southsider2k5

A couple of things here... I do agree with McCains assessment that we continually rewarded Il for doing things he had agreed to do in the first place, and Slate saids effectively the samething. We had to bribe Il, to not start overtly building nukes. How is not that rewarding him for something Clinton told NK not to do? Also we keep hearing about Bush not dealing with NK, but we have been in six way talks with them pretty much all along, and where has that gotten us? Are the talking invalid because we included more people than just the US? I don't get that, especially after the US was essentially lambasted for "going it alone" in Iraq. China has been bending over backwards as their ally and supplier of 80% of their fuel to get them not to do something stupid, which guess what, they did. Even when the Clinton admin was negotiating directly with NK, like we keep hearing Bush should, they were still threatening to restart their nuclear program, and didn't stop until we bribed them to do so. That isn't talking, that is rewarding a child for throwing a temper tantrum. The pattern of Il doing something drastic and then getting bribed to not do it again, is well established. Il just didn't seem to realize that this time the other side has no interest in rewarding his bad behavior.

QUOTE(mreye @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 12:33 PM) I thought you were self employed. His biggest problem is his asshole boss

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 11:50 AM) Which is of course, somehting that never, ever, EVER happens here. Seriously, what exactly is Reid accused of having done wrong in that AP piece? He's not accused of using his position to make the land more valuable, he's not accused of using his position in an improper way, he's not accused of covering up anything, as far as I can tell, he's basically accused of having made $700k on a land deal. And remember, this is the same reporter who tried to Smear Reid in the Abramoff case while somehow casually failing to note that Reid never actually supported the position Abramoff wanted him to support. Its different. It's always different.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 11:34 AM) We are assuming, and probably correctly, that this is coming out of the fixing the stadium fund and not a we invest $2,000,000 and make $4,500,000 fund. It is also interesting that seemingly if they make a change to the stadium that increases profits, they can't use those profits to help the team on the field. Seems like a bad deal for the fans. The profits from the ticket sales goes to the team and to payroll... Any money made from a sponsorship of the area would go to the Stadium Authority, unless they and the Sox have have a secondary agreement worked out for these specific kinds of moneys. Don't forget, the more fans the Sox bring in, the more money the SA makes because their revenues are also based on a part of attendance. That is why they are willing to make those investments in things such as the stadium remodel. Its a win-win for both sides.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 11:06 AM) Hey, as soon as you guys stop following that stupid Reid-obsessed AP reporter and actually looking at the couple of things Reid has done that actually look wrong, like the gigantic land deal he helped procure for a friendly lobbyist who just happens to employ 2 of Reid's sons, we'll get somewhere. Instead, you just keep reading this Soloman guy and he just keeps making you guys look like fools. Wouldn't that qualify more as attacking the messenger?

Ah there we go. I knew I wouldn't be let down

Another good one here... it turns out whoever is putting up stories for the democratic party can't tell the different between an American soldier and a Canadian one. http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/008234.php

Kinda going back to this discussion of tax cuts vs housing boom.... Its an op-ed from WSJ, so it is a little biased, but makes some excellent points. Bold emphasis is mine.

I want to know how Tex got the spotted Dick picture for his avy. Do you think he actually put "spotted dick" into google image search? If so, how many other links did he have to go through to find the one that actually was it?

FYI, with the projected budget deficit of $247.7 billion, Bush delivered on his promise to cut the deficit in half, except he did it 3 years quicker than he promised in 2006 instead of 2009.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 10:04 AM) I couldn't find a more recent Iraq thread, so... Update: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061011/ts_nm/iraq_deaths_dc_2 Total deaths in Iraq pegged at 655,000 since the start of the war. That is 2.3% of the country's entire population. I realize that some of those deaths were probably deserved. Many, however, were not. Let's not forget that it isn't just American soldiers and Islamic extremists/terrorists/insurgents dying over there. And before you say it Nuke... yeah, that is the toll of war. Innocent lives. But that is exactly my point. Was Saddam worth this? Did Saddam kill even a small fraction of that number? And is BushCo's real mission, to set up an anchorhead (military, political and economic) in the Middle East, really worth this much death? Will the American public think so in 5 years, when Iraq still isn't stable? Because rebuilding and stabilizing Iraq is at least a 10 year effort. I hope everyone realizes that, and realizes the continuing cost in lives and money and political capital that we face. Its a shame we were dragged into this nightmare - and sadly, we still need to see it through. We cannot leave now. Interesting thing I just read said that if the 655,000 dead number is to be believed, that is about 512 people a day. Even the civilian dead numbers that shocked everyone from last month said 2600 dead, which works out to about 89 a day, so where are the other 420ish people a day coming from? I haven't looked at the numbers that closely myself, it was just something I heard.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/12/war...t.ap/index.html

Its snowing like crazy downtown in the financial district.

The Dow is now trading over 11900 for the first time ever... DJ12K is in the crosshairs.

So how do people feel about this? To me this is pretty similar to giving the government the ability to spy on people all of the time. http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/92811,C...bside12.article

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/s...2p-386332c.html

I don't know if this is true or not... but it made me LOL. I know I am going to hell. http://forums.go.com/abc/primetime/lost/th...mp;forumStart=0 Also that was Russeau's kid Alex... Something else interesting... lost eastereggs

for all of those touched by this tragedy.

France calls NK Nuke test a failure

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/92793,...treas12.article

No one talking about the episode? I guess I'll go first... -So who killed Jae (Suns affair)? Did he committ suicide, did Sun kill him, or did Sun's daddy clean up Jin's mess? -We now know Henry Gale's real name, Benjamin Linus. We also know the Others have some kind of live connects to the real world, as evidenced by the World Series video. Also with Ben, why doesn't he want the people from flight 815 to have anyway of getting off of the island? -Good old brilliant Sawyer didn't stop to think that they might be listening to him? D'oh.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:15 PM) Noe let me be clear... I don't care that Reid did this: BUT... If he had an ® behind his name, he would be front page fodder for the NY Slimes, Washington Compost and the rest of the mainstream media for DAYS. But since he has a D behind his name, the blognation is in full effect defending it, just like they all got pissed when Hastert did... But of course, its different...

What's good for Hastert...

NORAD has just announced they believe this was just an accident. Also they are reports that the plane was doing acrobatic tricks (whatever that means) before hitting the building. They also said this play was on a visual flight plan, and wasn't required to check in with the radar towers.

Most of the news stations are showing footage... no link yet.