jasonxctf

if anyone knows Frank Thomas personally, he's on the list in Illinois. For his prior home in Burr Ridge he's got something valued between $10-$100. 19807135512 THOMAS FRANK 9060 TURNBERRY DR BURR RIDGE, IL 5/5/1998

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 08:20 PM) Cool found 355 bucks worth of stuff for my dad in Ca. really? rock on

thought you guys would enjoy seeing if you have any unclaimed property. my dad had over $600 of lost US Savings Bonds here in IL. I had $7 in missing stock dividends in IN! www.cashdash.net (Illinois-only) Each state has their database listed on the website. just search "unclaimed property"

does anyone have a complete list of all of the grinder rules??? i think it would make a nice addition in my office. thanks. btw, whoever is talented enough to make those Sox Clickable Smilies, I think we need a new World Champions one!!!

late night typing= crazy thoughts... obviously i meant 2 mil per year.

here's where we disagree for a few reasons... 1) I can gamble here in Illinois. I live 30 minutes from 2 casinos. I still go to Vegas once per year. Golf is huge in Vegas. People can certainly golf at home. So the whole theory of people go to vegas to do what they cant do at home is bs. 2) Fans travel to Spring Training in FL and AZ to watch their favorite teams. Wouldn't they travel to Vegas for the same reason??? 3) People come to Vegas from areas that are no where near major league cities. If you live in Springfield IL and are a Sox fan, you can drive 4 hours each way to Chicago or you can fly to Vegas in 3 hours and see them play while having a great vacation. 4) Vegas is the fastest growing city in the US. Nevada is the fastest growing state in the US. The nearest team is over 4 hours away. I certainly think that for any given game, the fan base at a game would probably be 50/50 for the home/away team. At the same point, I think that a Vegas team would draw over 2 million per game.

Back to the topic at hand... here are the latest Bush poll numbers. http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/29/bus...rity/index.html GW Bush: Favorable 46% UnFavorable 53% Laura Bush: Favorable 73% UnFavorable 13% Dick Cheney Favorable 41% UnFavorable 50% Donald Rumsfeld Favorable 42% UnFavorable 45%

it's interesting to see the strengths (Top 10) and weaknesses (Bottom 10) of each President listed. Clinton Strong: Economic Management, Equal Justice Weak: Moral Authority, Relations with Congress Carter Strong: Moral Authority and Equal Justice Weak: Relations with Congress and Economic Management Bush 41 Strong: None Weak: None Reagan Strong: Public Persuasion, Relations with Congress and Vision Weak: Administrative Skills

how did i forget someone that we weren't talking about or debating about??? g hw bush's post-presidency actions are not part of this discussion. We were talking about Clinton, Carter and Reagan's actions. You may want to go back and re-read the posts.

Five Best Presidents Abraham Lincoln Franklin Delano Roosevelt George Washington Theodore Roosevelt Harry S. Truman Five Worst Presidents James Buchanan Andrew Johnson Franklin Pierce Warren G. Harding William Henry Harrison Courtesy: C-SPAN C-SPAN Survey of Presidential Leadership Bill Clinton Historian Survey Results Categories Final Score Category Ranking Public Persuasion 70.3 11 Crisis Leadership 50.5 20 Economic Management 74.0 5 Moral Authority 19.5 41 International Relations 54.3 21 Administrative Skills 56.1 21 Relations with Congress 38.2 36 Vision / Setting an Agenda 48.1 22 Pursued Equal Justice For All 76.7 5 Performance Within Context of Times 51.2 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL SCORE 539 OVERALL RANK 21 Jimmy Carter Historian Survey Results Categories Final Score Category Ranking Public Persuasion 43.3 30 Crisis Leadership 42.3 28 Economic Management 37.0 33 Moral Authority 71.2 10 International Relations 55.8 20 Administrative Skills 51.3 26 Relations with Congress 41.6 33 Vision / Setting an Agenda 48.8 20 Pursued Equal Justice For All 78.2 4 Performance Within Context of Times 48.6 24 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL SCORE 518 OVERALL RANK 22 George Bush Historian Survey Results Categories Final Score Category Ranking Public Persuasion 51.4 19 Crisis Leadership 67.4 11 Economic Management 46.4 23 Moral Authority 59.8 19 International Relations 70.0 12 Administrative Skills 59.1 16 Relations with Congress 52.6 20 Vision / Setting an Agenda 40.9 28 Pursued Equal Justice For All 47.1 17 Performance Within Context of Times 52.8 20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL SCORE 548 OVERALL RANK 20 Ronald Reagan Historian Survey Results Categories Final Score Category Ranking Public Persuasion 91.4 4 Crisis Leadership 63.2 15 Economic Management 48.1 21 Moral Authority 70.0 11 International Relations 68.6 14 Administrative Skills 43.2 32 Relations with Congress 63.5 8 Vision / Setting an Agenda 77.0 8 Pursued Equal Justice For All 41.8 25 Performance Within Context of Times 66.8 12 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL SCORE 634 OVERALL RANK 11

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 04:28 PM) Interesting that you mentioned Reagans paid engagements, but not Clintons... That is exactly what he has been doing since he retired, making speeches and getting paid a ton of money to do so. yeah how much did he make for the Tsunami and New Orleans help???

i cant recall the specifics of how the gauge success vs failure, but if it's test based, a law like this forces teachers to teach to the test rather than just teach students how to learn.

Over the holidays, I was thinking about an issue that I was extremly impressed with our party with. I have relatives who left New Orleans for Illinois shortly after the Hurricane hit. There were 6 in total, their 5 dogs and 1 lucky sole who works for the NOPD that was left behind in New Orleans to help. There was even a nice article in the Daily Herald about them. In any case, we went to our local Labor Day parade with some other relatives to try and take their minds off of things. As with any parade, there is the HS Football team, cheerleaders, band, police, fire, etc. Since the town is pretty big, it also draws those of the Catholic Charities, Local Democratic Party, Republican Party, candidates, etc. My relatives decided to bring a sign with them that read "Hurricane Katrina Refuges" and placed in next to them. Most people stopped or said hello and well wishes to them. Then it was the candidates turn. Every single Republican Candidate drove or walked by them without a second thought. I even heard someone in a passing car say.. "hey look, they are from New Orleans" as the car drove by. Catholic Charities, the Cook County Democratic Party rep and Congresswomen Melissa Bean all stopped by to see what they could do to help. In fact, the whole parade stopped as Bean took 2-3 minutes to talk with them about what they needed. Her rep then handed us her and his card and asked them to meet up with them at the end of the route which they did. The combination of the three, got them through the FEMA BS, insurance info, money and even groceries and toys for the little kids. At that point, I couldn't have been prouder of being a Democrat.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 05:00 PM) How about the Barret report? Why won't they, (Dems), let the independent counsel release his report in full with no redactions,save the classified material. Is it because the wonderful Clintons used the IRS as their personal auditing house? I wonder. Is it a crime to intentionally audit people for no reason? Every woman that Clinton raped, oops, did I say that? Every woman he had relations with, was audited, as were many conservative think tanks and foundations. Coincidence????????????????? this is the most ridiculous thing, I think I have read on this board to date. That includes those comments about Timo and Ozzie! :headshake

just ask any school teacher or administrator about No Child Left Behind. They'll tell you what a horrible program it is. And in fairness, it was a joint effort between both parties. The administration did not fund the program however causing schools to eat the entire cost internally. This caused school deficits which inturn caused many schools to go out to voter referendum to increase tax rates making the schools look like the bad guys. Horrible program, needs to be eliminated or at worst gutted and re-written. (and funded)

i dont think Rasmussen listed a sample date on his report. I took all polls from December. My guess is that if Rasmussen released their poll on the 22nd or 23rd, the poll was probably from the 18th-21st. Making it pretty similar to the other recent polls showing job approval of 47, 41, 44, 42 and 50. Actually Rasmussen's title says approval is at 50%. When you add up the numbs, they only come to 49%. So with an average of 47, 41, 44, 42, 50 and 49 we come to 45.5%. I guess if we were true statistican's, we'd also throw out the high number and the low number to come to a true calculation. This would mean that 50 and 41 are eliminated and the new average is still 45.5%. These polls (as we've seen in the past) are quite misleading. My guess is that Bush's approval numbers will dip again before 1/1 as images of soldiers overseas without their families are seen. The numbers will kick up in early 2006 as everyone always enters the new year optomistic about everything. We won't truly get a sense of the country's feelings towards GW until mid-March or so.

here are all of the recent polls. incl Rasmussen they avg out to an approval rating of 43.07%. Still pretty piss poor. Survey Approve Disapprove Unsure . CNN/USA Today/Gallup 12/16-18/05 41 56 3 ABC/Washington Post 12/15-18/05 47 52 1 NPR LV 12/15, 17-18/05 44 54 2 FOX/Opinion Dynamics RV 12/13-14/05 42 51 7 Diageo/Hotline RV 12/12-13/05 50 47 3 NBC/Wall Street Journal 12/9-12/05 39 55 6 CNN/USA Today/Gallup 12/9-11/05 42 55 3 Cook/RT Strategies 12/8-11/05 42 55 2 Pew 12/7-11/05 38 54 8 Gallup 12/5-8/05 43 52 5 AP-Ipsos * 12/5-7/05 42 57 CBS/New York Times 12/2-6/05 40 53 7

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 06:12 PM) Does this remind anyone else of those annoying threads people made during Sept. and Oct. where it seemed every week someone decided it was a good idea to post those photos of AJ in a bar as something we should all be embarassed about? no.

Bush's tax cuts didnt do a damn thing. I ask a simple question... if we just experienced the "Clinton" recession (which is total bs) what did G HW Bush experience... the "Reagan" recession? Somebody please let me know when the stock market gets back to where it was back in 2000. Then we can show a 0% gain in 5+ years.

only extended 1 month

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:06 PM) Didn't we already pretty much send this BS to the grave last time? Why post it again when it was blown out of the water the first time? Basically you just took all of the poorest and least densely populated states and put them on a bad list. It has nothing to do with red/blue states and everything to do with the progressive tax system that takes from the rich and gives to the poor, well shock upon shocks, it has the same effect on poor/rich states as it is poor/rich people. Poor people tend to recieve more in tax benefits than they pay, boy what a shock. we did??? or you did?

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 09:44 PM) Ted Stevens is a douche. copier Dec 17, 2005 -> 02:59 AM Post #11 Winston-Salem (High A) Group: Members Posts: 542 Joined: December 30, 2002 From: Saint Charles, IL Member No.: 8 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 09:23 PM) The government should be made to do with less before it asks the people to pay more. Why should you, me and everyone else subsidize wasteful government spending? agreed. and that biggest douche in Alaska, Ted Stevens is the worst of them all. I want all Republicans here to look at who is the problem of "big government spending" The Tax Foundation has released a fascinating report showing which states benefit from federal tax and spending policies, and which states foot the bill. The report shows that of the 32 states (and the District of Columbia) that are "winners" -- receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 76% are Red States that voted for George Bush in 2000. Indeed, 17 of the 20 (85%) states receiving the most federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Red States. Here are the Top 10 states that feed at the federal trough (with Red States highlighted in bold): States Receiving Most in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid: 1. D.C. ($6.17)- D 2. North Dakota ($2.03)- R 3. New Mexico ($1.89)-D in 2000, R in 2004 4. Mississippi ($1.84)- R 5. Alaska ($1.82)- R 6. West Virginia ($1.74)- R 7. Montana ($1.64)- R 8. Alabama ($1.61)- R 9. South Dakota ($1.59)-R 10. Arkansas ($1.53)-R In contrast, of the 16 states that are "losers" -- receiving less in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 69% are Blue States that voted for Al Gore in 2000. Indeed, 11 of the 14 (79%) of the states receiving the least federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Blue States. Here are the Top 10 states that supply feed for the federal trough (with Blue States highlighted in bold States Receiving Least in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid: 1. New Jersey ($0.62)- D 2. Connecticut ($0.64)- D 3. New Hampshire ($0.68) R in 2000, D in 2004 4. Nevada ($0.73)- R 5. Illinois ($0.77)- D 6. Minnesota ($0.77)- D 7. Colorado ($0.79)- R 8. Massachusetts ($0.79)- D 9. California ($0.81)- D 10. New York ($0.81)- D Two states -- Florida and Oregon (coincidentally, the two closest states in the 2000 Presidential election) -- received $1.00 in federal spending for each $1.00 in federal taxes paid. This post has been edited by jasonxctf: Dec 17, 2005 -> 03:08 AM

but the protected land is only the size of South Carolina!!!

joined. this is a good idea.

well the drudge link that started this topic has been taken down without ever mentioning the other poll. "FOR SHAME... DRUDGE REPORT... FOR SHAME"