Y2HH

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 01:09 PM) I'm not a Mets fan, how dare you sir I gotta change my user name to MSF Wow, this entire time I've read that as METSoxFan. :/ Sorry about that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 01:00 PM) And also because...they legally can't strike for other reasons. I get that, but even if they could they wouldn't...this was about money, and the rest of the reasons were used to cover for that. Otherwise, they wouldn't have compromised on one the major issues, such as class size, which is what happened. Shows they didn't care about class size, and it was merely used as a bargaining chip.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 01:05 PM) The tax cuts Obama passed helped middle income families and he did end the Iraq war. Obama didn't pass any tax cuts...he simply extended Bush's tax cuts...TWICE.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 01:01 PM) So Y2HH, what does Romney and the GOP offer that you think is a better alternative? I'd love to see what Romney's secret plan to improve the economy is if you know what it is. Romney certainly isn't running on his record as Governor, hardly ever mentions it all, wonder why... I don't think Romney/GOP offer a better alternative. I don't think Romney is a very good candidate, nor do I think he'd make a very good president. But that still doesn't mean I agree with the Obama administration blaming the previous administration -- still -- after four years of continuing just about every policy that former administration put in place. If you want to blame the previous administration, fine...I'm ok with that. But then don't go and extend everything that terrible administration did...which is pretty much exactly what Obama has done. People will blame congress, the senate, or whatever...but how about we blame a spineless president that keeps on signing extensions to all of these wars/tax cuts, DESPITE blaming them for all of our ills? And I really dislike disrespecting the office of the President, including Obama...so I don't take it lightly when I call him spineless for some of the moves he made. I think Obama has surrounded himself with a lot of really terrible people, and they're convincing him to do these things...but that doesn't exonerate him in that he's still the one signing his name on the line.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 01:00 PM) how dare a campaign use catchy bumper-sticker propaganda! (just so you know, it's been happening ever since the advent of elections) Did you just reply to yourself? That's paradoxical.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 12:55 PM) to be fair, is Romney running on his? (universal, mandated health care - gay rights - and pro choice) Nope, he's not either. But that doesn't discount the fact that Obama is doing exactly what Metsoxfan is doing for him right now...blaming everything on Bush, nothing on Clinton, and nothing on himself, DESPITE the *FACT* that Obama has taken everything Bush did, and continued or extended it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 12:48 PM) Like I said, not running on their own record at all. Also every thing he said is complete nonsense to boot.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 12:46 PM) So let's go back to the party that actually got us in this mess to begin with...it took Bush and the GOP 8 years to skullf**k our economy with two wars, deregulation, massive deficit spending and tax cuts for the wealthy. You ain't gonna fix that in one term, I have no doubt we'll start seeing the economy grow stronger in the coming years if we stick with Obama and if the GOP act like adults and work with the President instead of c**kblocking his every move. That's a pretty simplistic view...and it's not based on reality, either. Every last thing you mentioned there, Obama took the ball and ran with it...but you conveniently ignore that, because otherwise you'd have no argument at all. And deregulation started under Clinton, not Bush, so that's dismissed. Let's see: All the wars you speak of were continued. The tax cuts you speak of...were extended...TWICE. Your entire argument is baseless. Try harder next time.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 12:39 PM) I don't think it was a red herring or anything like it - I think they wanted all those things. Well sure, the people saying it wasn't about money were being false. Money was a big part of it. But I know enough teachers to know that it wasn't all of it. This picture some people are painting that all these teachers just wanted more money is as false as the idea that money wasn't a real concern. People don't teach to make boatloads of cash. Basically, I was responding to this type of thing... Which, as I said, is just as false as saying it wasn't about money. I don't agree with what he said about the teachers not caring about the kids learning at all...but I also believe that if they had gotten raises, they never would have went on strike for the other things, because they weren't the important factors of the strike...they were simply used as additional bargaining chips.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 12:27 PM) so i'm not trying to screw you here Y2HH, i actually like you even though we disagree on everything but i was banned a week and a half ago for saying "your head is up your ass" mods, why is this post different? I don't think I insulted 'him' per-say, as much as his post. I think he used my example, which was personal, to take a shot at the hyperbolic talking points in the news right now...which is why I called it dumb. ...and Lostfan probably hasn't read it yet. He suspends me once a week. And we don't disagree on everything, either...you'd probably be surprised how much we agree on.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 11:05 AM) That was a big part of it of course, yes. I don't think anyone has said otherwise. But looking at the facts of all the things they were contesting, I think it is clear they wanted more than just that. People would love it to be simple, though. I think the point is, and the point I was trying to make, that while these other things would be nice...it wasn't their primary goal. IMO, it was subterfuge at it's best...or worst, depending on your view of this.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 10:13 AM) I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. And the sarcastic hits just keep on coming.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 09:30 AM) Couple of years =/= a lifetime. Don't let reality get in the way of his fantasy. He needed to make a point...though he failed in every way to do so.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 10:48 AM) I think if you forced people to find their own housing you'd be surprised that they'll find it, either on their own or with other family members. I'm not sure why it ever became societies responsibility to take care of someone for life. Your self and your family should be one and two on that list, and there are a number of charitable organizations out there too. In either case, something needs to be done. Phase it out if you must, but this nanny state mentality which is growing and growing is simply not sustainable. I'm sure in the next decade taxes will be raised and the economy will continue to be stagnant and more and more people will stop becoming self-sufficient and instead rely on the government. Nearly 50% of people in this country think that way. That's f***ing sad. Judging by their posts, even THEY think that way. They have this notion that the money will never run dry, only it already has, and this point we're playing a game of kick the can down the road. Our debt continues to grow, at an alarming pace, with no end in sight. To them, that debt is just a fantasy number...it doesn't matter. Only it does matter, whether they like it or not.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 10:05 AM) NPR reported this morning that those conditions were not met. And considering the strike is over, I think it's fair to say that the teachers in front of the TVs who said they were striking because of class conditions, were really just saying that because they knew it was their most sympathetic point. But clearly they were striking for their pay packages and evaluations. This was the point I made yesterday, but I was called stupid/insane for making it. ...only happens that yes, I was right. It was nothing more that what you said.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 09:25 AM) And by that standard, a person who took "A couple of years" to get their lives together and pull their family out of poverty would be "abusing the system". When it's someone you know, "it's always different". This is just so stupid, the only response it deserves is this one. Next time, just don't click reply. You had nothing of worth to add to the conversation with this post. It was THAT dumb.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 10:33 AM) So when you triple the amount of homeless in the country you'll finally be happy. And if we keep going the way we're going, they'll all end up homeless anyway... Is that a good solution? We've been kicking the can down the road for far too long. Eventually, it will come to an end. Something has to be done in either case. Balta is doing nothing but talking nonsense as if the way we are headed is a great direction. Eventually the money is going to run out (it already has, hence deficit spending/growing debt), and when the borrowing dries up (on our way), what happens to these people when the government has nothing left to give them? In either case, the outcome ends up being the same...but let's not talk about that, right? I've already conceded Balta lives on fantasy island, where the money will never run out, despite the fact that I know he's smarter than that. Fantasy Island aside, how about we discuss the reality of the situation?

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 04:01 PM) Has the occupy movement accomplished anything? Are these people lunatics or OK? No, they've accomplished nothing, other than costing taxpayers additional money to clean up the messes they've left behind. While I think their original intention was noble, and I'm glad to live in a country where this type of protest is allowed, their message was lost because they lacked organization...and thus lacked a message. Meanwhile, our current government pumped ANOTHER round of "quantitive easing" into the economy by flooding banks with more cash, so they could lend it out to citizens that need it (which they probably won't do). So, in response to the Occupy Movement, our government does what? Gives the rich bankers even more money to play with. Wasn't the entire point of the Occupy Movement supposed to bring focus on the other 99%? So much for that... Our government has no idea what it's doing anymore...and that goes for both sides that make up the vast majority of the whole.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 04:54 AM) I guess you're right, funding for the CPS is completely static. My mistake. Taxes aren't static, either. So your right, your mistake.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 19, 2012 -> 04:53 AM) No no no, his father was a hard-working man just struggling to get by and down on his luck. People like him deserve a helping hand in hard times, it's those other people, those welfare queens that are stealing our hard-earned money. Well...what you just said is partially true. I can't speak for Mitt, but when people use welfare according to it's actual intention, I have absolutely NO issue with it. As a matter of fact, I'm glad it exists for that purpose. Mitt's father used welfare for it's intended purpose...to help get him back on his feet. Growing up, my best friends mother did the same. He was on welfare for quite a few years when we were kids, eventually, his mother got a good enough job to live without it, and went back to college later in her life (in her late 40's). In this instance, the system worked as intended. She was able bodied and did something about it, despite having 2 kids and being a single mother throughout the entire time. I still hang out with him to this day, over 25 years later. Welfare queens, as you put it, are abusing the system, and part of this isn't even their own fault. Modern politicians (on both sides) helped foster this environment for them...because they're not using the system to get back on their feet...they're using it to continue being lazy. And lazy people tend to raise lazy kids who churn the system. It's a problem our system helped create, unfortunately...so I don't agree with Mitt in that this is some sort of democratic problem, either.

Never doubted Reed for a second!

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 09:21 PM) That was right down the middle at 91. Reed frightens me.

QUOTE (Brian @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 07:23 PM) My bad, thought first was open...oh, it was It was. Which is why pitching to him was so smart.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 04:46 PM) Chicago-livers: How would you rate Sprint in terms of chicago coverage. I know we've asked this before but I couldn't find it on the googlesearch of soxtalk. I live in Logan Square, and have a great deal on AT&T. However, I never get service in my house, so I need to switch. I would be more inclined to Sprint, but if they don't have a good reputation then Verizon it is. http://opensignal.com/