NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 07:00 PM) It started when the accusations of the 'kill obama' shout that a reporter said he heard, and a few cretins at a palin rally. I was told that the right is fostering the anger and hate. i countered that the left lives off it, and was rebuked. How many stories have we heard of a conservative beating an Obama supporter with a campaign sign? How many Democratic campaign offices have been vandalized this year? (None, because if there was, they would have been front page news. And surely have been labeled a hate crime) How many cars got vandalized because they had Obama bumper stickers? Yeah, there are idiots on both sides. And the leaders on each side are sort of lax in saying anything, because they want every vote they can get. Agreed. Like I said, feel free. I just hope that any discussion we have on this won't result in any... um... requests for teeth being sunk into someone's hairy hind quarters.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 07:47 PM) oh brother. Can I start a thread about Racist Hate Mongering Republicans? This is stupid even by my standards. You want to start a thread full of examples of idiot Republicans, to offset the thread full of idiot Democrats, feel free. But I think we'd all agree that's pretty useless on both counts.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 07:46 PM) It was said in a different post that the right is the one with the anger problem, and I was berated when i tried to posit that the opposite was true. I figured that I would get lots of replies every time I posted one. However, if you think this will set tensions too high, feel free to delete it. I would understand. I'm not wanting to delete it, which is why I am hoping we can get quickly to some sort of resolution. I think its a thread likely to get ugly. But maybe it won't. I am not sure who said that "the right" had the anger problem. I myself have said that I find the current campaign for McCain, his part and the RNC and other party bits, has been noticeably more negative than that of Obama's. I think that's true, and also, with McCain down in the polls, more anger will naturally come out. But I have zero doubt there are idiots on both sides.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 05:37 PM) Armstrong also gave up 3 SBs. Not sure how much was him or the pitcher, but still doesn't look good. It's a shame Armstrong looks pretty solid, but his since he is lefty and not too good defensively, he really can't be AJs backup, IMO at least. Maybe someone will trade for him or something, but I am not sure how much value a 25-year-old catcher has that really doesn't have a great minor league track record nor is he good defensively. Also, we are just going to have to take Beckham's numbers will a grain of salt since his play is so spread out. It's damn near impossible to get in any rhythm starting once every three days. He's really needs to improve defensively though, but maybe the errors are a result of him being shifted all over the infield in the AFL. one game is a pretty small sample size. I've seen stats put up on this site showing that Cole's throw-out % was almost as high as Lucy's. I don't think he's a bad defender. But, he is a lefty, and his splits show he is definitely weaker against LHP. So, not a good backup for AJ. Hopefully he continues to tear it up in AZ though, and we can get something for him in trade. I'm betting he has some value elsewhere.

Are we seriously going to have a thread full of examples of fringe morons? 'cause you'll find plenty from both parties. Why not just spare us all the tit-for-tat fest this will inevitably become, and just tell us the point you are trying to make.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 06:42 PM) Anyone plan on seeing W? At first, I thought it looked like it would just be one long Bush-bash (could be a good porn), so I wasn't interested in seeing it. But, then I read that it wasn't really like that. Now I'm considering going to it. There is a thread on this in the Buster as well.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 05:11 PM) Hey now, Kucinich was my favorite of all the primary candidates. He's bats*** crazy, but, I'd say he's more honest than most in Congress.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 04:59 PM) I am all for balanced budgets, but the killer in any budget amendment is that there would need to be exemptions for true emergencies. The fault lies here, just about everything could be considered an emergency. I would expect the 'emergency' exemption to be completely abused. That is definitely the trick. But I don't think its as big a hurdle as others seem to. I think the only exemption should be for war - as in, Congress funds and declares a war action. Any other "emergency" would need to use saved funds (which a balanced budget over time can provide), cutting programs, and raising taxes. Short term debt could still be raised for immediate cash flow in advance of planned program cuts or raised taxes.

I was looking at RottenTomatoes today to see what they said about new movies out. I read the reviews for Max Payne, which looks like its just as bad as the silly previews. This line in one review in particular cracked me up (about Max Payne):

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 04:35 PM) I used to be all about the multiparty stuff but if you think about it, if we become hyperdemocratic with a bunch of parties that have narrowed platforms, our government would be an even bigger mess and it would be hard to accomplish anything. I'm not sure I agree. Let's look at this - the current environment is much more partisan than it was, say, 10 years ago. Or 20. A lot less positive gets done, and when it does, its just porkbarrell sales to get bills through. Compromise on actual bills was much more common before. There are LOTS of reasons why this is occurring. But here is one interesting parallel trend - the loss of the smaller segments of each party that varied on issue stances. The Blue Dog Dems, the Northeast Republicans, the Farm Democrats, the Mountain West freedom-based Republicans... those groups have vanished, or been quashed. Some of their membershup still exists, but they've been forced to their party's respective gutters. Having those smaller groups actually promoted movement in Congress, not hindered it. You had variable caucuses for various issues, and that greased the wheels. So, having significant 3rd and/or 4th parties wouldn't stop things up at all - it would probably get things moving better.

QUOTE (YahtzeeSox @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 04:06 PM) Well he's no longer a candidate for presidency so I don't see how any of that stuff you mentioned applies anymore. Ron Paul is organizing something greater now. The presidential campaign was just a front to get the real business started, his Campaign for Liberty. If I had to guess at the goal of this organization, it would be peaceful revolution. I have no problem with that. What Ron Paul says is unrealistic because for the past 100 years we have been creating and growing a system that is just impossible to magically fix. Obama can't do it, McCain can't do it and neither can Paul. Someone like Ron Paul for president would have been a good start, but honestly you also need to do a complete rehaul of Congress as well for anything Ron Paul would like to do to become achievable. I would say that in that respect, Ron Paul would be as mediocre as anybody else because he can't really do much on his own. So, in that regard I am moving on from these meaningless debates and squibbles between 2 guys who cannot fix our country. Obama will be the president, he won't be that good, and then like kap says 2010-2012 is the time period for a great re-awakening which hopefully would mean we are ready to finally evict the fakers who control our country. But in the mean time we are still enamored with Barack "Talk We Can 'Believe' In" Obama and his meaningless arguments with John Wayne McCain. The mainstream media and television have controlled our minds and it seems the majority of Americans have bought in to the 2 party system, which is really just a front for the elite to seem like there is actual bickering and disagreement in Washington when in actuality no matter who is president we are going down the same path and that is not changing. This discussion, to me, is reminiscent of some of the offseason discussions between 2007 and 2008 I saw about the Sox. Some people were just so frustrated with the current system, they threw up their hands. Many wanted a massive rebuild, right then and there. but in reality, with a complex system, its often better to fix it a bit at a time. Results are slower, but risk is lower. This election features two flawed candidates - but two who are better than we've seen in some time. Its a start. So feel free to give up if you want, but all that means is that you won't have a voice in changing things. This is our system, flawed, but still the best in the world. It will have to be changed piecemeal. ETA: Also, the key to making even bigger changes is local involvement. And most Americans don't bother with it.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 03:52 PM) Well, technically, we are already a socialist country in many areas. Pooling resources for the common good can work. However, once the government starts taking obscene amounts of power away from the people (such as overbearing taxation, limiting free speech, committing mass voter fraud, and other authoritarian measures) things can go down hill very quickly. Right now, one thing that doesn't add up for Obama is where he plans an getting all this extra money for his programs. Merely taxing rich people won't get it done. Some of you guys are right, Clinton did promise no new taxes but he ended up raising taxes. I am sure my taxes are going up with Obama, now he might do some nonsense where the hike is referred to as 'a initial rate adjustment' in which he promises to give me a rebate.. however that rebate would boil down to nothing after fees or some other tactic is used to keep that tax money in the Obama system. Now I would actually support a tax increase (even on my income) if this money would be used to pay down the national debt. As LF said, that would go nowhere. But I'd like to see it. I am still a proponent of a balanced budget amendment. If you want to be able to throw money out there in dire need (like a really bad economy), you cut spending and/or raise taxes. You need immediate war action, you still have some of that funded automatically to the Pentagon anyway, and then you authorize a war action for the big chunks (war exemption to the amendment). You want to ensure flexibility, you build slush funds into the budget for emergency use. Not that hard, really. but I realize I'm in the minority on that one.

QUOTE (longshot7 @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 03:05 PM) The Trib endorses Obama - first time they've endorsed a Dem: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...0,1371034.story MIght have a small effect in IN, but IL is in the bag, and WI is basically there too.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 02:18 PM) In the McCain-Palin tradition of exciting their followers into verbal abuse, racism, and violence.... The good news there is that the FBI is checking to see if any widespread organized action really was underway, or if this was just workers who are bad at their jobs combined with required submittals.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 01:49 PM) How'd you get USAA, you were in the military or related to someone in the military? I haven't found anyone able to beat their auto insurance rates (although I believe auto insurance in general is a massive, borderline conspiracy-like scam). I think Schwab does what you're talking about too don't they? My wife's father was a marine. Lives in your neck of the woods, actually. And yes to the post about credit unions - if you can fall into their membership realm, that can be a way to get great rates.

QUOTE (mreye @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 01:40 PM) Now? No. But, in the past, yes. That's the problem I have. It's seems to be worse than ever that they do what will get them (re)elected instead of what is "right." Even before, I didn't see that as a pattern. I think it goes more individual to individual, in each party. And its always frustrating too, often the most reliable and most likely to stick to their stances, are the looniest in each party in terms of where they are on issues. See: Kucinich.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 01:19 PM) I just checked and if I put 1000 bucks into a CD for 12 months with my bank (USAA, seriously they are awesome) the rate is 3.90%. I might do that with some of the excess GI bill money I have since my classes are less than what the payouts from the VA are. USAA gives better rates than most - we have our insurance and car loan through them, luckily. If you know you won't need it at all during 12 months, then yeah, looks good. If you aren't 100% sure (and I never am), then I'd rather take the 3.5% from Citi or E-Trade without the penalty. The $4 over a year on $1000 is worth it to me to be able to get it out if needed.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 01:15 PM) Usually $500 minimum. But higher amounts for the larger yields. CD's are silly, I'm surprised anyone uses them anymore. When you can get the same type of rates, but in a savings account with no minimum and no withdrawal penalties and no tiem scale, CD's become dinosaurs.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 02:10 PM) How much money do you generally need to do a CD? No minimum for some, but the rates are then very low. There are online-only savings accounts at places like E-Trade and Citi, that pay 3 to 4%, and have no time commitment like a CD. So, really, why bother with a CD? I still think, long run, this is a generally good time to buy equities.

QUOTE (mreye @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 01:52 PM) I guess I can agree with that, but IMO, I said, IMO, it is "left" to try to please the "issue of the day" instead of standing fast to tried and true principles. That's been my biggest problem with the GOP, and national politics in general in the last 10+ years. It's really turned me off and I used to be a junky - I was one of the originals that mixed it up in here that caused the creation of SLap and the 'buster. I just don't have the heart for it anymore. I don't see either party having better standing than the other on "standing fast to tried and true principles". They both jockey around. I mean, in the longer perspective, look how many major issues (minority protections, environmentalism, etc.) have moved from one side to the other.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 11:55 AM) so many big words!!! I am overwhelmed by the staggering profundity of your artfully crafted retort.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 10:40 AM) If this is legit why has AHB not been banned? Thats all he posts and you know it. Just because their are more dems on here and more of the mods are dems doesnt mean that they should be allowed to get away with anything. Which Ive seen first hand how that works on this site. If you want to clean it up and keep it civil start with the people who go out of their way to annoy not the people reacting to it. AHB has never, that I recall, resorted to insulting other posters. Though you are right that the balance of his posts are just potshots at the GOP. That aside, let's be clear on a couple things. One, look at the admins and mods who tend to post here regularly - LF, SS2K5, Kap, myself and Rex. Rex is the ONLY liberal in that bunch. Two, I think I can honestly say that Rex, LF and I have been eminently fair with discipline on this board.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 10:37 AM) Lol at the dems on here attacking some guy from Ohio instead of addressing the real issue of punishing businesses and individuals for being successful. Take Joe the plumber for what he was, a metaphor, instead of hammering away at him like he matters or has anything to do with the actual election. I love the hypocrisy of you guys. So far Bristol Palin and Joe the plumber are huge points of interest but when it comes to ACORN, Rezco, Wright, Ayers theyre non issues. You whine about voter fraud but when it appears ACORN is committing voter fraud at record quantities its OK because it helps you this time. Joe the plumber?? Seriously? I've seen very few posts taking Joe the Plumber seriously. Have you?

Rotten Tomatoes is at 62% right now. Who is going to see it?

QUOTE (mreye @ Oct 17, 2008 -> 09:47 AM) Ha! I believe the GOP and McCain has moved further left (His choice of Palin not withstanding) and away from me. All about perspective, I guess. The only area I've seen them move left is on fiscal policy. If you know of another area where that has happened, I'd truly be curious what it is.