Texsox

I was puzzling over this, Basically there is no personal limit on how much a person could have insured. One could, in theory, have millions and millions covered, as long as it was in separate institutions, or different account types at the same bank. So why force people to spread the money around? Is there a difference in covering 10 people for $10,000,000 or 1000 people for $10,000,000 (same amount)?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 02:55 PM) If you got cancer from smoking marijuana that must mean you were fried to the point of being functionally retarded every day for like 15 years. really, how did you arrive at that amount?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 02:49 PM) Sorry but I honestly can't think of a more lame reason not to vote for someone. I did not say that was my reason. Much earlier, at the start of the primary season, I said that Obama v. McCain would be my ideal choice. I like much about both and could at least walk away from the result feeling good. Now 3,000 negative posts later, I've changed my opinion. If his greatest supporters can't find a reason to vote for him, how could I?

http://sendables.jibjab.com/ Not bad.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 02:18 PM) I don't have the ability to prove it. If I find the guy, I'll ask him to explain it to me again. Not finding a study that confirms or denies something is far different then actually finding a study. Basically all research is funded by someone. So try and imagine who would spend the millions of dollars the research would cost. If they used human subjects, they would need to find someone willing to commit an illegal act, repeatedly, over some time. Another problem with studying pot and cancer is there is no standard propduction. Impurities could be introduced by unregulated producers. Just testing for "pure" ingrediants probably would not be of much significance. So it could be pot does contribute to cancer, it just has never been studied.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 02:10 PM) You're basically saying Athomeboy matters as much as John McCain here and therefore they should be held to the same standards of behavior. Not at all. In fact all the negativity from a few Obama supporters has dropped the care factor to beyond zero. What was left of my hope for Obama has deteriorated into an active desire to see him lose. Imagine one of the most liberal posters here so turned off by Obama supporters I can't even feel a little happy if he wins. What I am saying is I find it hilarious that someone would post over and over nothing but negative posts about a candidate, even calling those around McCain his attack surrogates, all the while being an attack surrogate for the opponent. Something about the kettle and pot. If these negative ads are so bad, why do so many of Obama supporters personally use them? Do as I say, not as I do? With supporters like that, Obama doesn't need an opponent.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 02:05 PM) Well, you'd have to admit that the tar in your lungs wouldn't be good. But that's such a bs line of logic. Let's refuse people the right to use cars or to eat fast food. God knows how many trillions of dollars governments spend on those health care related costs (yet another reason why a government funded health care is a terrible idea). bs line of logic? We would be taking an illegal substance and legalizing it. You are describing legal things and then making them illegal. The bs logic would be since A is bad we should allow all bad things as well. Would legalizing cause usage to increase or decrease? I believe it would increase. So why would it be a bs line of reasoning to actually look at the risks and health costs before taking that step? It would seem that a prudent thing to do is analyze all factors before acting.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:56 PM) I define negative as spending a majority of your time pointing out how the other person is a bad guy have you looked at your last 3,000 posts

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:40 PM) Cindy McCain on the Today Show, May 8, 2008: "What you're going to see is a great debate. Which is what the American public deserves. None of this negative stuff, though. You won't see it come out of our side at all." And how should this make me want to vote for Obama? What in your bolded message should make me want to vote for Obama? Or is this an example of the negative campaign strategies you oppose? The most negative stuff I have seen this campaign are your posts

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:52 PM) To my knowledge there are no links between marijuana use and cancer. There was a guy on another board I go to that had access to databases of medical studies (not open membership unfortunately or I'd go dig it up) and he couldn't find any studies that said there was. I wonder who would fund such a study? To determine if an illegal substance also caused cancer? I'd have been more surprised if he found one.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) Based on the record number of people who voted in the Dem primary I beg to differ. Based on the tighest primary race in my lifetime fueling voting late into the primary season, I stand by my statement. Negative ads would have been extint a few decades ago of they didn't work.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:52 AM) The Age issue went away after 9/11 when the US cracked down on the fake birth certificates and that sort of stuff. The young players just can't get away with that phony documentation anymore, at least not when it comes to them playing professionally within the states (minor league or major league level). If they are playing in the Venezuelan leagues there is the possibility that they aren't the age they indicate. Realistically the only players who could be of the wrong age are players who already were granted visas pre 9/11 (El Duque, Contreras, etc). While tougher, it still is not impossible. Plus, it is easy enough in Latin America countries, where mordida or "little bite" is a way of life, to bribe an official and have an altered birth certificate. Is it as bad as it was? No. It is way better. Would I accept absolutely their ages are correct? No.

QUOTE (DABearSoX @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 11:17 AM) THIS.SEASON.IS.OVER. GREAT! We won the division by .5 games and play Tampa Bay in the 1st Round!!

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:02 PM) You and I know that but the average American who doesn't pay much attention as we do will look at things like commercials and newspaper headlines. Most people don't spend several hours per week reading political blogs and what not. Which is why negative ads work so great. Fear is a far bigger motivator then hope.

Makes a lot of sense, but it has made sense for fifty years. And I was thinking the smoking bans around the country may make it easier to pass this. It would be unlikely to have pot smokers in bars, etc. since tobacco has been banned in so many places. Have they ever developed an instant roadside check so that the impaired driver issue could be better resolved? That to me is still a huge hurdle. We can nail drunk drivers pretty easy, we would need the same for pot smokers if this was to pass.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 12:37 PM) I don't know why he should be president. He's too busy complaining about his opponent to tell me why I should vote for him. Really? I was just looking at his web site and there was plenty of information there. Unless your mind is already made up.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 12:49 PM) That money has to come from somewhere when a bank fails (taxpayers). Also, don't keep more than $100k in a single bank account. If you really want that much cash just sitting there, open up a second account. Which basically means the entire amount would be covered anyways. I did a little reseach, the anount was raised to $100,000 in 1980.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) kudos on the subtitle. Thanks, I do what I can . . .

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 11:33 AM) McCain likes to make it sound like every "pork" project would no longer exist under his watch. It's just not true. his argument is that it should be it's own bill, not an earmark. He tends to gloss over that part. And what is Obama's plan reagrding pork barrel projects?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:30 AM) Right. I would think that they would take a loss if the bank completely failed (which is almost certain to not happen). Isn't it time to increase the FDIC levels? Hasn't it been $100,000 for about fifty years?

So McCain is running negative ads. Tell me how that makes him a bad choice to be President? To me that is all about style and not substance. How does pointing to his ads and screaming negative! negative! translate to why I should vote for Obama?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:39 AM) I want to point out that its never a good thing when you have to bench a guy making 12M a year for the next few years. It prevents you from moving him and obviously since your benching him you are clearly getting on production. The deal which was once a bargain is quickly turning into a complete albatross. I love Paulie for all that he's done in a Sox uniform, but I honestly could care less what the Sox could get for him as long as they could find a creative way to unload that contract and free up first base. I think it is still a little early to believe Konerko's career is almost over, or that he will drop off that steeply. I believe some rest will work wonders.

Funny we don't seem to mind these "illegal aliens".

Seriously, someone run through this visit/non visit and tell me how it should influence someone's vote? What insight does this offer on Obama and how he would be as President?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:21 AM) You remind me of a troll I used to know...