bmags

stonewall jackson.

Aldon Smith is awesome.

Grants memoir was truly great.

pop punk is great.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 03:27 AM) i was trying to make a point and got carried away. I know...i just think the "you shouldn't worry about how much taxes are b/c it's not that much" thing is just way too personal. But perhaps my ways are way too wonky.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 02:17 AM) BTW I've gradually worked into the tax brackets where I really start to feel the pinch and here's my opinion on that... the truth is, if your taxes are killing your finances or otherwise putting a painful dent in your budget, you really suck at managing finances. Some people who make $120k or so need a reality check on what's essential to their life and what's really going to hurt if they didn't have it. They aren't as rich as they like to think they are but they probably live in a neighborhood in the suburbs next to someone who makes $1M or whatever, and their kids go to the same school, etc. Stuff that is essential to virtually everyone and most people struggle to pay month to month (in this order): Mortgage Car Payment Groceries Utilities Insurance (health, auto, homeowners etc) Phone/Internet/Cable Home security system (if it can be afforded) Stuff that some yuppies in my tax bracket think falls into the above category but the vast majority of people see as a luxury: Sending kids to private school Putting a significant amount into savings every month (like 20%. This is NOT an expense) 529 for kids' college Landscaper and/or maid Annual vacation Home improvement You get the idea but it's always like "if my taxes go up (like... a couple of percent) I won't be able to go to Europe next year while I do all these other things! Seriously now. None are as entitled as those who were born into privilege. Tell that to my parents 15 years ago when they were working just as hard but making 1/4 that, they'd have LOVED to have a problem like that. I think you are getting muddled down in an unwinnable argument. This was a little too micro.

what the hell are the numbers in this thread. Caulfield man, you throw like a billion arguments at once. I'll respond to NS72, i don't think Obama has to attack boehner or cooperate with boehner, I think obama should just get his damn fed appointments thru and focus on foreign policy.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 01:39 PM) I still actually don't mind the Senate having a gigantic that must be overcome for the biggest of the biggest of legislation on principle...I'd actually say that is somewhat consistent with the originalist idea of the Senate as a place where things go to slow down...but I despise the current version of the filibuster...where everything other than naming a post office is subject to it, the Senate can't get anything done, and there is zero effort required from the minority to use it. I understand they wanted the senate to cool down but i also understand they were giving a bunch of power to a largely illiterate and incredibly uneducated population. Even if i'm convinced that the bicameral legislature is fantastic, then i'd say that in itself is a huge check, and we don't need a gigantic supermajority in the second stage just to be a check on the first. If it's easier to create a bad idea, it's also easier to repeal it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 06:35 PM) See my post in the other thread. Boehner has said nothing of the sort - that was McConnell. And at this point, I am not so sur they belong that/close together. I think another dynamic will play out here. See, if the GOP, or Obama for that matter, try the fighting route here, not only will they lose every effort, but they will lose support from a frustrated public who wanted something done. No one wins if these people just yell at each other over a brick wall, including them. Right, Boehner said "no compromise"

I think they should make a plan to phase out the filibuster at a date set in the future where they won't know what party's in power. (10 years.)

haha, that made my night.

pinky and the brain?

let's watch all the spending cuts!

QUOTE (danman31 @ Nov 1, 2010 -> 03:04 AM) Sure. I heard a rumor that he complained about it, but I haven't heard anything since so it's probably not true. Definitely a reasonable point. I find that ridiculous. It's completely blaming the victim, and not only are you asking him to stand up to his employer, but a employer of celebrity status in one of the most hyper-masculine contexts we can imagine.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 28, 2010 -> 07:32 PM) link This whole "upper/lower body injury" thing in the NHL is pretty damn annoying. agreed. Even though they said it's not serious I'm still deeply cynical about injuries as vague as this. As a fan, the more mysterious quite often leads to more serious. BUT, I'm hoping this is just precautionary as it's early and they clearly need him the whole season.

damn.

Yeah that was a good one.

word...go mizzou.

QUOTE (WilliamTell @ Oct 29, 2010 -> 04:59 AM) But outside of 2004 he probably was always in the top 5 easily, maybe even the top 3. His four years from 2005-2008 gave him the longevity of a premiere whipping boy on this site. I remember when I first came on here Jose Valentin was a whipping boy in 2004. I'll say this, when Uribe took over 3rd base in 2008 I think a lot of people started to appreciate him, 1 because he did a phenomenal job, 2 because we knew it was his last year. I used to b**** about Juan Uribe a lot, they way you b**** about any player, but he was also one of my favorite players of the decade.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 27, 2010 -> 01:00 AM) but when I do say something that's perfectly honest and in black and white, I'm the hypocrite? Have a nice day! Cheers, Kap yes. Thinking you are being honest about something that's your opinion does not mean you cannot be defined as a hypocrite. I didn't doubt you were being sincere.

Jermaine Dye was pretty bad in april every season before coming to the sox. He had a few good ones.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 27, 2010 -> 01:22 AM) No, certain people know more then everyone, everywhere about everything, even in technical things they have no experience in. It's tiresome and why this place sucks now, and this last little bit of an exchange illustrates it perfectly moreso then the veiled stuff everywhere else in this forum. Certain people don't want to learn, cetain people always want to be right to the point of vomiting crap and seeing what sticks. But I, for one, do appreciate the nuances and experience you're trying to bring out here. kap, this is the most hypocritical bulls*** i've ever read.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 11:04 PM) I'm not comparing football from 2010 to 1970. I'm saying if Boise is going to cry about being left out of the title game then they need to give up their demands and start playing top tier teams on the road. Go play Alabama and not ask for a return date. Or maybe do a 2 for 1 series with them. So then they would have a stronger argument if they win those games and still get left out. And if they are good then they'll win those regular season games and still make the money by going to a BCS bowl game. If they lose then they really dont belong to be there in the first place. Imagine if Notre Dame decided to join C-USA. ND gets 8 easy conference games, schedules 2 MAC teams, keeps Michigan and then adds an mid level BCS team like Pitt to their yearly schedule. People would be ripping them apart for that. But since it's Boise, its ok. You are making all the points I would make. BUt really we are talking about boise when we should be talking about Mizzou, everyone. Come on. They're great. TJ Moe. I digress.

I'm fine with stoops looking like an idiot.

Mizzou #7... If we get out of nebraska alive...big things bros.