EvilMonkey

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 03:42 PM) First, he sought their endorsement and that doesn't make him a member, though it would've given him their votes, which now is considered unconstitutional I believe. Second, do you really think seeking the endorsement of a left leaning group is on the same plane as a group wanting to secede from the United States and whose leader had Hugo Chavez type language about the United States? I assure you it isn't. Obama's move was just a political play to get votes early in his career. http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html#anchor792932 Sounds a little bit more than just seeking an endorsement. He also attended meetings as well. http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng45.html Sarah was never in the AIG, something which took the MSM a month to figure out, and still haven't retracted.

Since AHB seems to drool over polls, here is one for you. http://www.gallup.com/poll/111049/Obamas-R...Plus-Minus.aspx

Ok, check this out. On MSNBC, they try and tak with one of the questioners at the debate. He was kinda mad that McCain assumed he didn't know about Freddie and Fannie before the crisis. He posits that it may be because he is a young black man that McCain thought he was ignorant. He also mentions other things in the story like how he was selected to be an 'undecided' for the debate. That part, they just went right on by and bolded the part about the supposed racism. Maybe they should have highlighted the bit about his selection process too. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...09/1523335.aspx Really now, this guy is an 'uncommitted'? There is a chance that anybody would switch their vote, but that is a pretty piss poor way to choose supposedly undecided people for the debate.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 04:53 PM) That is what drives me NUTS about the stock market. i wotn get into it now, but stock prices are more often than not not related to the ACTUAL value of a company. It' persevered value. Yes I understand that s how a "free market" works, and I get that totally. But like you said, their overall value didnt go down $3. I've seen my 401k go up, I have seen it go down, and right now I am not even looking. I know we have most of our stuff in the safer investments, lower average returns but generally safer, and the lower price just allows us to purchase more 'units', so when it goes back up, which it will, we'll have even more money. As for the perceived value, what always used to piss me off was when a report would come out that said "profits fell by 20% over last year", and the stock price would tumble. Hello, they still MADE A PROFIT, just 20% less than last year.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 02:33 PM) Hope they stab him quite a few times trying to find a vein. I agree with you. +1

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 02:48 PM) AP style guide 2008 Party Affiliation: Let relevance be the guide in determining whether to include a political figure's party affiliation in a story. Party affiliation is pointless in some stories, such as an account of a governor accepting a button from a poster child. It will occur naturally in many political stories. For stories between extremes, include party affiliation if readers need it for understanding or are likely to be curious about what it is. Translation: If a Democrat is in trouble for something, it isn't relvant. If a Republican is in trouble for something, you bet you ass it's relevant, because the ignorant masses need to know how evil and corrupt those damn republicans really are!

We need to slap the people that are panic selling their stuff and taking a bath, when in most cases they should just sit tight and ride it out. They are helping to cause this by their own behavior. Alcoa went down $3 per share today. Is Alcoa really worth $3 less this afternoon that it was this morning? If you have bank stocks, maybe.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 09:56 AM) I gotta say, I'm lovin the hypocrisy these days. And it's coming from BOTH sides. Obama brings up Keating 5 and it's a "smear job" according the McCain Campaign. McCain brings up Ayres and it's a "questioning of Obama's judgement". Please. Both sides. Cut it out! Sayith the pot.

Apparently 105% of the population of Indianapolis is registered to vote. i wonder if ACORN has an office or three there? http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/more_vote...its_population/ Oh, and they have problems in Missouri also http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081009/ap_on_el_ge/voter_fraud

QUOTE (juddling @ Oct 8, 2008 -> 09:08 AM) !!!!!!!DAMN!!!!!!! This season of The Shield just gets better and better. Ronnie soooooo wants to kill Shane. Only problem, is that Tavon will get to him first. About 3 more episodes, and one night Tavon shows up and puts a cap in Shane's azz. I still forsee bigger and badder things in Ronnie's future, possibly even being the one to whack Vic at the end and be the only one to ride off into the sunset alive. I was disappointed with Vic's change of heart at the end, and he should have sent more than 2 gys to do the job.

There are two things to keep in mind. 1) Republicans generally don't trust pollsters, so they either decline to answer, or just don't get polled at all. 2) Many people will tell a pollster that they are voting for Obama because it is the 'cool' thing to do, or they want to avoid being called a racist, or a host of other reasons, and when they actually vote, will vote McCain. Remember all the exit polls that had Kerry winning by huge amounts, and then it turned out he didn't win at all? People screwing with pollsters. Go ahead, cream your jeans with each new poll, but nothing is over until its over. He may yet win, but your suffering from premature electuation. It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and nothing is over until we (the voters, not pollsters) decide it is! Aaaaaagggghhhh!

I think that Dye would be the player most likely to regress, but if I had to choose from the 4 listed, I would go with CQ, only because he would be pitched around more.

QUOTE (The Critic @ Oct 8, 2008 -> 09:11 AM) Started looking for it. Read that last line of your post. Stopped looking for it. I thought most guys preferred head over cuddleing anyway? Oh wait, he said heads. Sorry, my mistake.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Oct 8, 2008 -> 07:48 AM) I was sent this in an e-mail a few days ago, kinda funny. Don't know whether anyone actually said this though. "On television today a Democratic spokesman pointed out that when Obama holds a rally 25-30,000 people show up, whereas when McCain holds one he only draws 10-15,000. The Republican spokesman replied, 'That's because McCain's supporters are at work.'" he has a point. A large portion of Obama supporters are college students, who can take off during the day to go to an event.

I don't think it was McCain that said iraq would be quick and easy, I think that was Chaney.

The only thing these undecideds are undecided about is if they want thier government handout in the form of government programs or tax cuts.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 7, 2008 -> 06:50 PM) uh oh http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9...;show_article=1 Let's see. I'll bet that all the false registrations registered as Democrats, that some low level flunky will be charged with doing this on thier own, despite a pattern around the country of ACORN doing this very thing, and the democrats on here will try to say that this is no big thing, only a few names, no pattern, and just distracts from the 'issues'.

I wonder how come Obama rarely mentions his time as director of the Joyce Foundation?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 7, 2008 -> 02:22 PM) I doubt you've seen me use that defense (the other guy did it) for anything. Negative campaigning is certainly a reality, and they do both do it. But you won't see me throw out some random GOP'er in response to a negative accusation about Obama. I did not mean to imply that you specifically used that as a defense, but it has been used on here by others many, many times.

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/005606.html Thin, rollable PV cells here soon! This could be really cool, and make solar available cheaply, to all. Might now power your whole house or anything, but if it covered 40%-50%, that would be cool too.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 7, 2008 -> 12:35 PM) Cliff's notes version: a regular-sized photovaltic panel will be like 120, 150, 200 watts, or whatever, depending on their size and rating. Shingles are shaped like shingles (obviously), and their texture is a little different but they still look like shingles from a distance. Each one is wired individually underneath the roof and it's probably 10-15 watts apiece. It's pretty expensive, but then again, so is installing a decent-sized solar system in the first place. Check out this: http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/005606.html I am going to post it in the enviro thread as well.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 7, 2008 -> 02:07 PM) So, Palin is OK because some random Democrat did something questionable? If your child tries to tell you something is OK because *insert name* did it, do you accept that? Wrong is wrong. I am not 100% sure Palin is wrong here BTW - I just take issue with the "but so-and-so did it!" tactics. That seems to be the defense for Obama in his lies and negative ads. McCain does it, so its ok if we respond. Maybe I'll boomark your response here for everytime I see that as a justification for Obama being just another politician and paste it in reply. I just said that if she relied on the advice of her accountant, I don't see this as being some national emergency. People do that all the time, and sometimes the accountants are wrong.

Now this is an Obama shirt I could buy! http://tiny.cc/ObamaShirt

If Charlie Rangle, the guy who helps make up all the damn IRS rules and crap, can conveniently 'forget' to claim rental income, I can't see where her relying on an accountants information to be anything to talk about further. Unless you want to note how much the Palin's donated to charity, as compared to Biden.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 7, 2008 -> 10:45 AM) This is getting scary: I think the scarier actions are the constant threats of legal actions by the Obama camp everytime someone says or does something they don't like. Don't like a radio interview? Tell them you are going to try and have their license revoked. Don't like the guest choices at a non-profit protest? Sick the IRS on them to remove their tax exempt status. That is way more scarier. Who would have thought all the brownshirts would have dems wearing them.