jasonxctf

• Joliet: shooting. how fitting. seriously i hope the city nails this. it would help showcase what a great city Chicago is and bring in enormous financial growth to the Chicagoland area.

great point. I wonder if GWB will follow the path of Ford, Reagan and his father and become a "consultant" or try and help out society like Clinton and Carter.

Pierre is an obvious upgrade over Podsednik. Great defense (I think 0 errors on the season while Podsednik has 8) great speed 50+ stolen bases so far, with similar OBP.

20 mins into this video, I can say its a very good watch.

yeah dont forget that nationally the dems picked up a traditional stronghold seat with melissa bean and may get another with tammy duckworth.

according to wikipedia... As of 2005, Illinois has an estimated population of 12,763,371, which is an increase of 51,355, or 0.4%, from the prior year and an increase of 343,724, or 2.8%, since the year 2000. This includes a natural increase since the last census of 406,425 people (that is 959,470 births minus 553,045 deaths) and a decrease due to net migration of 63,011 people out of the state. Immigration from outside the United States resulted in a net increase of 328,020 people, and migration within the country produced a net loss of 391,031 people. As of 2004 there were 1,682,900 foreign-born (13.3%).[6] At the northern edge of the state on Lake Michigan lies Chicago, the nation's third largest city. In 2000, 23.3% of the population lived in the city of Chicago, 43.3% in Cook County and 65.6% in Illinois's part of Chicagoland, the leading industrial and transportation center in the region, which includes Will, DuPage, Kane, and Lake Counties as well as Cook County. The rest of the population lives in the smaller cities and in the rural areas that dot the state's plains. So bascially, if a candidate gets 65% in cook county and carries the Rockford, Rock Island/Moline and Peoria areas, he or she is a shoe-in.

this state is going to be "blue" for a long, long time. Thanks George.

New Lineup for the rest of the year 1) Iguchi 2) Cintron 3) Dye 4) Thome 5) Crede 6) Konerko 7) Pierzynski 8) Anderson 9) Sweeney

why isnt alex cintron our starting SS for the rest of the year?

not following the logic here. Lieberman lost by 4% didn't he? Gore did get robbed due to more people electing him than Bush. That's not how our system chooses its President, but its a legitimate beef. "More people wanted me as President than Bush" Kerry... not so much. There were significant problems with the Ohio vote, but had he carried that state it would be the same situation as above. Bush could then say, more people wanted me as President than Kerry" As for both Lieberman and potentially Chaffee, neither of them should be able to run as indys. There should be an election law that states if you run in a contested primary and lose, you are done.

Brandon McCarthy please pick up a Red Courtesy Phone.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/31/bur...m.ap/index.html

i'm thrilled with my AOL High Speed for $29.99/mo

Dell... enjoy your call to India

its sad. America is full of fat-asses. that was one of the biggest shockers I saw when I traveled overseas. The food portions are smaller and people are much slimmer.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Aug 28, 2006 -> 04:36 PM) You are in school to get one thing, an education. You are not there to make buddies with the teachers. You are instructed in math, science, social science and arts to help round you out and prepare you for college or the work force. Teachers are authority figures, not your buddy. It isnt a one on one relationship with your teacher, its a one to many relationship. And the comment about being told that you can eat or drink just like a dog. At work most people have a set time that you can have lunch. At some places you have a set place to eat said lunch. The rules you learn in high school are in preparation for the rules you have in the workforce. but you're missing the point. the students learned more in that class, because they had respect and admiration for the teacher, than in any other class they took. it's not a coincedence why.

the best thing a teacher/school can do is empower their students. not regulate them. i remember that 10 years ago when i was in high school, our school had a no food/drinks in class policy. no one could bring a water bottle or sandwich to class. the administration was afraid of either what was being drunk or garbage/mess that would be created. i had a class where the teacher said... you know what... i'm going to allow you to eat/drink in my class. But if you take advantage of the situation, it's over. I don't think its right that you are being told when you can eat and drink like a dog. That teacher got more respect from her students than anyone teacher I ran across. The troublesome kids (the ones who got into trouble in every other class) loved this teacher and not just for this comment/decision. It was a matter of respect. The students felt like they were being respected and gave it back 10-fold. The students learned more in her class, then any other. They still remember her today. Ask yourself why??? Was it because she allowed them to eat and drink in the classroom? Absolutely not.

these kids are being forced to go to school. we shouldnt force them to wear or not wear certain clothes at the same time. the business analogy sounds good and all, but you aren't forced to work at a particular business. you choose to work there and thus choose to accept their dress code. Some businesses have a suit-only dress code, others go business casual, others say anything is fine. if we dont treat high school students like adults, how are we supposed to expect them to act like adults?

what a joke. very poor move on the administrations side. these kids are going to shut down for a while and the learning process will be impeded because of it. Far more that a T-shirt that says "Buck Fush"

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2006 -> 06:19 PM) Is it worth pointing out that 1 of the 2 examples you gave is an order of magnitude or two more expensive than the other? In 2004, the U.S. Gave about $3.4 billion in aid to Sub-Saharan Africa (there's some that goes to Egypt otherwise because of the Camp David agreement). That same year we spent what, about $100 billion on Iraq? good point. those were the 2 things that came to mind first. I'm sure we drop billions in aid to other areas of the world too. its not that i'm against helping others, its just that our priorities are backwards. shouldnt we be spending us taxpayer dollars in the us first before giving it away to other areas of the world? i commend aids relief in Africa... but we have an Aids problem here in the US. Why not work on relieving/reducing this problem first before solving the rest of the worlds problems. (homelessness, education, public works, etc) QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 25, 2006 -> 05:44 PM) and N.O. should be a "chocolate city" too! poorly worded, but i think the point he was trying to make is that New Orleans should not just be rebuilt for the haves without the have nots. See my other thread in the Sex, Lies and Music category. Housing/Rental prices are keeping the poorest individuals from coming back to the city. If the city was 60% African American prior to Katrina, somethings wrong with the rebuilding effort if its 70% Caucasian afterwards.

now its even tougher for residents to move back. Housing prices are through the roof as our rents. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060825/ap_on_...f_new_orleans_2

people blasting these comments are just Nagin-haters. Plain and simple. He made a good point and a fair comparison. our country is pretty piss poor with disaster relief no matter what the circumstances. and for my 2 cents, we need to stop spending so much money rebuilding and assisting other areas of the world (Iraq, Africa, etc) and spend more of our tax dollars fixing our own problems.

see, i question pablo's post-all star performance and he proves me wrong. my master plan worked.

whats with the ozuna love on this board. The guy is hitting 6/45 or .133 since the All Star Break. Podsednik is hitting 26/118 or .220.

The biggest reduction was observed between 1964 and 1985. "A three-to-four degree increase of the temperature on Greenland from 1920 to 1930, and the increase recorded since 1995 has sped up the ice melt," he said. The effect of the rising temperatures in the 1920s and 1930s was "visible dozens of years later, and that of the 1990s will be (visible) in 10 or 20 years," Yde said, adding that he expected Greenland's glaciers to melt even faster in the future. The shrinking of the glaciers since the 19th century is "the result of the atmosphere's natural warming, following volcanic eruptions for example and greenhouse gases, created by human activities, which have aggravated the situation further," he said. i love how the title of the article indicates that its not global warming, but later in the story the researchers themselves suggest that human activities have caused this. horrible journalism.