bmags

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 12, 2009 -> 09:18 PM) There is a huge differnce between being partisan in the process and then not going against the DIRECT law that is written. Of course he can't sign it, it's VERY f***ing black and white in their law. This vote valid? For Coleman? Naaah. Looks like they checked two boxes. For Franken? OK, looks good, it was just an accident and they INTENDED to vote for Franken! Yes. That's what's happening. Do you remember all those sample controversial ballots that balta posted on here that we all guessed spiritedly on? They were pretty much all thrown out, including that check for franken, but write-in for lizard people, or anything where two boxes were filled in, like the one that said no. So how is that happening? The secretary of state and governor could sign a provisional certification to seat Franken while the legal challenges are done.

democrat secretary of state Ritchie who has muscled every election official into fixing the votes for Franken is being so partisan now as to refuse to certify Franken's election according to the law! "Minnesota law is very clear on when a certificate of election can be issued. Neither the governor nor I may sign a certificate of election in the U.S. Senate race until all election contests have reached a final determination. Even if the governor issues a certificate of election prior to the conclusion of the contest phase, I will not sign it."

Or just that Gupta would be a great communicator as Surgeon General.

I mean, we knew something was going to happen. All we were hearing in Sept. and Nov is how if something big doesn't happen soon the two state solution is dead in the water. Really, the Palestinians had their best shot with Olmert. Now, a total hawk is going to be elected, and there will for sure be no peace accords. Granted, his career was over, which allowed him a certain candidness, but he advised giving back land won in the war. You certainly won't get this if Netanyahu wins again.

I blame Joe the plumber

BS, Your avatar isn't showing up for me...

not much more to discuss on it since we missed the initial wave. They are both bombing the crap out of each other. It's not like RU-GA where there were concerns the Russians could keep moving north.

and wouldn't you want to make that man the face of your political party

has anyone seen let the right one in?

keep it up, this is hilarious.

LOL, accusing us of ignoring the facts

KW in the tabloid tribune today brushed aside the JG rumors, for what its worth.

happy its back!

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 6, 2009 -> 10:43 PM) I do like the use of applied statistics and web site design. I also like an advanced artificial intelligence algorithms written by collegues of mine, but that doesn't mean they are a go to source for everything. WSJ factless editorials, on the other hand...gold

You've said that you like 538.com, that's why I used it. It's certainly less biased and more thought out than the editorial section of the wall street journal.

they've been reporting falsities. Continue using them.

thanks Bsqwert

QUOTE (chwhtsox @ Jan 6, 2009 -> 10:13 PM) I can't find the entry form, anyone got a link? yeah me neither. I just registered at the site thinking I'd get an email. but I forgot that goes to mlb.com and anyways I couldn't find it on the site. nothing like tricking people!

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/01/did...their-fact.html

Well, being a student, I signed up.

When i worked at the copy desk, I tried to put as many double entendres as I could. Only once did they yell at me. And by yell of course I mean just asked me to change it. I was very proud of my time at the copy desk.

my TPM obligatory, pro Obama copy paste. per TPM blog (talkingpointsmemo.com): And from a career intel professional ... I have 29 years of experience in the intel business both in government and as a consultant / contractor to the government. I recently retired after those 29 years as a Navy Captain (Intel). I have served with many in the "national intel community" and served on the WMD commission in 2004-05. This is my cred, now for my comment. I think there is a lot more here than is being said. I believe that Feinstein did not want someone like Panetta who has a large and independent power base and network. If you get a career guy they are a lot easier to isolate and move around. Panetta has been around for a long time and has his own network. I actually think that it is a good choice. He knows how intelligence needs to be presented to the President - that is the critical issue here. I do not discount the notion that many in the CIA feel slighted by the creation of the DNI and not being the "premier" agency anymore, at least when one looks at the totem pole. But if you look at the PDB more than 80% of the product still originates from the DI. It is the gold standard of intelligence agencies, both here and abroad. As a old colleague once said to me: there are a lot of jewels in the crown of the United States government but there are only a few large critical ones: CIA DI, NASA, NIH, State; that is where the intellectual might of the government is. The issue is not intell guy or non-intell guy. The big issue for Blair and Panetta is strategic or tactical orientation. We are fighting two wars and the warfighter always screams they don't have enough intel or enough of anything for that matter. The dice are so loaded for support to the warfighter that critical strategic intelligence for the President and other senior leaders goes wanting due to time constraints on collection assets. We need a significant re-orientation away from tactical support by CIA and other National agencies and back to their primary mission - direct intelligence support to the President. The last 15 years have seen an explosion of tactical intelligence capability with the advent of UAVs (which DoD fought against for so long due to the fighter pilot mentality). National systems need to be re-oriented to national priorities and away from tactical or operational desires of the warfighter. I think the Panetta selection is another indication of the change coming. I was concerned that the selection of Jones as National Security Advisor and Blair as DNI underscored the great concern that I have about the militarization of intelligence. The selection of Panetta, with a much wider and deeper power base than either of them, makes me hopeful in this regard. Panetta is a skilled operator, he knows how to get things done. He knows how to get a budget approved and to make the wheels of government work. He will be a force - both in the Administration and on the Hill -- much larger than any career guy could be. This is good. It gives the CIA the opportunity to re-create itself within the current structure.

QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 3, 2009 -> 10:50 PM) OK fellow music geeks, I need your help. In the trailer for 'Revolutionary Road', the song is "Wild Is The Wind" originally done by Nina Simone. Many people have done versions of it, who did the one in this trailer? If you look up the film's soundtrack, the song is not listed. The voice is so familiar. http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/revol...ry-road/trailer While I have a strong feeling I'm incorrect, I feel like it is Antony from Antony and the Johnsons.

To be fair, the speed of pryor was a huge help in negating the texas pass rush. He got out of many sacks that, at least Boeckman, but most QBs wouldn't avoid.

Paul had by far the best use of internet fundraising. I doubt that was an 08 fad. It's clearly going to be the future of political fundraising, they'd be foolish to ignore it.