all officials under its control.

In the first specific rebel response to the two policemen, chief FARC negotiator Ivan Marquez, one of the group's seven top leaders, said on Thursday that: "Right now we don't have any official report on that incident, if it was or wasn't the FARC."

While the FARC has said it would halt kidnapping to fund its war against the government, it never said it would stop taking members of the armed forces as "prisoners of war."

The government on Wednesday asked rebels to make it clear they are not wasting time at peace talks in Cuba and genuinely want to end the five-decade conflict.

An escalation of hostilities could affect the progress of the peace discussions in Cuba. Santos has said he wants to achieve an agreement within a year.

"We're willing to stay at the table until we find a path that leads us to peace. That's why we said that we will not get up from the table until the desire of the people in Colombia is fulfilled," Marquez told journalists in Havana.

The rebels took up arms in 1964 as a Marxist agrarian group fighting against social inequality and the concentration of land among a wealthy elite. But they later turned to drug-trafficking and kidnapping to finance their activities.

Santos is credited with some of the harshest blows against the FARC, first as defense minister and then as president, including killing the group's leader, Alfonso Cano, in 2011.

Over the years, the FARC has held dozens of politicians, police officers and soldiers in remote jungle hideouts. Hundreds of FARC members are in Colombian prisons.

Since a 2002 U.S.-backed offensive, security has vastly improved in Latin America's fourth-largest oil producer, attracting billions of dollars in investment as explorers pushed into ever remoter areas in search of crude.

But the FARC stepped up attacks last year on oil and energy infrastructure. Its bombings of pipelines shot up nearly three fold in the January-October period to 142, but attacks against energy towers fell by nearly half in the same period to 35.

In the latest incident, Colombia's army said that the FARC blew up an energy tower in a rural zone in the Norte de Santander province on Wednesday.

(Additional reporting by Luis Jaime Acosta in Bogota, Nelson Acosta in Havana and Eduardo Garcia in Quito; Editing by Philip Barbara)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/colombia-rebels-seize-oil-workers-kill-four-soldiers-173611771.html

the hobbit mick jagger Newton Shooting Newtown Shooting Gangnam Style Ryan Lanza Sandy Hook

Accounting News Roundup: Individual Tax Evasion; Corporate Tax ...

U.S. Is Preparing More Tax-Evasion Cases [WSJ]
The U.S. is expanding its crackdown of offshore tax evasion, preparing numerous criminal cases against suspected offenders, defense lawyers involved in the cases say.?Four years after an agreement between the U.S. and Switzerland pierced a veil of banking secrecy by requiring Swiss bank UBS AG to turn over names of account holders, defense lawyers estimate that federal prosecutors are conducting at least 100 criminal investigations against suspected tax evaders.?The moves come as the U.S. is turning the screws on smaller banks that may have helped taxpayers stash money in secret overseas accounts.?On Monday, a federal judge in New York approved an Internal Revenue Service summons demanding still more records from UBS. According to court filings, the government now is focusing on U.S. taxpayers with accounts at smaller Swiss banks that didn't have U.S. branches but served customers through a UBS account in Stamford, Conn.

Can publicity curb corporate tax avoidance? [FT]

Members of both political parties are keen to reduce the statutory corporate tax rate from 35 per cent, which is high by international standards, to perhaps 25 per cent. The problem is that if revenue-neutrality is demanded, no new revenue source such as a financial transactions tax is permitted, and the base-broadening is confined to the corporate side, then there is a problem. There are not enough corporate tax expenditures available to finance the rate reduction that everyone thinks is necessary. [...]?The one big tax preference theoretically available to finance a rate reduction is deferral on foreign source income. Presently, the US taxes the income of foreign subsidiaries of US-based multinational corporations, but only when repatriated to America. Income remaining offshore is untaxed by the US.

?

Companies Plan to Trim Cash Stockpiles [CFO] For only the second ?time in more than two years, the corporate-cash indicator from the Association for Financial Professionals shows more finance executives (28%) anticipate cutting their cash hoard in the first quarter than are planning to add to it (23%). It?s the first time finance professionals are forecasting lower cash reserves for a quarter since January 2011, when the AFP began conducting the study. If the forecast is correct, it would suggest companies are becoming less wary of parting with their cash.

BlackBerry 10?s Debut Fizzles as U.S. Buyers Left Waiting [Bloomberg]
The smartphone maker formerly known as Research In Motion stumbled in its introduction of the BlackBerry 10 lineup yesterday, disappointing shareholders with the lack of a firm U.S. release date and setting a price that may be too high to lure away customers from Apple Inc. (AAPL) and Google Inc.?s Android. The shares tumbled 12 percent after the event, which included an appearance by Keys, a Grammy-winning R&B singer who was given the title of BlackBerry?s global creative director.?BlackBerry 10 phones won?t appear in the U.S. until March, raising concerns that the company will fall even further behind the iPhone and Android in its biggest market. The lag also means BlackBerry won?t get as much value out of its first-ever Super Bowl commercial, which airs on Feb. 3, weeks before Americans can even buy one of the new devices.??For the BlackBerry faithful, another month is a long time,? Shaw Wu, an analyst at Sterne Agee in San Francisco, said in an interview. ?The execution could have been crisper.?

?

IRS Tips Won't Protect You From Identity Theft Tax Fraud [Forbes]
FYI.

?

Small Firms Say LinkedIn Works, Twitter Doesn't [WSJ]
Just 3% of 835 business owners surveyed earlier this month by The Wall Street Journal and Vistage International said Twitter had the most potential to help their companies.

?

Pot Consultant: Washington State Looks For Weed Scholars To Separate Seeds From Stems [AP]

Your next career move? "As Washington state tries to figure out how to regulate its newly legal marijuana, officials are hiring an adviser on all things weed: how it's best grown, dried, tested, labeled, packaged and cooked into brownies.?Sporting a mix of flannel, ponytails and suits, dozens of those angling for the job turned out Wednesday for a forum in Tacoma, several of them from out of state. The Liquor Control Board, the agency charged with developing rules for the marijuana industry, reserved a convention center hall for a state bidding expert to take questions about the position and the hiring process.?'Since it's not unlikely with this audience, would a felony conviction preclude you from this contract?' asked Rose Habib, an analytical chemist from a marijuana testing lab in Missoula, Mont.?The answer: It depends. A pot-related conviction is probably fine, but a "heinous felony," not so much, responded John Farley, a procurement coordinator with the Liquor Control Board."

Source: http://goingconcern.com/post/accounting-news-roundup-individual-tax-evasion-corporate-tax-avoidance-bad-advice-avoiding

prometheus trailer patrice oneal shamrock slainte the quiet man yellow cab dropkick murphys

Hornung: Don't wait until spring to list your home - Inside Real Estate ...

Lane Hornung

Spring is the traditional kickoff of the home-selling season.

This year, however, many markets across the country are facing the lowest inventory of unsold homes in decades, while buyer interest is soaring.

Realtors increasingly are calling brokers at other companies to find homes to sell and are even knocking on doors asking owners if they want to list their homes. Multiple offers are becoming more common, driving up prices.

Nationally, rising prices mean that 1.4 million people can now sell their home, people who had previously been underwater ? that is, their mortgage had been worth more than their home?s market value ? according to a recent study by CoreLogic.

The case for selling your home today, rather than waiting until the spring market in March or April, is the subject of this month?s conversation between Lane Hornung, CEO and founder of 8z Real Estate, and John Rebchook,?of InsideRealEstateNews.com.

?John: Lane, why aren?t more homeowners listing their homes for sale?

Lane: It is somewhat perplexing. I would have guessed by now that the bunker mentality caused by the housing downturn would have passed, but many prospective sellers are still hunkered down. This psychology may be holding the market back. The inactivity of sellers is certainly not being shared by buyers.

John: Why are buyers bullish?

Lane: I think buyers are bullish because they see the market running away from them. If you are an active buyer, you are seeing comparable homes that you looked at six months ago priced 5 percent to 10 percent higher now than when you started. And it?s not just listing prices. Homes are selling for more. This is not esoteric data. This is empirical data that buyers see happening with their own eyes.

John: Is there any indication that this disconnect between buyers and homeowners is changing?

?Lane: I think many prospective sellers think we are still in a bad housing market and this is a bad time to sell. The good news is that the strength of the market is starting to permeate down to homeowners and the psychology of sellers may be changing. We just have not seen it manifest itself yet as far as increased listings. Hopefully, we will.

John: Because all the stars seemed to have aligned, does that mean a homeowner should plant a For Sale in their yard?

Lane: It depends on what is going on in that homeowner?s life. Personal needs and desires take precedence over trying to time the market.?However, if the conditions in your life are such that you want and/or need to sell, certainly there is no reason to wait.

John: One seasonal cycle already has not held true. Sales in many metro areas increased in December from November and many brokers are seeing brisk sales activity in January. What do you make of that?

Lane: The market is unseasonably active right now. Buyers didn?t take off the period between Thanksgiving and Super Bowl Sunday. They didn?t get the memo that they were supposed to stop looking at houses.

Now, all we need are more houses for them to look at.

John: Thanks Lane.

Have a story idea or real estate tip? Contact John Rebchook at? JRCHOOK@gmail.com. InsideRealEstateNews.com is sponsored by Universal Lending, Land Title Guarantee and 8z Real Estate. To read more articles by John Rebchook, subscribe to the Colorado Real Estate Journal.

Related Posts:

Source: http://insiderealestatenews.com/2013/01/hornung-now-is-the-time-to-sell-your-home/

amy schumer Prince Harry Vegas pictures Avril Lavigne Microsoft Tropical Storm Isaac amber portwood Phyllis Diller