NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 02:43 PM) All I said was he didn't die. Nice to know you were there for the eyewitness account though, thanks for the info. You mentioned "the altercation", and in my book running away is not an "altercation". I think that's an important fact in this case. And if you go look up any news article about the case, you'll find that is what happened, as the agents eventually acknowledged. No need for the snark.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 02:45 PM) If they did a 15 minute Muslim or Hindi ritual I could only imagine the posts I'd be seeing here right now. If you get elected President, you can do whatever you want to. You may get on down with your bad Hindu self. And its Hindu (the religion), not Hindi (the language).

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) actually, the drug smuggler was shot on the buttocks during the altercation. he did not die. He was shot in the buttocks while running away.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 02:07 PM) My Senator's comments on CNN makes me realize again what an ass he is. What did he say?

Lay it all out here. What are your predictions for Obama as POTUS? Ideally, try to provide both what you think he will do well, and what you think he will do poorly. Begin...

QUOTE (Soxy @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 10:25 AM) I think Clinton was as big of a cheerleader as Reagan. Yes we can make higher education affordable through better grants, scholarships or something. It's completely out of hand. I'll tell you what I'd like to see, in terms of education costs... we need to do more about tax shelters for early child care. Its just a reality now that most families have two working parents, and day care is absurdly expensive. Like, more than tuition at most colleges (even private) per year. Its absolutely insane. If its two kids, you are talking about more money than the majority of Americans take home every year.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 10:15 AM) I think they're just grasping on to "but Truman left with bad ratings and look at him now!" while ignoring the (many more) Presidents who left with bad ratings and are still viewed as terrible. I think there are a wide variety of examples of all cases. Reagan was so very popular, but over time, looked a little less perfect. Clinton was popular but not Reagan-esque and was personally despised by many, and yet he seems to have come off a bit better since. Carter was seen as pretty bad then, even worse now. Bush 41 is one who was not well-evaluated at the time, but seems now was not nearly so bad.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 09:48 AM) What some people making the "we can't judge him for a while" argument miss (and I don't mean you or anyone else here, but the Bush apologist articles) is that we could very well end up viewing him even worse than we do now. Could be. My perceptions of various Presidents changed as time passed after they left, some for better (Clinton, Bush 41), some for worse (Reagan, Carter).

DHS releases a statement about a potential security threat at the inauguration. Very little detail.

QUOTE (klaus kinski @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 09:37 AM) There 's an Inauguration pretty much every 8 years-this just hyped beyond belief This is one case where I am glad to see the hype. Presidential inaugurations, as well as elections, SHOULD be a big deal. All the other garbage we see hyped in the media, like "reality" TV shows and assorted other useless matters, are secondary. This is a big deal, and should be.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 08:54 AM) It might be a better workout because you arent a good swimmer. Most good swimmers move at maximum efficiency which helps them turn more laps with less effort. You might swim a mile and burn twice as many calories. I would recommend it to everyone. I am not a great swimmer but will supplement my cardio with the occasional couple mile swim and it just drains me. Yeah, if you aren't a big time swimmer, swimming uses a bunch of muscles you may not otherwise get much work on. Its a great addition.

I'm at work (should be a poll option!), but I assume it will be running over the BB/Marketview screens here at the trader desks. I'll try to catch some of it here and there.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 08:11 AM) Complete the phrase for the next four years of realistic goals, even if they are a stretch. . . . reduce our Troop levels in Iraq by 75% . . . put in motion a guest worker program . . . increase by 15% our use of alternate energy sources increase by 15% over current levels is far too low a goal. Heck, it went up by more than that in 2008 alone, from something like 8% to 11%. I'd like to see, in 4 years, a doubling of that number or more to over 20%. QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 08:30 AM) ...restore habeas corpus It sure will be nice to have an administration who may actually respect individual freedoms again. Kind of ironic, since the parties have flipped on that theme. QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 08:35 AM) ... have the American economy in a state other than "crumbling". In 4 years? At best, we could maybe be recovering by then. But I doubt it will be rip-roaring by then (I hope I'm wrong). I'll add a few... ...Protect wild lands responsibly, for example, by designated the many WSA's as full Wilderness Areas. ...Make real efficiency changes in government, via this new office Obama set up. ...Be getting 25% of our energy from alternative, renewable sources. ...Repair our image and relationships on the global stage.

Looking back, maybe 10 years from now, we'll have a better idea of Bush's place in history. But that isn't to say we can't judge some of his actions now, and as of this point, I can't think of a worse President since the Depression.

The problem I have is time. We just had a baby, and I can't justify being gone every night while I work out for an hour. So from now until about April, I am playing racquetball a couple days a week, and gyming a couple times (upper body weight routine, then some time on the mill and/or bike). But come April, which I can't wait for, I can get in a good workout during my commute. I bike to work every day. 6 miles each way, that's 12 miles a day, and I do it on an MTB with knobbies (makes it a little tougher than a roadie), and go pretty much all out. Dealing with traffic and lights, I get it done in about 25 minutes each direction. I then shower and change at the gym near work. It works out great because it takes me no extra time each day, nothing taken away from the family, but I get in some serious work each week from April through September. I haven't been able to do it the last couple years (heavy travel job), but now I can go back to it. I am about 40 pounds overweight right now, and need to drop it this year.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 19, 2009 -> 08:17 PM) You wont let go of mutually assured destruction as being the primary reason for the lack of conflict in the post-war era, because that's pretty much what all your points are reverting back to. Mutually assured destruction relies on the belief that the costs of modern war will never outweigh the benefits, and that great powers will never engage each other because of that fact. Well it is probably true that modern war is never economical, that was not a reason to avoid conflict in the 20th century. World War 1 ravaged Europe, every country on the continent was put into unfathomable debt and went through unprecedented human suffering. They called it the war to end all wars for a reason. So why was World War 2 allowed to occur? Shouldn't the destruction of WW1 been enough to prevent any other conflict especially if mutually assured destruction is actually applicable in international relations? World War 2 started because of war debts not being forgiven between the United States and European nations, in particular France. Part of this was due to the lack of any forum for France to make it's case as the United States backed out of the League of Nations. After the US refused to ignore the war debts of France, France cranked up pressure on the Germans for reparations and it led to a global economic collapse that was completely unprecedented. Germany nor France could appeal to the United States for relief due to the absence of the US at the League of Nations. International Relations 101: When modern countries are reduced to nothing and are ignored in the international system the likelihood of irrational behavior by that country increases exponentially. America was naughty, isolationist and selfish... so we got Hitler in our stocking for Christmas. There is a common misconception that globalization is inevitable when in fact it's a product of policy decisions being made by individual nations to stimulate economic growth. For instance you can't be against the UN and for MNC's, that's a glaring contradiction. You're only concerned with the economic aspect of globalization under a ridiculous notion that economics and diplomacy are two separate arenas of the international system. You might have been able to make the argument you are trying to make in 1922, but World War 2 proved everything you are saying completely wrong. Isolationism doesn't work anymore, the last time we were dumb enough to try it we caused the worst economic collapse and deadliest war in human history. The bolded above is an incredible stretch. You point to one factor, and not even one of the biggest ones, not to mention something multiple layers indirect as the cause of WWII. It also indicates you believe that the US started WWII? And you need to be careful with posts like yours earlier, saying that people should read a book. The forum is full of some very well-read and well-informed people. And frankly, looking at the 2A thread, I saw a bunch of people making much more well read arguments than you provided. But you see, its all subjective, isn't it? Just don't make the assumption that people who disagree with you are ignorant, which is what you implied. Please take more care with your posts.

The one store I actually enjoy shopping at, for any kind of electronics, gadgets or appliances is ABT. Nothing beats them, period, and they will pretty much always match an online price. Knowledgeable staff, and a fun store.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 17, 2009 -> 06:28 PM) I'm curious as to how an IGO like the UN can be poorly run and corrupt? The execution factor falls much more on the shoulders of member nations than the UN itself. Were you not aware of the Oil-for-Food mess? And the if the execution factor falls to the member nations, then the UN serves no purpose. It has to actually DO something to be of use.

The answer is both, IMO. Its a good idea, and a necessary entity that can (and sometimes does) play an important role. Also, its poorly run, corrupt, and doesn't execute nearly as well as it should.

We've discussed Hudson in multiple threads in here, and there have been a number of reasons for and against. Also, what makes you sure we AREN'T pursuing him?

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Jan 17, 2009 -> 09:25 AM) Yes people like you truly do suck, come into stores ask the associates questions about it than leave and buy it online. I cant blame you for wanting to save money but it truly is irritating when you get those customers. I almost never bother the associates because they usually know less than I do. The only reason I even go into the store is if it is something I really want to see in person first, i.e. a TV. I'll already have done the research and narrowed it down, go to the store and look at the candidates, then leave to go order it. But I can see how that would irritate store staff. It is part of retail, though - people shop around. If I go online and find that the store price was better, I'll go back to the store. But that never seems to happen. Some people are less knowledgeable, and the staff can be very helpful for them. Others don't want to wait a few days for something to ship. The store and staff still serve a purpose, just not for everyone.

In Iowa, concealed carry permits are granted at the sole discrection of the county sherriff. There are 99 counties and 99 sherriffs in Iowa, and each one has a very different approach. When I was living in Iowa, I was in Story County, and the sherriff at the time (I think his name was Fitzgerald) was very stringent for both open carry and concealed carry. he personally interviewed people, did background checks beyond the usual, etc. but Hamilton county next door, I knew some EMT's up there, and all you had to do was fill out a slip of paper and you'd get a permit.

QUOTE (MO2005 @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 04:05 PM) Who cares!! Don't we have anything else to talk about besides Jon Garland? Oh that's right, no! If you don't care, then don't read the thread or post in it.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 04:01 PM) This is over firearm ownership, a right I have no problem with. My problem is people who want to bring guns in public and thus around me. So people can own guns, but not carry them? That defeats the very purpose of 2A, not to mention you are placing your own fears over other peoples' constitutional rights. I'm sorry but that doesn't fly with me.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 16, 2009 -> 03:54 PM) Key word. Guns are designed to kill people, there is no may about it. If you're using a gun correctly you're either going to land somebody in the ER or in a body bag. Something tells me it wouldn't be the same if you could only carry a taser or a stun gun (things I have no problem with because the chances of a taser killing me are about as tiny as me being the victim of unprovoked violent crime). This is just not at all correct. A gun has many uses, which MAY include shooting a person. Or it may be shooting an animal, legally or illegally. Or shooting a target of some kind, legally. But a gun's most important use in our society is actually not any of those, and it goes directly to the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment - preventative power. 2A's main purpose was as a check against a potentially oppresive government. The fact that the public is well-armed mitigates that threat. In the self-defense situation, the individual right situation, the presence of a gun on a law-abiding citizen will reduce the likelihood of a criminal acting against that person. So its most important power is its presence - not its use.