bmags

we just came off an election where Nate Silver used polls to nail, almost to a tee, what the election would look like. This argument is ridiculously stupid. Anyone that took a basic level stats class can learn to understand an effective poll.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 30, 2009 -> 04:11 PM) And you are assuming that was a legit poll. Polls can say what you want them to say. Only if you are incapable of understanding neutral poll questions and are too lazy to read the language/results of the poll.

now their slaps on the wrist will be known!!

hey sorry if this is redundant/has been covered, whats the eta on toews? Is it kind of up in the air?

I seem to remember the hawks/wings game at wrigley last year, like, shutting down the northside as I was trying to leave. If that's just die hards, that's a hell of a lot of die hards.

what was dye's injury?

In other words, tex would have no problems funneling government money into a private business you own through gov't contracts...k.

also, curious as to why lieberman was on record as something different some few years ago...before his wife's position.

Yep. And torture. and DADT.

why do people think TI was so important to this joke? was I f*** you in an austrian accent not good enough?

they denied me so I hope their program burns to the ground in a fiery blaze.

I cannot stop laughing at this...so many funny parts - keeping the sex toys and viagara "just in case", flashing his badge which led them to calling the police officer's coworker wife, the sex spot being the cemetary...I'd put this in general b/c I think it's funny no matter, but I don't want lectures about how "all party members do this" - I don't care, this story is funny politician or not...but way funnier this way... http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/...#more?ref=fpblg

yeah, man, it's been really tough for republicans to get their message out. They have no where to go to, no one lets them on sunday talk shows, theirs no network to pump their point of view, they have no radio programs, no one even knows they are there.

Is there a reason WHY it's such a hitters league? Do more top hitters go there than pitchers. Is it strictly arizona weather + small stadiums?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 01:36 PM) because last I saw, no one was calling for Snowe to be stripped of everything she has earned. and there's a difference between doing what she is doing, possibly voting and at least working with the opposing party, as opposed to actively denying your own caucus the ability to vote on their biggest legislation in 60 years. That's quite a difference. But, obviously, i forgot, everything is equal blah blah blah... If a Republican threatened to filibuster against tax cuts, filibuster against defense spending, filibuster, etc. you see how far they get. Honestly. It's not even in the same realm.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) When you are talking about procedure, it is a technicality. Congress needs to address this, but until then, those are the rules. Are you honestly telling me that people should vote for a technicality when they know doing so will result in something they don't believe in? Then why ever vote no? Why ever vote? Sometimes you are going to be overruled when 100 people are voting on something, well, if ever they could be allowed to vote. The vote is the statement. Why look at voting records? Let's look at threats to make sure voting doesn't happen. That apparently is the key. Hey, let's go to dinner. Alright, where do you guys wanna go. I've heard good things about this spanish food place Oh, me too, sounds good. I like Mexican. Well let's take a vote. No, I've already heard people express their vote against me, we shouldn't vote. Let's just not eat. For one, I think the Senate filibuster is way too easy to enact, as opposed to the house, they don't have to do anything strenuous. It isn't Mr. Smith goes to washington. But really, You arguing that I shouldn't be mad about a senator in the Dem caucus granted leadership positions that not just isn't giving his vote to what his caucus has worked on, but won't even let them vote on it. It's ridiculous.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 12:50 PM) The difference is technical only, really it is much worse, because he is putting the bill into a situation where he knows it will pass. At the end of the day, everyone is saying that Lieberman's duty as a Democrat is more important than his job as a Representative, which is insane. If he doesn't believe in a bill he knows he is going to vote against, why should he cast a vote that he knows will lead to its passage? because we live in a representative democracy that only recently has moved the bar from simple majority passing, to now 3/5s. The majority in 2 chambers plus another branch would pass this on straight up or down, but because a minority in one chamber, it shouldn't even be allowed to be voted on? That's not technicality.

I really wish I would've bought the box set. Being poor sucks.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 12:23 PM) I guess that is your opinion, but obviously the high level Dems decided otherwise, and I tend to agree with their assessment. Lamont wasn't going to win, unles Lieberman self-destructed somehow. The high-level dems only campaigned for Lieberman in the primary, after that everyone was kind of mum, but Clinton, for instance, helped the Lemont campaign.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 03:33 AM) Then they probably should quit b****ing about it, or quit acting like inclusiveness actually is true. There's a difference between voting up or down, and voting against cloture to prevent a vote on the bill your party has worked on. In the Senate, 40 senators can threaten to fil-i-bust-er and they don't have to read a telephone book, they merely have to continually have someone in the senate as present, and this would kill a bill easily. So no, I don't care if Lincoln, Bayh, Nelson say "no" I have a problem if they don't allow their own party to vote on its own bill.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 12:09 PM) lol wut? Its not true I disagree? How strange. it's not true that Lemont had no chance in the GE. If he hadn't stayed mum for 3 weeks in october when Lieberman started to backtrack on war rhetoric it would have prevented a lot of the 20% migration from democrats.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 28, 2009 -> 12:08 AM) Disagree. that's not true.

I do. Now go read about DOJ.

you realize that lieberman is an I in the dem caucus, given leadership positions because of this?

you understand how our gov't works so well don't you?