southsider2k5

So will Barack step up and tell his supporters to not attack McCains wife?

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 02:47 PM) The redistribution of wealth sure sounds socialistic to me. Not to mention the class warfare rhetoric that has gone with it. The demonization of anyone who has been successful is embarassing to our system.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 02:30 PM) I agree. There does not HAVE to be some single solution. The only "standards" that matter are inteface-related - in other words, how things plug into each other. As for what the energy source is, or how its then used, those can and should have some variability. That helps encourage modernization, and is less risky. The market decides these things, and pretty quickly. People decide what they like and buy it. The rest of the companies either change or go bankrupt. If you get into government decesion-making, you bring in a whole other slew of problems, the big one being who is wispering into their ears. With the money the candidates are raising right now, you can damned well bet there are going to be people influencing the direction the country goes here, if it is left up to the public sector, and not the private.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 01:50 PM) Bush and Kerry did 3, and those 3 debates were LEGENDARY in terms of how scripted they were. There were something like 32 pages of rules. The candidates weren't allowed to address or question each other directly. The cameras weren't supposed to stay locked on the candidate that was speaking and couldn't show the reactions of the other candidate. The candidates weren't allowed to be filmed from behind. And on and on. During the primary season, how many times, especially towards the end, did we hear about how tedious the debate schedule was getting? That and Barack needs to raise more money...

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 02:13 PM) The market doesnt know where to go. And we can NOT have 5 different standards. There needs to be a single standard (2 if you include all electric) This "the market dictates" is great most of the time, but sometimes you need to have a heavy fist for continuity sake. I don't want the "heavy fist" to be wealded by the same people who currently mis-regulate everything under the sun. This are the same people who have ruined the financial industry because of their complete lack of knowledge of the financial markets with Sarbines Oxley, and yet we are supposed to trust them with the direction of our transportation industry? No thanks. I am not interested in seeing them screw up something else. Hell it is the governments pork barrel spending on the transportation system for cars that has put us into this situation in the first place. Instead of building more roads for the people back home, they should have been investing in rapid transit systems for the good of the country. If they decide this, we'll end up with the betamax of transit.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 01:56 PM) I want to add a little bit of my interpretation of the situation... There is no presidential "guidance" as to what the next fuel standard will be. THis leads to a problem with what the next-gen of cars will be as well. Here's why: To roll out a non-oil based car, you need the infrastructure. That will require large amounts of time and resources. But, what IS the next-gen? We dont know. E85? Hydrogen? All Electric? No one knows where to go, and it's too expensive to put your fingers in all the pies, so you have to pick one and go for it. Without STRONG leadership from a president, nothing will happen. He needs to say "in 20 years, we will be all ____, let's make it happen". "We chose to go to the moon" type of statement. I don't want any President telling us what car to buy/build. The market needs to decide that, not the government.

Awesome. One of the best voices in all of pro sports.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) I keep seeing this Carter parallel used. Makes no sense to me, beyond the fact that they are/were both crusaders for the poor, and want to see the tax code move more towards progressive. Beyond that, they are night and day. I keep seeing the GWB 3 comparision made too, and it makes just as much sense to me. Obama is out there proposing lots of the samethings that failed during Carters time, and since that is the tone here, I figured why not.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 12:26 PM) There's going to be more debates when this is all said and done. McCain wants to do it in a way that makes McCain look good and Obama vice versa. Obama's not going to deliberately let McCain play to his strengths against him, that'd just be damn silly. McCain threw the first punch, so Obama's gonna counter, McCain will counter again etc. Wash/rinse/repeat until November. Yep. Jimmy Carter the second is going to do it the way that it has always been done.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 11:54 AM) Heh, this reminds me of this morning when they were showing how Tim Russert would ask all these politicians if they were running for president, and they all were saying "no." Of course they did later. Just like that guy at the top of the Democratic ticket who wasn't running

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 11:37 AM) This was one of those proposals that the "Underdog" makes to try to make the "Front-runner" look bad. As a classic example, I'll give you John Kerry saying in 2004 "Let's debate once a week until the election". If the front-runner accepts, then it hurts him because instead of going out and campaigning, holding events, rallies, etc., he's spending all his time either preparing for the debates or actually being at the debates, and meanwhile it helps the underdog because it's giving him a ton of free media even if he doesn't perform that well. On the other hand, if the front-runner doesn't accept what is again an absurdly large number of events (deliberately so btw) then the underdog can attack him for not wanting to debate as often. The irony is that he was perfectly willing to debate Hillary until he got into the lead as well. Then again, this is the candidate of change, so why would we expect him to do things differently than people in the past right? Same old s***, different day.

I guess Obama is scared to debate McCain... McCain wanted 10 townhall meetings, and instead has proposed just one, and that was on the 4th of July. In football, this would be known as the prevent defense. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...-townhall_N.htm

http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/15/media-...urity-proposal/

Let the swiftboating begin! http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/magazine...amp;oref=slogin

QUOTE (joeynach @ Jun 14, 2008 -> 07:51 PM) I think gas prices in China and Russia around $3 per gallon. So how do they have cheaper gas when their demand is through the roof. Cant be all taxes b/c we know that we dont tax gas $1 per gallon, we tax gas like 20-30 cents a gallon. So either American gas companies have artificially inflated the price from the wholesale cost, or somehow China and Russia have sweetheart deals on oil that we dont. Either way it blows. Here is the current price of gasoline futures, its at $3.46 per gallon. Thats the price the oil companies can pay for wholesale gasoline right now. So that means most of the country is seeing a mark up of about 60 cents, and Chicagoan's are seeing a mark up of about 80 cents. Does anyone else find that strange, not the part about Chicago being more expensive but about the mark ups. Why can the oil companies mark up gasoline so much while the economy, other gas dependent industries, and Americans suffer. Why cant the mark up be 20-30 cents a gallon instead of 60-80 cents. Why should this be unregulated when so many people, jobs, and industries depend on it. I know it sounds un-capitalistic to "intervene" here, but this situation is unique. Your talking about an inelastic product (gasoline) which also influences other inelastic products (food prices) that people depend upon to survive. Like I was saying before...seems fishy. That mark up is almost entirely taxes. The futures price is sans local, state, and federal taxes. In Indiana our # is 52.4 cents per gallon of tax, and last I looked we were at $4.03 a gallon, so that is a whole 5 cent mark up.

38-31 + 4.5 games

38-30 + 4.5 games

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 13, 2008 -> 06:37 PM) Dobbs Hates McCain and Bush cause they are too easy on immigrants. You'd have to go back to Checkpoint Charile to find someone who was hard enough on immigrants for Dobbs sake.

38-29 +5.5 games

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/20...onzalez-seizure

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan...lle-obama-rumor

Wow. RIP and for the family and friends...

Funny in 2004 the Democrats all told me that chaging your mind was a good thing, and it meant you were open to new lines of thought...

Countrywide, which just happens to be the same company that Jim Jonnson received loans directly from the CEO of... I guess that makes Dodd qualified to be in the VP vetting process?

What's the great thing about Junior High girls? I keep getting older, they stay the same age -R Kelly Yes a joke, just like this ruling.