StrangeSox

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Feb 16, 2011 -> 08:47 AM) I think its good because we can't sit there and argue over each others purchases. We have agreed upon rules, like not touching the savings account (which is truly combined). If she wants to go out and spend $200 on clothes, that's her deal as long as she can fit it in her budget. It also makes gift giving more fun. Rather than knowing that I just paid (directly or indirectly) for my own Birthday gifts it comes out of "her" money. That's how my fiance and I operate and how we plan on continuing once we get married. I still see everything she spends her money on thanks to daily Quicken downloads, but she knows all of my banking passwords.

The House GOP budget bill raises the Pentagon's budget.

LOL. I mean that with the deepest sympathies.

91 wins and the division.

It was in the Catch-All thread for some reason

That falls under the "preferred programs" clause

Both sides full of s***, using it only to attack their opponents' preferred programs and praise their own while not really caring about the budget at all?

Doesn't follow. I don't have to justify something I haven't claimed to support in order to point out Republican hypocrisy/terrible fiscal policy.

It never hurts to point out how wrong everyone who was beating the drums for the Iraq war were. Again. Because I don't think this country is any less susceptible to the same bulls***, different location today.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 01:58 PM) How is this news? The book "Curveball" covered all of this years ago, they guy was full of it, and the Germans and Brits knew it. The US just WANTED it to all be true, so they could do what they had already planned to do for different reasons. Did he openly admit to making it up in the book? There was no evidence in favor of and some contradicting his bulls*** as far back as 2002/2003, but not an open admission by the source until now.

Curveball, the Bush WH's source for most of their Iraq war justifications, admits to making it all up. Shocking!

Best Game Ever? http://greatgatsbygame.com/

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 11:24 AM) No, he does exactly what a modern justice is supposed to do. He writes legal decisions based on partisan politics. The oral arguments don't matter any more, it's the same game as House and Senate floor speeches. Sometimes he'll even surprise you with how he decides things based on his politics, but that is the modern interpretation of the Court. The fact that his wife is on the payroll of several Tea Party groups and the fact that he and Scalia give motivational talks or something like that to Congressional Republicans bothers me a lot more than him not talking and being a reliably partisan vote. He's largely inconsequential and unoriginal and just goes along with Thomas and Scalia. The politicization of the SCOTUS is a different issue than Thomas's worthlessness.

I think that's the larger point. He's kinda worthless on the court.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 09:18 AM) I'm still hoping for a Bioshock movie, but I don't think its going to happen. http://www.atlas-shrugged-movie.com/ edit: Bioshock's source material is Atlas Shrugged, but it presents it in a dystopian view.

Clarence Thomas hasn't spoken in 5 years.

One of the nice things in the recent CC reform legislation is the requirements for CC companies to more clearly spell out what making the minimum payments will result in.

I'm too lazy to find it now, but there's studies out there. The "Americans have an average of $X000 of revolving debt" statement is true, but doesn't give the full story. Something like 40% of Americans don't carry any revolving debt. Something in the 10-20% range carry tens of thousands, distorting the per capita measurements. Kinda like putting me and Bill Gates in a room and taking the average wealth. But it goes back to ever-rising costs of living and stagnant or shrinking real wages for most Americans. Our economy has grown over the past two decades, but that growth has been funneled mainly to a handful in the financial sectors. When your bills keep rising but your wages don't, you still have to make ends meet somehow. And how well would our economy function without all of this consumerism? Demand creates jobs. If everyone cut back spending substantially, wouldn't that just close a lot of businesses and put a lot of people out of work?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 08:33 AM) I read about this first and figured "oh, that's just another attempt to make a statement by introducing a bill that will never actually come up for consideration anywhere. It's insane." Then I learned it had already passed a committee. QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 09:11 AM) South Dakota Moves To Legalize Killing Abortion Providers. Welcome to South Dakota. Balta, no one reads your posts.

Of course, the Republican line on defense spending to the above questions is we should have an exponentially increasing defense budget.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 14, 2011 -> 10:19 PM) That's full of s***. You cannot even compare the two like they are trying to, for many, many reasons. It's an apple to oranges comparison. However, I'm sure you know ALL about it, so I won't bother explaining it because no matter how or what I say (even when it's my job to know), you'll know better. Why can't you compare the two? I've read about half of the essays. A driving point is that the per-unit cost of weapons systems keeps rising, but the force-multiplication factor doesn't keep up. So we've an ever-widening gap for replacement costs which can only be made up by rapidly expanding defense budgets. There's also the problems of relying on ever-more complex systems and what that means if those systems break down or malfunction. And, of course, if all of the hype surrounding the latest whiz-bang weapons systems is really to be believed. Is the F-22 a great plane? Probably. Is it the unstoppable domination machine we need to spend billions upon billions on to get a relatively small number versus buying a larger number of still-very-good-but-not-as-great planes?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2011 -> 04:19 PM) Yup. There was a video last week of them testing, and it's probably next to impossible to beat a machine in timing that s***, thus I had no interest in watching. I assumed they would have built in some sort of compensation for that. Unless they found his algorithms weren't always done running and ready to buzz in right when the window opened.

Might try the curry one without the peas, because peas are gross (texture thing for me, I like peapods in stir frys). The bean taco one sounds good. My fiance and I have both been wanting to find some new recipes, the problem is we both eat like five year olds.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 14, 2011 -> 01:31 PM) You probably just don't know how to cook or something. Yes, so this: Isn't super helpful. I need step-by-step guides, damnit, especially if I'm going to cook something I haven't before.

I've eaten deer within the last five years. Wild Boar, also.