kapkomet

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Aug 10, 2006 -> 04:39 PM) I love how people are discounting record turnout in an August primary. 40% is an amazing turnout number for a primary. The Virginia Primary turnout number was something like one-tenth that. I'm not discounting it, but I'm not playing it up like you seem to be, either. I know this is more your fortee then mine, but I think elements of this are overblown, on both sides.

it was a nytroglycerin compound... that stuff - yikes.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 10, 2006 -> 03:54 PM) Which is exactly why we should be defending them, not restricting them. I am referring here to governmental efforts to restrict freedom in other areas, NOT airline security. Flying on a plane is not a right. Therefore, they can and should restrict it as necessary. What I am saying is, even if terror reign huge in this country at some point, we are that much more obligated to protect every Constitutional freedom we have. Not the opposite, which is the disturbing trend coming from the far right. No, I agree about that... I'm talking strictly about the airlines.

Any good photo editor at a newspaper should know what they are looking at. It's all about the "worst news possible" sells. That's the agenda.

We're so freakin' spoiled, it's unreal. WAKE UP, people. It's these freedoms that people take advantage of.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 10, 2006 -> 03:24 PM) Well, at least in this primary, there was a specific reason to involve them; his opponent had the man casually referred to in some circles as the "First Black President" campaigning for him, and at least in the primary, there was a non-trivial African American voting block, so they were there to help counteract the Big Dog's influence. Bull. Absolutely bull.

See, I don't know. Out of the Dems eligible to vote, about 40% showed up in CT, and 51% of those voted for Lamont. So, that means 16% (or however the math works out, whatever, you'll get my point) voted to remove Joementum from office. It was a smaller percentage then anyone wants us to see, let's put it that way. This is *HUGE* to all the Dems and liberal media because it's a "referendum on George Bush". GET THE f*** OFF OF THAT. It is NOT. But they sure want us to believe it.

Yikes, that was this weekend? That's not good.

Fisk's has to be #1. Guichi's play was spectacular. Maybe one of the best ever - but it was pure luck. Is this on tonight (Thurs) or was it on last night?

Who cares? This story (and offshoots of it) is/(are) getting old. So there's an agenda. Surpirsed? I think not.

You'll be lucky to see 30 at this point. Sometimes I wonder why I chose to have a kid in this screwed up world. I wonder if she'll see adulthood.

Just pass the crap on around, will ya?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 10, 2006 -> 12:01 PM) Wow, I can't believe they actually had their own people out there with them. Geesh. Doesn't surprise me at all. Doesn't everyone see this? Remember, this was initiated by Hezbos - and under the direct order from Iran, in my opinion. This was to test Isreal's resolve as well as to see what their conventional weapon arsenal currently is so that Iran can plan its attack accordingly. Everyone keeps saying it won't happen, but remember, this nutcase wanker from Iran has committed to the world ending within three years now. And I, for one, think he's serious. Isreal is to be destroyed in that three year period, so the time is getting closer to all out war.

ANy candidate that has the reeeeeeeeeeeeeeverends behind him on primary night should have his head examined.

From what I have read elsewhere, this was to happen in the next few DAYS. Something's going to happen at some point soon. It's just a matter of time.

The first interview is to weed out the bad people, or people who don't fit. The second interview is to actually find the two or so people they really want. One thing that gets lost in the interview process, and it's probably the most important part - the second interview is also YOU interviewing THEM to make sure it's a fit for YOU. Boz, not saying it's not here, but for those who are on their first and second and ... XXXX career moves, every time you interview it's CRUCIAL that the company fits you and your longer term goals. Most of the time, we are thinking the other way, what do they think of me, etc. It's just as important, if not moreso, what you think of them and how they will treat you.

I just saw it in the other thread. Should have started there. Look, B-Mac had 3 good starts last season. 3. And everyone does want to annoit him as HERE AND NOW. I think he's ALMOST ready to step in, but our starting 5 is probably our best starting 5 right now. Otherwise, B-Mac would be there. He IS our future, though, assuming he's here long enough for it to happen.

QUOTE(TitoMB345 @ Aug 9, 2006 -> 10:48 PM) Yes, the McCarthy quote I think we can all agree is complete bulls***. In no WAY was McCarthy bad or even "not good" he was purely dominate. It was a very stupid thing for Ozzie to say. someone link me or quote me what he said about B-Mac, because I missed it.

Now that was good.

So I guess the people that come back and tell the good stories are brainwashed? I have family that came back and told me a lot. No, it's not all pretty, but there's places it's not bad, either.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Aug 9, 2006 -> 04:31 PM) The party clearly abandoned her. But that's hardly the people of her district. It was just a primary. Yea, the party did abandon her, funny enough.

I do want to say - I'm not saying discuss ways to improve - but the constant barrage of FIRE XXXXX and BENCH XXXXXXX and pitch XXXXXX only XXXX situations... meh. You people DO NOT KNOW what's going on in the clubhouse. And I'd kindly like to ask that you quit acting like you do. Discuss? Hell yea, that's what we're here for. Obsess and say the same thing 100's of times over and over? Meh. It gets old. I appreciate everyone's right to an opinion, but you shouldn't let every single damn game get to you like it's the end of the world. Cause it's not. Enjoy life.

The real problem is too many people around here take this WAAAAAAAAAY too seriously... at least on the board. It's a game, a pasttime, entertainment, and something we all should enjoy, not obsess about everytime someone on the field does something wrong. Fire XXXXXX because he XXXXXXX TONIGHT... please. It shows ignorance. Do XXXXXX because XXXXXXX TONIGHT, again, ignorance. On the other hand, XXXXXXXX, WOOOOOOOOOT, they won TONIGHT!!!! is also extreme to the other side, although that's many times more tongue in cheek to dismiss the constant barrage of negativity. The point is you're supposed to enjoy the game, and take it for what it is, not post 85 posts a day about how bad the team sucks and bench and fire every player who doesn't do EXACTLY what you think they should in a given situation. It would tell me that your life hinges on a baseball team - and there's a hell of a lot more to life then that.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2006 -> 01:31 AM) Cynthia McKinney Runoff tonight also... 20% reporting: Cynthia McKinney 892 26% Hank Johnson 2,505 74% WOoooo... Wait a minute, nevermind.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 8, 2006 -> 05:06 PM) But the original posts that I was replying to were talking about media bias. I asked for evidence that the article in question contained such bias. There appears to be none. No, not in the articles themselves, but CERTAINLY on what is CHOSEN to be reported on, there's bias.