YASNY

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 12:04 PM) Paraphrased: I don't want America to become a 21st Century France (chorus of boos). Still a great country, but not a superpower. Actually, I thought it was a chorus of ooooohs.

It's now official

Fins to the left. Fins to the right.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:56 AM) While I agree there is a difference between a conservative and a Republican, I think McCain is beginning to make it look questionable if conservatives are even a majority in what people like Rush thinks is their own party anymore. The one thing I think we can agree on is that the current state of the Republican party is not good at all, regardless of who anybody thinks is right in the debate. Agreed. The party is fractured. I disagree that's it's questionable if conservatives are a majority. The conservative base was divided between Romney and Huckabee, while McCain swept up all the moderates.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:52 AM) Oh they do, no question about it. It makes me very sad that in the last 8 years, conservatives have become what they hate and are now completely close minded to anybody different with interest in their party, which is perhaps the biggest reason for the fracture in the party right now. There is a difference between a conservative and a Republican. The conservatives are expressing those differences.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:48 AM) It's not that hard to grasp. Conservatives dislike anybody who doesn't agree with them (including moderate members of their own party), and are kicking and screaming at the changes in their party going on right now. As a result, McCain, who is perhaps the biggest beneficiary of these changes, is becoming a target for all conservative political people to attack because he's the face of the change and is making conservatives drop left and right in this campaign. Like liberals don't despise anybody that doesn't agree with them. :rolly

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:41 AM) Big difference. Romney is suspending. Which means he keeps his delegates. Romney could suddenly prove very valuable to a Mike Huckabee trying to become the nominee. If Huckabee can extend his reach somewhat, we could have a kingmaker. He's taking the podium at CPAC now

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:38 AM) With all this HATE for McCain from large portions of the Right... wjy is McCain so hated? Also, why does the right seem to think anyone one step to the left of far right is the devil? I've NEVER understood this hatred. You dont hear people on the far left whole sale ripping apart someone on the right. Yes they might disagree, but you never hear them declair them the devil. To quote the legendary Jack Buck ... "I can't believe what I just saw!"

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:35 AM) LBJ would NEVER cheat on Ladybird! ummmmm ... ok

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:33 AM) oh I just wet myself. lol Seriously, Gore knows the Clintons as well as anyone having worked with them for 8+ years. He knows their slimmyness and problems. I know some would rather see him work around the world, but I would LOVE to see him as Secretary of Energy. He's be the "Anti-Cheney". While Cheney and his chronies pushed pro-oil, Gore would push pro-alternative energy. I actually like that idea. BRB ... going to take my temperature.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:28 AM) Well, at least FDR and Kennedy knew the press would protect them...Clinton had just a BIT more reason to keep it in his pants... Now that you refered to FDR by his initials, and of course JFK was widely used, it reminded me that LBJ was supposed to have some dalliances as well. What's Obama's middle name again?

Infidelity in the White House. Roosevelt. Kennedy. Clinton. Maybe I should switch parties!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:01 AM) Well, considering how long it's been since this team has drafted in the top 10, I don't think anyone could seriously disagree with that. When was the last time this team had a top 10 pick before this year? If memory serves me, it was 1990.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:11 AM) What was funny is I thought buggered had a more sexual meaning. That's in England.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 11:07 AM) Serious anti-US-Israel bias in the article. Not saying he's wrong, but there is plenty fo scary stuff in there, except that it may be in retailation for high oil prices, I like that. Stop their porn until we have Agreed on the bias. It is an intriguing possibility though, and I wouldn't put it past any of them. I still expect us to be at war in Iran before Bush leaves office (if, in fact, he actually does).

Unconfirmed report on FoxNews. Romney to throw in the towel today. Source: Mark? Halperin in a Time politics blog, per FoxNews

Mods --- Please delete the above post. I forgot to include the link (I just happened across it) and now I can't find it to edit it in. If I do, I'll repost. Never mind. Here it is

Internet Cables Cut–Prelude to War or Simply A Warning? February 5, 2008 A single undersea fiber-optic cable carrying internet traffic accidentally being cut once in a year’s time is believable. 5 of them however within the span of only a few days resulting in most of the Middle East being left in the informational dark ages cannot be mere happenstance. The odds are too extreme to even contemplate it being anything but a deliberate act of sabotage, and particularly when Israel and US-occupied Iraq happen to be unaffected by it. As of the moment of this writing, 5 internet cables–buried deep beneath the ocean floor to prevent them being accidentally dredged up by a ships’ anchor–have been cut, preventing most of the Middle East from internet access. The cables provide 90% of the region’s internet service and the countries affected most by this are Egypt, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran. They have since re-routed to older, slower lines and satellites, but overall internet service is slow and in some cases–particularly Iran, there is no internet service whatsoever. The lines–originating in southern Europe and then snaking their way southward to north Africa and then eastward through the Suez Canal and then on to India are the communication, commerce and technology lifelines for these nations. In a world where everything is dependent upon the internet, from government operations to financial markets the devastating effect this disruption could have on these nations is easy to see. In all the media coverage of this event, it was hinted that possibly an anchor from a ship was the guilty culprit. However, shortly thereafter Egypt released a statement to the effect that video footage of the area where the cuts took place showed no surface ship activity for the previous 12 hours and added that these particular lanes are closed to maritime traffic for the express reason of avoiding damage to the cables. Interestingly, none of the stories covering this event mentioned (or even hinted, for that matter) the words ‘foul play’, and this in an age where everything from global warming to bad breath is blamed on Osama Bin Laden and his merry band of Islamic militants. Besides the everyday issues of news and information services, telephone communications have been severely disrupted and financial markets have suffered as much as a 70% loss in trading activity. It is estimated that the earliest the problem will be fixed is the beginning of the 2nd week in February, as it takes several days for repair ships to reach the areas where the cuts took place. As noted earlier, almost as if by some magical coincidence Israel and US-occupied Iraq have not been affected while these other nations are scrambling to get the lights turned back on, something adding even more reason for raised eyebrows amongst skeptical people. And those suspecting foul play have good reason for doing so. Besides the fact that 5 undersea cables are cut within the span of only a few days, there are strategic reasons for ‘interested parties’ to want to see such an event take place. The countries most affected are all major players in the current goings-on in the Middle East where the US and the Jewish state are up to their eyeballs in skullduggery. The gulf countries were recently visited by George Bush who tried–unsuccessfully–to rally them around support for renewed pressure on a recalcitrant Iran, only to be laughed out of the region. In addition, when asked recently by the US to increase oil output in order to lighten the effects of a downward-spiraling economy, the OPEC nations (some of whom were affected by the cable cut) refused. The Gulf countries in particular are heavily involved with Iran in banking issues at a time when Israel and America are trying through sanctions and other pressures to isolate and economically strangulate the Islamic republic by preventing other nations from doing business with her. The Gulf countries are getting nervous about a steadily-declining dollar to which their own economies are directly linked and are now openly talking about following other nations that have linked their own currencies to something less troublesome such as the Euro. Pakistan–the only nuclear-armed Muslim country, recently gave a resounding ‘Hell-no’ to the prospect of US troops operating on its soil. In short, the deliberate cutting of the internet cables can easily be seen as a shot across the bow by the US/Israeli hydra, a form of low-intensity/covert warfare aimed at destabilizing them and making things uncomfortable, as well as reminding them that if they don’t play ball according to the dictates of the New World Order that ‘accidents’ can happen. There are other possibilities as well. Since it is an established fact that the Jewish state plans on eventually absorbing as much of the oil-rich land in that region as possible for herself in the interests of fulfilling the biblical idea of ‘Greater Israel’, the cutting of the cables could very well have been a dry-run operation in monitoring the affected nations and seeing where their weaknesses lie in the event of war. Communications are as vital to a nation fighting a war as is the eyesight of a prizefighter in the boxing ring, and if sand is thrown in his eyes he can easily be defeated by someone half his size and weight. Likewise with tiny Israel, the ‘David Vs Goliath’ who would gain an enormous advantage in disabling the communications abilities of nations she plans to destroy in the same way she destroyed the communications equipment aboard the USS Liberty when she began her murderous attack in 1967. Whatever the case, the fact is–just as President FDR once noted–that ‘nothing in politics happens by accident’ and ‘whatever takes place does so because someone planned it that way’, and with the case of the mysterious cutting of 5 internet cables within the span of only a few days, someone benefited from it all, and, as usual, surprise surprise, it just so happens to be Israel. 2008 By Mark Glenn, Correspondent–American Free Press Newspaper

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 03:24 AM) Your point is, and it gets to the heart of why some people hate Hillary. You *know* why they are married. Name other candidates that you *know* that well? There are many reasons that couples stay together after affairs, and not all of them are running for President. You also have added the quality of the marriage as a reason to vote for or possibly not for someone. At least in the Clinton's case. Within a healthy marriage the partners should be working to help each others career. So at least in this case, they have a very good marriage, even using your theory. Yet, you find fault in that. Perhaps they do have a crappy marriage in some aspects, but even the area that they do well, you're comfortable labeling a negative. And you are not alone in that. As you mentioned other people share that opinion. And repeated enough, it becomes another "fact" about the Clintons that "everybody knows". It's as if she is the only woman in America that has stayed with a husband who cheats. We accept other reasons in ordinary people's lives but in this case it's because she's a lesbian who wants to be President. It's amazing in this race the Family Values GOP had a many times divorced candidate in Rudy G and the Dems have a candidate that kept her marriage together. The candidate that received the most negative about it is the one that chose marriage over divorce. Now it seems the preferred value is divorce. This may signal a major turning point in our attitudes. "Stand By Your Man" "D-I-V-O-R-C-E"

The link

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 11:55 AM) If we judge teams by accomplishments, I have a hard time dismissing the Dolphins. When three or four teams manage a perfect season, hell one team, then we can start dismissing them. And I won't even go towards comparing teams in different sports. That's mental masturbation at its worst. As much as I don't care for the 72 Dolphins annual celebration when the last undefeated team loses, you do have to give them their due. They have done something no other team in the storied history of the NFL has done. No way do I consider them the greatest team in NFL history, but like the man I quoted says, you have to respect the accomplishment.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:43 PM) Stick around. And who do you want going after terrorists, someone ruthless or not? Seriously, that is one thing that actually has me thinking about her. From the confidence and ruthless side, she's the closest to Reagan in this race. Picture any of the four candidates at the Berlin wall and she's the only one I see pulling off the "Tear down this wall" line. I'm not happy with ANY of the candidates. Hillary may be a great lady to socialize with, I don't know. But I don't want that 'person' anywhere near the White House. Ever.

Hillary is a ruthless ... ah hell, I can't do this. I despise the woman too much. You guys have at it.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:23 PM) YAS, seriously, try and find some of his longer speeches, they do say a lot. Problem is the candidates make so many stops in a day that they only have a few minutes wherever they go. And to make matters worse, the more a front runner, the more demands on their time, and the less time they have to say anything. I was surprised by all the candidates in that regard. The best analogy I have is a coach at a pep rally versus the coach meeting with his staff and players. I watch the man talk and listen to what he says. So far, I haven't heard much of substance.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:26 PM) We forget that all the hostages were returned home alive. Ford standing around with a stupid smile and a WIN button to save the economy, and Nixon's Checker Speech. Carter did a lot more good than bad, and set the stage for Reagan. In many ways we needed that transition. Yeah ... he set the stage alright. Reagan said, it won't do for those hostages to be in custody when I take office and and an hour before he took the oath, they were released. 20% interest rates also set the stage for Reagan to revitalize the economy. Carter was a good man, but a disaster as president.