Y2HH

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:50 PM) Which you consistently claim while never producing a shred of data to support. Since you believe there is no inflation, you won't care if/when you don't get a raise to keep up with it. That's a statement, not a question.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 04:55 PM) The Kuerig machines to have dominated the market and everyone seems to be making k-cups for them now, even places like Gloria Jeans and Dunkin Donuts. Not a fan of k-cup coffee...it doesn't taste brewed properly to me.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 06:49 PM) Thanks. I have been doing Old Fashioneds with Bulleit rye lately which is also way up at 95% rye content but only an 80 proof spirit. I thought I had a line on some 100 proof Rittenhouse Bonded but it fell through. I actually prefer the 80's over the 100's -- those just taste too strong to me. That said, I'm a Kentucky Straight Bourbon drinker, I'm pretty new to the Rye's, so I have no experience with the 100 ryes. One of my favorites (I have some) is Woodford Reserve. My absolute favorite, however, is Pappy Van Winkle's family reserve -- 23 year -- this one happens to be a 95 proof. Not a fan of Scotch, though.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:55 PM) That is about a perfect cocktail. And true to the historic definition of a cocktail = spirits, sugar, water, and bitters. Peychaud's Brandy cocktail (brandy and Paychaud bitters) probably predates the Sazarac ans the Old Fashioned Brandy Cocktail, but it has none of the perfection of either of the others. What is the proof of the Templeton and what is the rye content? One I would lime to try. Templeton is over 90% rye grain, and the remainder is malted barley...so it's rye content is unexpectedly high. It's 80 proof. http://www.templetonrye.com/production/

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 02:15 PM) Just take a look at that Slate article I linked a few posts ago. It's not just Rush but also prominent politicians who are getting to the point of denying the existence of legitimate sexual harassment as a real thing. I picked Rush's name because it was the easiest example of the complete lack of any consequences that will happen if these allegations are proven to be true. I have faith that the truth will come out -- and when it does -- those prominent politicians will answer for it, trust me. The media will assuredly all on assault them on it. And if they won't, the Internet surely will. In the end, the truth will come out, and in the end those that are guilty will pay, even if it means paying by muddying up their own names.

Oh, and I formally apologize to anyone I offended. I know I said I don't care if I offended you (SS) or anyone else, but I actually do care. P

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 02:08 PM) I remain skeptical that if we someone get incontrovertible proof of these claims, Rush will apologize profusely on his air and his credibility will be tarnished. Rush is an idiot, who cares. The only people that listen to him are die hard neo cons that you have no chance in having a decent non-biased conversation with anyway. So let Rush be Rush. Not the power trio from Canada, anyway...they rule.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:47 PM) Really, we've watched the exact opposite happen here already. As more people have come out and said thing which accuse him of stuff, the "They're just doing it for money" volume has turned up. They can turn that volume up to 100%, doesn't matter if it turns out to be false. However, if what they're saying turns out to be true -- and I trust we will find out in time -- it's them that will end up looking dumb.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:50 PM) That is not at all similar to attacking the accuser and disparaging that person in order to deflect their claims. That's iffy...and while it's not the exact same, it IS similar...in either case, both are attempts of character assassination. In the end, if the women turn out to be liars with the past the right wing media is reporting on, then it wasn't the media that assassinated their character, they did it. Same goes for Cain/Liberal minded media. Cain has to know this is part of the game, and let's not pretend these women weren't advised of the same. Come out against a public name and expect this...if it turns out to be untrue, sue them for defamation. However, if you come out against a public official with a spotty past -- rest assured it's coming out. And I don't care if you do it to a democrat or a republican in power.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:32 PM) You're a better mind-reader than jenks. Whether or not this woman is telling the truth, the immediate dismissal of her claims because she's a "gold-digger" or has had a long employment history or has filed for bankruptcy and had a paternity suit is absolutely character assassination. My disgust with the sexist dismissals of women's claims of abuse or harassment and the subsequent attacks on the accusers is not partisan-politically motivated. It's only character assassination if it's not true. Is it true? If so, she assassinated her own character a long time ago...blaming the big bad republican mainstream media for doing it is a lie. That's like me blaming the liberal media for the ongoing character assassination of Cain. Thing is, if Cain did these things, and paid settlements to keep people quiet throughout the years, as the weeks roll on we will find out and get a better picture of the man Cain was/is...and in that same light, it was Cain that assassinated himself...not the liberal media.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:24 PM) I am? If you weren't, why are you so quick to defend the obviously innocent women from the big bad republican smear machine? I believe it was you that said, and the character assassination begins...which is simply you siding with the women because it's republicans they're going up against. I mean, of course it's just you looking out for the little people. Politics has absolutely nothing to do with it. Sell your bulls*** elsewhere...your post defending them is ENTIRELY politically driven. And you know it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:20 PM) No one is wishing that Cain had harmed people. That's a pretty offensive accusation. You sure as hell are. And I don't care if you're offended.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:18 PM) It is literally a he-said, she-said case. We know that there were settlements. Beyond that, there's no real hope for proof or evidence. Then how about you stop hanging him from the f***ing noose, since you have no proof or evidence, no matter how much you WISH there was.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:17 PM) Seriously? You actually expect hard evidence in what is almost by definition a he-said, she-said case? The hardest evidence you're going to get is the fact that there were settlements. Supposedly the accuser yesterday presented sworn statements from 2 of her friends that she told them about the events at the time, but look how convincing that was. Barring video of Cain grabbing some woman's behind showing up on youtube, there is not going to be any hard evidence. So, I guess he's not guilty then. I like your brand of justice, however...a few people accuse someone of something and f*** them, he must be guilty...after all, you don't agree with his politics. Good to see your true colors.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:13 PM) Actual verdicts? How? There aren't going to be charges filed for cases that happened 15 years ago. That's part of why you settle in the first place. I guarantee you we will find out in the weeks to come if this was true or not. How much would you like to bet? Verdicts don't necessarily have to mean "court verdicts", but if there is proof, or evidence, someone will come out with it...and with or without a court of law, we will know if it's true.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 12:50 PM) The over-the-top misogynistic response to this from the conservative talk radio/internet sphere has been more disgusting than the actual allegations. edit: jesus christ the comments on this article: http://www.suntimes.com/8592168-417/sneed-...-month-ago.html If it ends up being true about Cain, we will find out. If it ends up being false -- get this -- we will find out! I know it's tough to wait as it unfolds before we decide to make up our minds. In the end, the truth WILL come out, and then and only then will anyone know for sure. Can't any of you wait for this to play out and get some actual verdicts instead of just throwing your hat into whichever side of the ring you want to win? It's pretty sick some of you actually WANT this to be true about Cain, simply because you don't agree with his politics. Whether he's innocent or not be damned, right? f*** him because he's a Republican. And don't pretend that's not how you feel, because it's apparent, and it's shameful. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Well, so long as it's someone you like, I guess. Nothing like waiting to see who's right and who's wrong here or anything...the media reported nothing but facts on this and we know everything! Personally I've never liked Cain since he started appearing int he public eye, I don't particularly agree with him on much of what I've heard, and his 9/9/9 plan is just...downright flawed. But wishing it's true that he sexually harassed people? I may not like his politics, but wishing he'd have harmed people to keep him out of a presidential race is f***ing sick.

I've been enjoying Old Fashioned's as of late -- made with Templeton Rye whiskey. 1 sugar cube Few dashes of bitters on the sugar cube A very little bit of water or club soda on the sugar cube Muddle the sugar/bitters/water, or club soda Add a nice swath of orange peel (try to mash it/smash it/twist it without ripping it, get the oils in the skin to come out -- or you can muddle it a bit with the sugar) 1-2 shots of Templeton Rye (or any kind of bourbon, doesn't have to be rye) Add ice cubes Mix Garnish with slice of orange and a Maraschino cherry According to many drink historians, it's the definitive (and first) American cocktail ever created.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 08:25 AM) I'd also highly recommend driving the Beartooth pass if you're in that area. There are some incredible hikes in the Beartooths as well. The hike up to Grasshopper glacier can be described as "Highly recommended" if you have a vehicle that can make the first 1/2 of the drive and you can survive a hike at 11,000 feet. Just has to take his time -- anyone not from those areas that isn't acclimated to the elevation should take their time for a few days. Practically anywhere you go in those areas, there is stuff to do/find.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 08:20 AM) Beehive is incredible, btw. I don't know...those geysers don't do much for me...it's kind of blah scenery. It's cool to see the water shoot up but other than that, it's just a bunch of people and bland scenery surrounding.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 08:17 AM) You said that it takes a few hours because of the number of people. That's the kind of thing that would scare me off if I didn't know better. You get a crowd lined up right around Old Faithful that floods in and out right when that geyser goes off, but otherwise, there's a ton of other stuff to do and 2/3 of the crowd sticks right at old faithful. Well, you may have gotten lucky. Last time I went there, there was so many people there that the lot was entirely full, and traffic was in waiting for about a mile down the road that enters. Took almost an hour to park.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 08:08 AM) I would actually disagree with that...it only takes a couple hours to see Old Faithful if you intend to see it a couple times. It gets a crowd, but the parking lots don't fill up, and there's lots of stuff to do right around it. First, the Old Faithful lodge is a gorgeous place to stop and at least take a meal/hit the shops, take a gander at the wooden construction above you while you're doing so, it's incredible. Then you've got the entire upper geyser basin around you to walk through, including Castle and Grand geysers, if you can catch them going they're a big treat also, but they're much more spaced out than Old Faithful. You'll want a few hours in the basin, but you can catch old faithful 2-3 times in a couple hours and still have tons of other stuff to do, not just because of the crowds. You disagree with what? I said that seeing Old Faithful takes a few hours...you then say you disagree with that...and then said it takes a few hours. I never told him to not go there, but he may not be the type of person that likes crowds. I'm the type of person that doesn't want to see super touristy stuff I can look up on the internet, or in magazines, books, etc. because so many people have taken so many pictures of these spots over the years that there's little point in seeing it/paying to see it other than being able to tell people you saw it. I love seeing things that most people will never lay their eyes on...and sure as hell can't just look up on Google for some pictures. Want to see Old Faithful? So do a lot of people. There it is. There are far more interesting/beautiful things to see in those areas aside from things everyone in the known universe has already seen.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 7, 2011 -> 04:28 PM) There are plenty of banks with national/global options that don't charge you though. Customers have to be smarter for what they sign up for, because banks will bleed you dry if you're not careful. I saved probably clsoe to $400-500 in fees by opening up a Schwab account before going abroad, free ATM usage around the world. But I took the time to find that option. There are, however, the nature of that game is often that you have to use the ATM that happens to be where you are. It's not like you're always right by one of their "approved" ATM's. But yes, options exist -- but sometimes people simply can't use them. I have a BOA account because it's really close to my house -- I use it strictly for bill pay, and availability of funds. My Etrade account holds my actual savings/investments. But when I need money from Etrade fast, rather than having to drive to one of the few offices they have, I can wire the money to BOA and have it the next day without having to go far. I rarely use my ATM, which has a daily limit on it just in case -- not to mention I never EVER use my debit card. Anyone that uses a debit card needs to stop, it's just absolutely dumb, and offers you zero advantages. Use a credit card ALWAYS, NEVER a debit card.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 08:00 AM) God damn that sounds like heaven. Add Glacier to your list. Get there while there are still glaciers. I could probably come up with a couple dozen things for you to hit, in and out of the parks, since I've done most of them. Can you start off with a little more of an outline? Glacier is pretty far from there. That's like 400+ miles north.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 05:55 AM) We are planning our summer 2012 trip and will be heading up the Continental Divide camping, backpacking, some hotels and cabins. I am searching for shorter few hour things to do while driving from point a to point b and any tips at the bigger national parks. We have about 4 weeks for this trip. Thank you. Yellow Stone and The Tetons are very close together, so you won't have much of a problem finding things to do between them/around them. If you go to this area in the peak summer times, it'll be absolutely packed, so depending on what your plans are, I'd start making some reservations now so you can get some of the nicer cabins, locations, etc. As for things to do in that area, because of how many people go there, it will easily take a few hours if you want to see Old Faithful. That said, there are a ton of smaller geysers around the area that nobody goes to look at (because they're not called Old Faithful) that you can have some private time at. Rocky Mountain National Park? Is that what you planned on going too? While there is a LOT to do in that area, between there and Wyoming the drive is pretty boring/barren. The town Estes is pretty touristy if that's the sort of thing you are into, but otherwise it's surrounded by hiking trails, campgrounds, etc. Some of the higher elevations can get cold, so always keep that in mind, even in mid summer there can be snow up there. I just went to RMNP a little over a year ago, but it's been years since I've been in the Teton/Yellow area. This summer I'm returning to the Bad Lands/Black Hills in SD.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2011 -> 01:07 PM) It shouldnt, but there are online savings accounts you can use that wont cost you anything. Its all about doing the research. And ATM's are one of the most convenient awesome inventions of all time. They revolutionized electronic banking. The point is, ATM's actually LOWERED the banks expenses, yet they charge you for this and call it a convenience. What they neglect to tell you (which they once were telling people when they first came around) is that convenience is a two way street. They no longer have to keep their banks open as long, their banks aren't nearly as crowded which helps them in multiple ways (less cleanup, less unhappy customers that have to wait in long lines, etc.), and let's not forget they replaced people with machines, people that need insurance, take up office space which they have to rent/clean, etc...all because a computer is doing all that for them. That convenience helps them MORE than it helps you. And they're making you pay for doing them the favor of saving them a LOT of money on all the above things I mentioned. Note, a bank isn't merely a "money storage facility". They're BORROWING your money and using it to lend to other people, who pay THEM an interest rate to borrow YOUR money.