NorthSideSox72

I love these ads. I think they are hilarious. It takes an inaccurate stereotype, and breaks it down via humor. Seems pretty effective to me.

Weird. You have to be of a certain age to purchase or own a gun, so, you'd think you'd also have a minimum age for a FOID card.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ May 14, 2007 -> 12:49 PM) Later on this summer I'm going to both Seattle & Vancouver and I was going to see if there are any must see attractions (or things that I must do when there). And yes, I will be catching a Mariners game so I will definitely be seeing Safeco field. My wife is in Vancouver this week for some kind of conference. When she returns, I'll send you some info.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2007 -> 08:19 AM) THIS IS OUR UPDATE ROSTER AS OF THIS MOMENT BOLD is in italics is OUT unmarked means we don't know. We do have room for a couple more people, as some people have had a change of plans and cannot be here anymore. Please let me know if there are any new people who want to play! chisoxfn 23 Wherever Southsider 33 Whereever Greg Pratt 18 P, 1B, 2B Kapkomet Wherever Shipps Wherever JDDirtySox 27 SS, OF Joeynach 2B, SS, 3B FlashTizzle 22 2B, SS, 3B NorthsideSox72 1B, 2B, 3B, P Reddy 20 CF, 2B, SS Hangar18 30 2B, C RibbieRubarb 35 Infield, C elamin 22 2B, 3B Hangar18 Friend 30 3B TitoMB345 18 1B, LF TheWood Need Info RobinVentura23 Need Info Aboz56 25 Wherever Listen folks... do you really want us to go out there and get our butts kicked by WSI, because we don't even have 10 players? Time to step up! Flash, I'm calling your ass out. Are you in or what?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 17, 2007 -> 06:07 AM) REvenue for the government = straight profit, because the government has no expense against the collection of the gas tax. I disagree with that view, but I understand what you are saying.

Birmingham wins 6-4 Whisler struggles but wins (6 IP, 7 H, 4 ER, 3 BB, 4 K) Dewon Day: 1 IP, 1 BB, 3 K, no hits or runs Getz 2-4, 2 2B, RBI Lucy 2-4, 2B Adding more shortly... Charlotte wins 7-5 Thome 1-3, 2B, 3 RBI, 2 BB Hall 0-4 Anderson 0-4 Fields 1-4, 2-run HR Broadway wins it (5.2 IP, 6 H, 3 ER, 3 BB, 1 K) W-S loses to S, 8-5 Starter was Richard, no decision (6 IP, 9 H, 3 ER, 3 BB, 3 K) Loser was Bakker (1 IP, 3 H, 2 ER, 2 BB) Ricks playing C, was 2-3, 2B, 2 RBI (listed as a 2nd baseman) Schnurstein hits his 21st double (wow), 2-5, dude is hitting .325 with a 1.070 OPS Who is this Micah Schnurstein kid? Looks like he was demoted from AA last year to W-S, which seems weird. He is hitting a ton. Kannapolis beats Lexington 6-2 De Los Santos starts, no decision (4 IP, 4 H, 2 ER, 5 BB, 5 K) Perez with the W in relief (2 IP, 2 H, 2 K, 0 R) Sharp 3-4 Cruz 1-3, 2 RBI, 3B Gomes 2-3, RBI, BB

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ May 16, 2007 -> 02:46 PM) I know I'm retired and all, but potatoes are "good for you" like driving a 60 mpg car is "good for the environment"... Couldn't stay away long, could you?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 16, 2007 -> 04:14 PM) Loosely held, the "big oil" companies make about .08 to .12 cents on refining gas. What's the federal tax on gas again? Ummm hmmm. And I just re-read my comments - I should have said that they make more on GASOLINE then the oil companies do, not oil itself. You are comparing REVENUE for the government to PROFIT for the company, so I don't think that's a fair comparison. You would want to compare oil company profits on oil production (possibly including refinement for other purposes than gasoline, like plastics or commercial oils), to the net amount the government makes AFTER pegged purposes for that revenue (specific amounts for transit and what not). That would be a profit vs profit comparison. Or, just go on revenue - oil company revenue versus tax revenue on the given product set. Those are like-for-like comparisons.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 16, 2007 -> 01:40 PM) The government makes a hell of a lot of money off of the oil... WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more then "big oil" ever does. Do you think that could just possibly leave these idiots to drag their feet on real alternative energy? I have a very hard time believing that the government makes more money on oil than oil companies do. Do you have any stats on this? And are you comparing revenue and revenue, or profit and net gain, or what? Just curious what makes you think that is the case.

That quote rocks.

QUOTE(Soxy @ May 16, 2007 -> 12:21 PM) Preach it! I wish some candidate would talk about this on the campaign trail. Dangerous topic for candidates. For one, previous attempts to "fix" it (which actually was just propping it up financially) have failed, so it looks like a losing effort. Also, this country is not used to using the trains that way, and many people won't see the benefit. The only way I can see using it as a campaign piece is just a small mention among energy policy statements, and to achieve anything with it, you'll need to essentially tear it apart and just about start over. I hope these things happen, but I have little faith.

Its a shame our national rail system sucks so bad. We need to take some notes from Europe. Some individual cities have good systems, but Amtrak is a mess and a half. With all the added pain in the ass of air travel, and high gas prices, Amtrak should be booming, but isn't. Now is the time to get that system working efficiently and intelligently. For intercity travel, particularly regionally, it should be a main source of travel (Acela does that, but its the only one that works at all right now).

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ May 16, 2007 -> 11:32 AM) A german shepard is maybe half the size of a Wolfhound - I was laughing at the thought of a dog the size of Wolfhound trying to get on board a plane. Are they that big? Wow. I didn't realize there would be a dog twice the size of a shepard. Then again, I know almost nothing about dogs.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ May 15, 2007 -> 10:07 AM) LMAO at the idea of an Irish Wolfhound on a plane. Pooka would be more spooked by the other dogs rather than the fireworks. He'd also be too busy whoring himself out to score treats and belly rubs. Laugh, but I sat next to a German Sheppard on a flight a few weeks ago. He was a rescue dog, and allowed to fly in the cabin. Very well behaved.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 16, 2007 -> 10:06 AM) Ugh, I can't stand estimates like this, because they're so bloody misleading. The same thing happens with ANWR. Yes, 4.6 billion barrels of oil would be enough to power the U.S. in its entirety for a few months. But, that is if all of that oil could be pumped out within a few months. Sadly, that simply can't happen. What is a lot more likely is that a lot of money will be spent over the next 10 years developing these fields and overall they'll produce something on the order of a few hundred thousand barrels of oil per day. In reality, this is basically just a drop in the bucket. The output of these fields won't even be enough to offset the decrease in production of Mexico now that mexico's largest oil field in the Gulf has peaked. It won't even be enough to offset the growth of U.S. energy demand over 1 year (depending on how much the price goes up). If you start talking about not drilling here, not drilling in ANWR, and not drilling in the rocky mountain front region, you're talking about sacrificing maybe 1% of the U.S.'s oil consumption. The simple fact is, while these reservoirs sound big, they are microscopic compared with even the growth of U.S. energy demand, let alone the total bulk energy demand. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Alaska is no solution at all. Getting us further off oil to reduce demand is the only real option.

QUOTE(Markbilliards @ May 15, 2007 -> 09:06 PM) Why was Thome pinch hit for in the 9th with bases loaded? Please tell me he was taking it easy and didn't get hurt more. Wow, I didn't notice that, I'm curious now myself. Seperately... is Corwin Malone done now?

QUOTE(Cknolls @ May 15, 2007 -> 01:12 PM) http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/05/13/rap...ion-and-murder/ When will BIG AL have a say so about this?...... Jesse? 1. As we've established here, no one on this board gives a crap what Al or Jesse say anyway. 2. What on earth does this disgusting crime have to do with them? Why should they comment? Because the killers happen to be black and the victims happen to be white? If some liberal posters here are accused of being Bush-obsessed, then you sir are Al and Jesse-obsessed.

Has anyone here read Blackwater? The writer has a clear left-leaning bias that adds too much political glare (that part can be ignored), but if you look at the actual facts and quotes... wow. Scary stuff.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ May 14, 2007 -> 02:09 PM) Now any of you like me who have facebook (which based on the age of most on the boards is the majority I've assumed) have seen the utter bulls*** threads/groups/events about not buying gas on May 15th in protest of gas prices. Now to me, this is THE dumbest thing I've ever seen in terms of a "protest". Do these losers REALLY think buying gas on the 14th or 16th instead of the 15th and still giving their money to the gas companies will make a difference? The ignorance of this whole protest is astonishing to me, not to mention the fact that nobody purchases gas more than on 2 days a week, thus odds are you wouldn't buy gas on May 15th even if you had no idea about this protest. If you want gas prices to change, tell your state to quit taxing the hell out of it and forcing the individual gas stations to sell the stuff at several percent above market value in additon to the taxes. And if you want a real protest, get a big thing where a lot of people spend a week walking/biking/using public transportation to get around. That way, people eliminate a gas cycle and then the oil tycoons ACTUALLY lose something. /rant against ignorance ends here That bolded part would have no positive result, and a bunch of negatives. It would result in less money for all types of transit, and encourage people to avoid lightening their consumption. It would do more damage than good. That said, I also agree that the one day boycott is absolutely pointless. And I like the idea of a don't-drive week. If you want gas prices to go down, also try... --Buying a more fuel efficient vehicle --Vote for candidates actually interested in alternative energy plans --Finding alternatives to driving to get from A to B (when possible) --Make less trips, with more people

Here is something to consider. Every candidate has a timebomb or two - something waiting to hurt them. And Obama and Clinton have very, very big ones. Beyond sex and race factors, Obama has huge problems on youth, lack of experience, handlers who are currently strangling him and that surface-only image. Now, let's say he falls apart early, and Clinton takes the lead early. What comes next? Clinton has amazingly high negatives - like 50% territory. And while early polls are not very meaningful competitively, that negative number IS important, and here is why: once a candidate is hated, there is no coming back. People who are ambivalent or semi-OK with a candidate can be coaxed. But a full 45-50% of the country already despises Hillary, and that number will not go down. So if Obama goes out early and Hillary is fully exposed, that will open the door for Edwards, or maybe even Richardson, to sail in as the "other" guy. If Obama deflates early, Clinton loses. Therefore, its likely she tries for a slow deflation of Obama, not a n early destruction. QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ May 14, 2007 -> 02:26 PM) It'll be far worse backlash in 2008, and I doubt the democrats will throw out as pathetic a candidate as John Kerry. Frankly, from what I can see at this point, any of the current Dem contenders would be better than Kerry was in terms of electability. Well, except maybe Gravel.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 13, 2007 -> 08:28 PM) Yeah, look at the companies whose sales are up, and tell me if they represent a niche. That's one!

QUOTE(aboz56 @ May 13, 2007 -> 03:55 PM) Obama has no shot. And your reasoning is... (not that there aren't some good reasons, I'm just curious what yours are)

I have an MBA, and looked at some federal jobs. Here are three thoughts to consider... 1. Whether or not you are happy in a government job is very much effected by what you expect of your co-workers. If you are the type of person who expects to have people around you that are mostly high-skilled, ambitious and driven, then gov't work is not for you. If you could care less about the other folks and just want a good job for yourself, then by all means, go for it. There are of course lots of intelligent, driven people in gov't work, but in my experience, the percentage is lower there than in the private sector. The one exception would be at the very highest levels of gov't, where I would expect much more ambitious folks. 2. Salaries won't be nearly as high in gov't work for someone with a biz background as it will be in the private sector. 3. The pension/retirement benefits are great in fed jobs, but that is really only helpful to you if you plan to stay there for your career. Is that the case for you?

QUOTE(mr_genius @ May 11, 2007 -> 06:28 PM) He is against the federal death tax. That was my point. He COULD have made friends on the matter, had he not blew it. QUOTE(Damen @ May 11, 2007 -> 06:30 PM) Your numbers aren't quite correct. That's interesting, I didn't think the number was that low. Thanks for the info. Thing is though, perception is reality in politics. A lot of people are against the estate tax because they think, maybe, they will be that rich. The fact that most of them won't be is not relevant to those people. That is why its talked about as much as it is.

A sweep would be nice, but we certainly don't "need" one. 2 of 3 would be good, a sweep would be a nice bonus.