kapkomet

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) If you are Letterman, why wouldn't you want Obama on your show? I understand it's ratings, but I just wanted to put Letterman, CBS, and [slurp][/slurp] in one sentance.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 01:54 PM) lol it's whose choice? The Dems. They can do whatever they want. But they aren't. Man, if "conservatives" and "moderates" are so wrong with everything they think, why don't they just do what they want to do??? You get the point.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 12:53 PM) out of curiosity does kap realize how many DOJ and Obama appointees STILL have holds on them with no verbal objections? I think it's no secret the Dems have been unable to hold their caucus, but that's what happens when you allow conservatives into your party, but it's better to have kay hagans/lincolns/nelsons than the opposite who most certainly would just be threatening filibuster. They have the ability to be whipped, but they clearly wanted a conservative bill. Yes, and that's their choice. All their focus is screwing us up the ass with their "health care plan" right now.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 01:13 PM) News is reported by people, and therefore, will always have various levels of bias. Which I think is what you are getting at. However, two important notes here. One, Fox is far more biased in their coverage than the other major networks. Two, regardless of that, the major problem with ALL these news outlets is that they are shallow and trashy, doing very little actual reporting on actual news. Its all opinion and flash-and-dash garbage. That is actually a much larger problem here, than any inherent bias. Real journalism is expensive, sometimes boring to most people, and usually presents the true complexity of things. People don't like that - they want simple, black and white, someone to blame. NB(S)C: Obama: Hey Bri! Let's go grab some burgers! Brian Williams: [slurp][/slurp] AB(S)C: Obama: Say, let me put my infomercial all over you guys for health care... please don't run anything contrary to my views. ABC: [slurp][/slurp] CB(S)S: Obama: Hey Dave, hey 60 minutes! I gotcha covered, please save me the time! CBS (in particular, Letterman) [slurp][/slurp] Fox: Obama: f*** you, you're an RNC talking point machine. MMMMMMMMkay.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 01:43 PM) It really should happen to him at this point. If he wants to be a Republican, he should just be a Republican. Laughable once again. Same for Olympia Snowe. Susan Collins. Alan Spector (oh wait...).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 12:34 PM) It will be done. It'll just be done by Jan 1 because the virus took a little longer to culture. You're missing the point I was trying to make, but that's ok, because it's not really important. Yea, it'll get done.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 09:03 AM) I really wish they'd lose tax exempt status here. Who is "they"?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 12:11 PM) Well, it is the closest I could come to blaming it on politics. It's not anyone's political fault, but don't be stupid enough to promise 80 million vaccines if it cannot be done. This fits his "I will fix the world's issues" mantra all too well.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 11:43 AM) it's also not a secret that the 60 vote supermajority required for everything passing the Senate is also a new development over the last 10 years or so, and especially the last 3. That's laughable, Mr. Cloture on court appointees (which is EXPLICITLY not constutitional unlike cloture on other issues, not that I agree with it being used for EITHER party).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 11:38 AM) This is such a "sweep the dirt under the rug" post it's kind of remarkable if you actually believe that. It's like being pissed off at the government for the smoke in the L.A. basin but ignoring the giant wildfire. How many times have Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi blamed the hold up on this bill because they "want bi-partisan support" when in reality they don't need it? If this is such a grand and great thing, shove it up our asses because we're all too stupid to know any better, right, oh towering inferno?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 08:38 AM) So here is something interesting I read this morning, from the AP. They were curious about the growing rumors circulating recently, about a global cooling trend. Some climate change skeptics have been claiming that we've been in a 10 year cooling trend, since a peak in 1999. Putting aside for the moment the idea that 10 years of data is terribly meaningful, the AP did a pretty cool blind study on this. They took temp data from both ground based sources and satellite sources (the satellite results tend to be cooler), and sent the raw numbers for the past decade to statisticians (who didn't know what the data represented), to find a trend. What did they find? Not only no cooling, but in fact, further warming (or, to them, increasing, as opposed to decreasing, values). Article here, though its AP so its all over the place. One of the leading proponents of this supposed, recent cooling trend, likes to pick 10 years from 1999 to present to show the trend. Well, not only does that trend not exist, but he chooses the highest year on record to start with and STILL is making a bogus claim. And if you start in 1998, or in 2000, the warming trend is actually pretty high. I continue to LOL at these "skeptics" whose theories and data never marry with reality. I really think some people simply don't want to face the issue - they prefer to keep their heads in the sand. You know, just saying this for a thought. The surface of the earth is probably much like a frying pan. Think about it. It will retain heat even if the air temprature cools. When you turn off the stove or the oven, the temprature of what's on it or in it stays the same or actually goes up until it can catch up to the surroundings. And as to the "causes" that's obviously open for debate, so let's not go down that path when I make the point above. It's just a thought meant to discuss, not throw Kaperbole ™ at this.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2009 -> 03:53 PM) Thankfully the media learned its lesson from how the Iraq debacle was sold, so I'm sure this time the anonymous sources actually have really good reasons for staying anonymous. Yea, they want to keep their job.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 02:42 PM) It has nothing to do with my beliefs on Health care. It's a guy who I respected as a journalist who is apparently bending to Fox News' corporate RNC mouth piece mentality. Does he REALLY believe health care reform is bad, or is he walking the corporate line? I dont know anymore. It's amazing that when people go to Fox News they all of a sudden become activists. That's better then what you said originally. But honestly, this sentance can be changed to: It's all the "no-spin all-spin zone" and that's the problem with the "media". There's no integrity left anymore.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 01:26 PM) Man, and I used to like John Stossel. Fox's John Stossel To Rally Against Health Care Reform Makes you wonder if he is there as a "reporter"/Fox News Employee or on his own accord. [mindless drivel] Oh man, I used to like that guy, until he differs from my opinion, now he's just an asshole. [/mindless drivel] How DARE someone disagree with something the great AHB believes in!!! Do you realize how pathetic this makes you look? That's my problem with you posting like an RSS feed of things you do/do not believe in.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 11:03 PM) The Bible as we know it doesn't even say what it was originally meant to say. The translations were butchered to the point that many of the messages have been completely distorted. Taken literally, or picking and choosing, we've lost much of the meaning the writings were meant to convey in the first place. As for the other discussions taking place in this thread regarding the true motive behind the Vaticans welcoming Anglicans into the Catholic Church, isn't this a clear sign of where relgion has failed us, yet again, in the first place? That this is what things have come to? Political motivations, power plays, attempts to bring in more money? This isn't what faith and religion were ever meant to be about, and yet now, it is all it is about. I don't understand how anyone can put up with the Catholic Church, or any of organized religion for that matter. Agree, re: translations. Religion is always about political motivations, power plays, and attempts at more money/people (i.e. power) - humans at its core are one big mistake and that's what religion is.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 03:57 PM) Not really, not in terms of what the money will go to, or in terms of the effect on perception, which is key here. So what about perception? ETA, nevermind, SS said it.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 03:27 PM) While I understand that...some people may not feel that way.... The constant uphill battle to try to figure out what you've done morally wrong and how to be better can be very taxing. Especially for someone who might be more weak-minded. Everyone needs a day to feel like they are ok...and Christianity doesn't allow for that, at least not without consequences. I disagree with that premise as well. You can't pick and choose what you want out of the Bible and make a hill to die on, so to speak. It is equal to the sum of its parts. You can't take what Paul said in Acts forward in the Bible only nor can you take what the book of James in sole disgression. Now you enter Catholicism, Protestant, religion in general and at the end of the day, none of them have it perfect because religion is as imperfect as a human is. You just have to do the best you can.

The Blue Angels are loud. My house will never be the same... until next year this time. Although this year, they are really loud because I think they're flying lower then normal because of the clouds.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 02:29 PM) The money isn't going to the government, its just staying in the company, in that case, as I understand it. Which is more or less the same thing in this specific example.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 11:45 AM) ah, so you predict in another year and a half the Obama numbers will have played out? i don't think there will be any jobs recovery until, at best, 2014. if ever. I think those jobs are gone for good. but lets all hope i'm wrong. They are. There's no manufacturing sector to retrain people for. And, these companies are learning that they can do without the employees termed during this downturn and still turn a nice profit. I keep hearing "GREEN" is what will save us, but that's just wishful thinking at this point.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 09:27 AM) 29.7 in a 25. What do you take me for, a daredevil? Was it raining? I thought I saw that somewhere in this thread. I have heard that the radar guns don't work right in the rain.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 04:32 PM) UPS and FedEx say hi. This comparison is totally not the same. I have seen you use it over and over, and frankly, it's a leap that's illogical. And I do have some experiences in this area.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 17, 2009 -> 03:56 PM) On another board I go to people were defending it. "What's the big deal? They could just go to someone else!" It is a big deal, but they can go get someone else. There's the subtle difference.

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 10:52 PM) How many people have died as a result of Obama's domestic policies? Not a f***ing one. Not one. He's such a peaceful guy.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 08:39 PM) Repeat something enough and people get sick of it. No Blood For Oil!