Texsox

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 01:31 PM) OMG! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE! NOW! 100 YEARS FROM NOW!! 1,000 YEARS FROM NOW!!! !!!! !!!!! Anyway, I think there are strong correlations that says "mankind" is doing some harm to the environment. I'm not denying that. What gets me is, 30 years ago, we were experiencing "global colding" ( ) according to some of the same (now bandwagon) "global warming" scientists. So, which is it? I wonder if the funding was strong in the 1970's for the "global colding" crowd, you know, the impending ice age and all of that? I think that it's naive to think we don't have an impact. I can also respect both you and Flaxx, because you're from the "scientific" type of field, which I am not a part of. Having said that, though, there's enough evidence from the other side, IMO, to at least question how much of an impact we are having. After all, earth has been through a "global warming" cycle before, otherwise, we'd still be in the ice age. So we reversed a climate freeze and not only stopped that, but now are projecting a warming. And humans and CO2 doesn't have an effect.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 10:38 AM) When a key element of your platform is that you are going to run the cleanest and most ethical Congress ever, you probably should know when to STFU. You are also going to open yourself up to additional scrutiny when you stand on holier than thou grounds. And it hasn't been a "mixed bag" its been business as usual, just like I said it would be. Nothing has changed, and it isn't going to, on matter what gets shoved down my throat. If these people don't like being called a hypocrite, they shouldn't act like one. What they really have to understand is our society no longer wants to hear big goals. Imagine if Kennedy had talked about a man on the moon in 2000. He'd have been laughed off the political map.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 11:22 AM) The GOP as a party seems to OK with massive funding and complete federalization of the military and all security apparatus', under the argument that they have to be handled at that level for national security and welfare. And yet, when it comes to problems with the environment (pollution, warming, etc.), which are frankly much more prescient and are having a much greater effect on our lives than either terror or Iraq, they are apparently unwilling to allow federal control. It seems to me that in both cases, due to their very nature, they need to be federal or even international concerns. As I was reading your post I was thinking, those are the big things that should also be above partisan b.s.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 10:42 AM) I agree, to a point. My personal hangup was/is that we hear all the time about how we need to change, and you know what? Yes, we do. However, to me, all this is a mechanism to interfere with free enterprise and get a cut of the profits for the government to regulate environmental controls. The government doesn't belong in it, period. That's where I have major disagreements with the Goracle crowd. I do believe that MNE's need to be socially responsible when given credible evidence that there is environmental damage being done that they need to fix it right away. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen near as often as it should. . Starting on April 22, 1970, do you think we would have cleaned up the environment as much without stricter government laws and involvement?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 09:57 AM) Maybe Bush should have just fired all of the DA's like the all Great and Mighty Bill Clinton? http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZmM...zFjYTRmYTlhNzk= I am certain this was in jest, and not to flame, but maybe we should be trying for a higher standard instead of "he did it, so I can too"? Let's stop the downward spiral to the least common denominator and push for something we can be proud of? So far it's been a mixed bag from the Dems. I'm disappointed in some of the things they have done. And when they do screw up, I'm sending off emails quickly reminding them to take the higher road.

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 09:21 AM) The over-hyped, over-sensationalized view of medical malpractice is hysterical. Personally I say let's blame the judges/jury's for handing out the ridiculous awards. I'm all for a cap, but let's not go crazy. We have to keep doctors in check or the standards would drop. Threatening them with a loss of their license and heavy fines/lawsuits is the most effective way of doing this, IMO. It sounds lame, but there are lots of people that get really messed up by the poor decisions of doctors and should be able to recover something for their loss. It's easy to say 'let's stop the needless med malpractice claims,' but try telling someone that their problem isn't severe enough to warrant a lawsuit. Let's not blame the doctors who don't do their job correctly. Let's blame the lawyers for exposing those problems and helping victims recover for their loss... I'm going to press Add Reply and see if the earth starts shaking, or lightening strikes, I agree with you.

BTW, I asked the head of staff of a 8,000sq ft Gulfside home what their utility (electric bill) is and they said it was in excess of $2,000 per month. Their home is occupied by their staff during the week for part of the time, but only really in operation during weekends when they are down from Dallas. I'm not certain how that fits in. They have a lake they call a pool, lots of glass, big old wood doors salvaged from 200 year old estates in Mexico, the home was built in the 1980s by a Texas oil man. BTW, some of y'all would have been jealous of the photos of fellow Texas oilmen that were tucked away in various corners, Bush, Bush, etc. Some very current.

So now he's a hypocrite for investing in the green energy industry. And if he didn't there would be articles and comments on how he has this investment portfolio and he isn't investing in green energy. A better analogy would be, I'm a huge supporter of the printing industry, I believe printing is the future and necessary for our lifestyle and well being. Therefor, I am going to buy/start/invest in a binding company in addition to the print shop I already own. In your example it would be: I'm a huge supporter of the printing industry, I believe printing is the future and necessary for our lifestyle and well being. Therefor, I am going to ask everyone else to buy/start/invest in a binding company but I'm not. (Then according to you he wouldn't be a hypocrite because he wouldn't be buying from himself.

Keeping away from Oz specifics but just about firing a guy a couple seasons after he's been the manager for a championship team. You might want to pull out the '85 Bears video and wonder how Dikta became stupid., Or grab some old Redskins tapes and then look at Gibbs. You have 25 players and one manager. How many of those players are still here? The question then becomes, is Ozzie the right guy to manager *this* group of players? Notice that not many guys win championships with multiple teams.

If it makes you feel any better, keep making payments on time and you are buying yourself better credit for the future. In a way, your rating is like money in the bank. Be very careful on someone taking over payments, if the loan is still in your name, it's your credit at risk if they default. And you are lucky to understand the savings game early in life. Compound interest is a wonderful thing.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 11:28 PM) Wife pays the home bills, so no idea what that is. But on my 2400 SQFT store, my electric bill is less than $300. And that is with 7 computers on for 12 hours per day, 4 copy machines on 12 hours per day, a power hungry direct-to-plate system, an AB Dick press, 2 laser printers, a Dell server, stereo, space heater for my always-cold designer and numerous bindry pieces, all electrical. And FWIW, I never said he wasn't using energy saving methods, etc. i said that the buying of carbon credits is just plain bull, ESPECIALLY since he buys them from his own company. Nice how noone responded to that little bit of info there, just went right on by that, as if it didn't matter at all. Nope, nothign for Al to gain personally by people going green, nothing at all. Move along, nothing to see here, it's always different. You do realize he's buying from his own companyn with real dollars that cost him real $$? It's like saying that EvilMonkey doesn't support the printing industry because he owns a printing company. Isn't owning a green company important?

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 11:35 PM) So, maybe some lawsut reform would go a long ways towards ending needless tests and increasing medical costs, eh? Stop needless tests for CYA stuff, keep costs down a bit and so on. but I guess the trial lawyers wouldn't stand for that, would they?. Nope but we keep electing lawyers so we're screwed.

I should lose but would win on a casual inspection. I close up this house a couple times a year and go camping. I have done most of the "home depot" projects to lower electric usage. But, I am 100% electric and a/c 11 months a year and use a very inefficient heater the other times. When it is 103 for the 90th consecutive day I like a frosty 75 in the house. I like my margaritas frozen so I need plenty of ice and a blender. The electric company I use is rated "green" and has rates higher than the average. So I guess I am buying some "street cred". But you know what? I clean up miles of beaches and trails and participate in more environmental projects than I can count. If someone wants to judge my environmental impact solely on my electric bill, I fail, but will hold my head high and believe in my heart I am doing more than the average American.

Mine is over $300 monthly average for 2,000 square feet and we have electric choice.

My feeling is the GOP should be able to appoint anyone who isn't under indictment. IMHO the person can be as far right wing as Bush wants to nominate and that should not effect the confirmation. I've said the same thing with Judges, etc.

Happy Birthday!

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 02:52 PM) The problem is not so much seeing the doc whenever you're sick (though if you go when you have a cold, that might be a bit much), it's the treatment and labs the doc might give you. If someone with basic care goes to the doc and complains of a headache they've had for two days, the doc will probably give them some meds and tell them to call back in a week. If the headache sufferer has a really god insurance package with no deduction, they might try to convince the doc to call for more advanced tests (i.e. MRI), which most of the time aren't necessary. "What the hell, I'm not paying for it. I want an MRI!" Then folks like QP's pop have to drive themselves to the ER when they're almost in a coma. It's messed up. And to highlight how screwed up the system is, if the Doc doesn't do the extra tests, and there happens to be something serious, a jury is going to award the patient $$$$ in a malpractice suit. I've heard Doctors tell that at least 15% or more of their tests are ordered as a CYA.

There was a west wing episode that mirrors this. Basically, if you admire the way someone runs their company, and share the same ideals (Dem or Rep) wouldn't you want to invest? And if you are similar in views, wouldn't you want to donate to that candidate? So on that level I kind of understand researching, coming across a company, and mixing private and public work. I also think it is unreasonable for public officials to not invest in the stock market. In fact, I think it should be required so they don't f-things up and hurt me. But, it always brings up situations like this. I try to be red or blue blind to who it is and find a solution that works for everyone. Perhaps a blind super trust that every national elected member contributes to that buys every stock. The amount would vary, but every stock would be carried.

We only support that freedom if you are not a US government employee Remember Reagan and the air traffic controllers? He's wiping away tears over the brave Solidarity workers in Poland as he's firing the scum strikers here

I am certain that both parties have attorneys whose job is to research these "little interesting" opportunities.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 11:17 AM) Since we're talking specifically about issues with the VA, I'd like to hear people's reaction to this recent RAND Corp. study of health care @ the VA compared with other varieities of private health care in the U.S., which seems to show dissimilar results in cases where people actually get in to receive treatment. There are some advantages in having a consistent health care provider. I also believe it is easier for VA Doctors to prescribe treatments than HMO and Private insurance paid providers.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 11:07 AM) 1. Whatever this turns out to be health-wise for Cheney, I hope it gets better and this becomes a non-issue. I despise Cheney for a lot of things, but I don't believe him to be an evil person. I hope he gets better. 2. If this does happen, I doubt Bush picks a Prez candidate. For Bush, it looks like the beginning of another power play precedent. For the candidate, they get all their negatives exposed early and often, while not being able to achieve anything materially positive. I don't see the gain there, unless they were a marginal candidate to begin with (and therefore need the attention). 3. Condi Rice is not ready to be a President. Therefore, I dealy hope she doesn't get a job one heart beat away from the Presidency. I doubt anyone is ready to be President under those circumstances. If that was truly the #1 priority, we'd be looking to Bush the older or Clinton to take over the reigns. They don't have to be taught where the coffee pot and bathrooms are. But this will be about politics.

There are lots of problems in our world and we can't solve them all at the same time. Sometimes it takes the problem getting just a little worse. Sometimes people have to die. As a society, we can't beat ourselves up for not tackling this problem much, much, sooner. Overall, from injury to long term treatment, we have done much better. Part of the problem, is actually a very good thing, we are saving a lot more soldiers in the field who would have died in Korea and back.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/306365_bestbuy07.html

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 10:07 AM) Except for being one of the sleazier men in government. Nice going away present. He's got to be close to retirement. Would never be a Pres candidate. Everyone will pray President Bush remains healthy. And I think Condi would be an interesting pick, for all the reasons Jim mentioned. Not much to do as Veep. Get's us a new Secretary. Could be a win-win.