bmags

QUOTE (knightni @ Oct 11, 2008 -> 02:36 AM) The people who are against her, already think that she's incompetent. How will this change their view? The people who are for her, will side with her "soccer mom" family bias in this matter. How will this change their view? The borderline people will look at this and see her as a politician who did a political thing that a lot of politicians do. Is there a politician out there who hasn't used their office for some personal gain? i didn't see this but I disagree with this. the US Attorney firing and this are very big deals. I don't care how this pushes polls nationally, the fact that another person could be in the white house that did the following: Makes everyone follow their exact ideology (loyalty tests when she first became mayor) Fires people for personal reasons (troopergate, US Attorneys) croneyism sickens me to the core. After 8 years of this crap, of the complete politicization of departments that were. not. supposed. to. be. politicized. I can't imagine another woman getting away with this. The worst part, this s*** keeps happening, and all that happens are reports come out saying "Hey, people acted wrongly here" and NOTHING happens to them.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 11, 2008 -> 04:28 AM) That's kind of funny because last night's episode was by far the worst in the show's history. Truth, it was also the first one all my roommates watched. It was terrible timing.

Friday afternoon news cycle.

The thing that I look at...GA went 16 for Bush in 2004, McCain's only up THREE!?!?!

have fun.

ugh, I think it just went from +300 to -170 in like half an hour.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 08:23 PM) I'm going to excerpt virtually this whole TPM post because it's so, um, correct. thank you, I already knew this and read this, but the straw grasping was getting old. and fwiw, the Wall St. Journal also talked about how this was more employee fraud than election fraud.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 07:45 PM) So if this is the case, when we start to rally, we will rally hard, because there will be multiple covers instead of just one per short. Interesting. SS...as I'm trying to wrap my head around this...when people start investing in the funds or stocks in the funds, would that mean the stocks have more money behind them with more covers...And if what I just said is a simple yes or no I'll be shocked.

God, I was so shocked when I heard Russia lost 50% of their value in the market. Then we are at what, a 35% drop now? Jesus.

gulp.

thank you. I just got a new this american life on the economy I plan on throwin on the ipod and listening to today. Thanks NS and SS, I have a lot to learn but, god if there is any good for me is that this all has made the stock market incredibly pertinent and interesting to learn about.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 06:48 PM) I don't necessarily agree with 2/3 of the things you've said...but if hypothetically I did, there's still one big problem you're missing...you can't exactly do a good job of explaining how you're going to be more fiscally responsible and do a better job with the economy than the Democrats and at the same time tell me how good of a job George W. Bush has done, simply because of the record. Either you have to attack the President's earmark record on something other than the stupid earmarks (anyone who can do the slightest bit of math simply scoffs at that) or you cede the economic ground to Obama. They don't have a charismatic fiscal conservative in their bunch right now, the only bright ones they have are social conservatives. All they could've brought out was Fred Thompson and Fred Thompson had absolutely no idea what he was getting into clearly.

How does that happen? Can someone explain to me how you can short sell that much stock that doesn't exist and gain real money from it? If it's too complicated that's fine, but it blows my mind.

Well, I guess my depth perception is super off. I can usually tell home run or pop fly to the outfield. But I'll be damned If I don't think every foul ball is headed my way. But as for the situation at hand, I'm too used to college football where there is pretty much a job to being a fan. A need to make home field as intimidating as possible, and I've found I've taken that into other professional sports. So I probably would've been the people standing up at every situation too and yelling and pumpin my arms up and all that. Seems a little strange after all the big game threads talking abotu how loud and crazy our fans were and then so many posts in this thread laughing at people who were so loud and hyped.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 05:19 PM) And she'd know something about witch hunts I laughed.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 01:56 AM) If you can't see thru your rage enough to realize that, there is no point in discussing that any more. Wow.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 02:29 AM) Todd isn't out giving campaign speeches, Michelle is. That makes her fair game. But yeah, they are giving such a free pass to the Palin kids. Just totally ignoring them. He's out giving interviews. And just how did the media go after her 17 year old daughter, they reported on the press release the McCain campaign put out?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 12:27 AM) Well, because they didn't ask Palin about the market and the economy. How dare they not expose her as if it's her (and the GOP, by default) fault. And therefore, RSO will then fix it because he's "better" then McCain and Palin (but that goes without saying). kap, take a breath, then read it again.

Her husband is, and considering Michelle Obama was dragged through the mud in February I'd say Todd Palin has gotten a pretty free pass. But oh yes, the media is OUT TO GET MCCAIN, they built up his image for 10 years just to tear it down in some cruel trick! edit: oh, and here's your correction, it also ran on the second page of the paper: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09...s-not-a-member/

AP style guide 2008 Party Affiliation: Let relevance be the guide in determining whether to include a political figure's party affiliation in a story. Party affiliation is pointless in some stories, such as an account of a governor accepting a button from a poster child. It will occur naturally in many political stories. For stories between extremes, include party affiliation if readers need it for understanding or are likely to be curious about what it is.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 07:54 PM) Waiting with baited breath for the MSM newscasts tonight to do a story on Messiah being a member of the NEW Party. They were all over Palin being a supposed member of a seccessionist party(false), so I am sure they will follow this story with as much vigor. First, he sought their endorsement and that doesn't make him a member, though it would've given him their votes, which now is considered unconstitutional I believe. Second, do you really think seeking the endorsement of a left leaning group is on the same plane as a group wanting to secede from the United States and whose leader had Hugo Chavez type language about the United States? I assure you it isn't. Obama's move was just a political play to get votes early in his career.

I haven't driven my car in 4 weeks. BUT WINTER IS COMING

This isn't Russia

You think Joe McCain will call West Virginia a bunch of commies now?

I think it's cause by the time that he comes in they already feel committed.