bmags

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 07:52 PM) <!--quoteo(post=1839355:date=Feb 25, 2009 -> 01:47 PM:name=Balta1701)-->QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) <!--quotec-->The Volcano Chaiten in Chile has responded to Jindal's speech by erupting 3 times in 24 hours. (Until 2008, that volcano was inactive for somewhere around 9000 years.) .msnbcLinks {font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 425px;} .msnbcLinks a {text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px;} .msnbcLinks a:link, .msnbcLinks a:visited {color: #5799db !important;} .msnbcLinks a:hover, .msnbcLinks a:active {color:#CC0000 !important;} Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy I love when geology gets into politics

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 06:54 PM) Like I said in the beginning, I didn't express my opinion. On purpose. Yes, he sucked. Obama did a good job. My problem with Obama's speech is like every other "SOTU" speech - it's all promises about nothing. Easy to make fun of things when you don't get in the water with everyone. "Lol once again all you OBAMA SHEEP thinking the MESSIAH had a GOOD SPEECH while the REPUBLICAN SUCKED!" ..."oh and you too republicans in the thread SHEEP"

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 06:09 PM) No, it wouldn't. I've seen it here. I've heard it elsewhere. That's the difference. To tell you the truth Kap I actually expected a lot of Vindal. I'd heard he was a charismatic version of pawlenty who at one point I'd found reasonable, but he was just awful, brutally awful. If this is the face of the GOP I'm feeling pretty good If I was Obama, but poor for the US. Luckily, I think the Utah gov. is smart, intelligent, and especially not an idiot. But when Fox news, david brooks, the entire right wing concluded that Jindal sucked, do you come to the conclusion that Jindal was good? You are such an independent thinker, always thinking the republican response was great in the face of everyone saying it was terrible, here's a cookie.

They say you can tell how the season's going to go by how the first at bat goes.

Finally saw Jindals response. David Brook's reaction is classic.

Modest Mouse in the days past liars unicorns just several that haven't been mentioned

Come on guys, people have been calling this Obama's stimulus bill, and they have a monkey being shot saying "i guess they'll have to find someone else to write the stimulus bill". As soon as I saw that I said to myself "somebody f***ed up". For the majority of people in this country who are not actively trying to NOT find racism and have some historical understanding that equating blacks to primates happened quite often fairly recently, they saw how poor the cartoon was. You really shouldn't have to explain a cartoon this much to, not even get the joke, but to explain around first assumptions. I'm not condoning calling for firing, but this is a pretty big f*** up by the posts editors. Proof of that is Murdoch actually apologized for it, I can't ever remember that happening.

Well then 4 times, 8 if you consider round trip! Now, if instead of the Jeff. City to Union Station trip there was a high speed rail, i would most certainly do that over my car.

I've ridden it 4 times...if we are talking Metra (is that part of amtrak?) then it multiplies to a high number worth mentioning.

I like how you guys are essentially giving the academy more legitimacy by implying winning 8 oscars in a given year forces you to be compared to all other years and ranked by Oscars. It seems people in this thread are both decrying the poor choices of the oscars but legitimizing them by getting so upset.

Oh GOD!

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 04:23 PM) Good luck with trying to get the business traveller to move to this. People are away from their families enough with travel and would rather fly and get there quickly instead of taking forever to use a train. Here's the point, though. You wouldn't be taking a train cross-country. But, if you do work in chicago. Instead of that 30 minute plane ride, you'd take the train. At face value that seems inefficient. BUt then, taken into effect how brutal airports are, your 30 min. plane ride scoots further and further towards 4 hours. Meanwhile, a highspeed train to indy would be about that, if not faster. To st. louis, about the same. And while you are on the train you can call and get work done. This ins't a replacement for Chicago to Boston, it's a replacement for Chicago to Milwaukee/STL/Indy. And when gas is high, would your company rather pay for your miles done by national avg. x miles driven, or a flat rate on the train. We ought not thing where the puck is now, but where the puck is going to be.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 05:12 PM) Probably not as bad but a high speeding train with 1000 people on it seems like a desirable terrorist target...especially since planes are near impossible to target now. well, this'll be off topic, but there's been cases of government watchdog groups who have taken things they shouldn't be able to take just to prove a point that it's still ineffective and takes forever.

yeah i can't, maybe some drug dogs and metal detectors but nothing as inefficient and terrible as airplanes.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 04:58 PM) That would be something like a full day on a train, correct? I don't know that Americans are ready for that. They want to be there now, which is why the car wins out over the train most of the time. My trip from Jefferson city (about...130 miles from STL) to Union station was 11.5 hours with a stop in STL. It is a 7 hour car ride there. I'd imagine a high speed rail would be quite comparable.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 03:54 PM) Locally, yes. but many people prefer to fly to take business trips and vacations. My wife and I have friends in St. Louis who we'd love to go and visit more often. but there is no way we can afford to fly... and the idea of driving 5 hours for a weekend visit isnt enticing. However, a 4 hour train ride where we can play card,s read, or nap... now that is enticing. And if there was a way to link the Chicago hub to the Florida hub and have some sort of a high speed line from Chicago to Orland (DIsney)... man, I'd be in heaven. Well, in my experience with my father/father's friends/brothers since they entered the work force, is that since 9/11 they prefer to drive for business trips because they can get work done calling while driving, as opposed to on a plane, and the hassle of security with the lap tops and shoes and wait time, which is pretty much just time lost. I think a train would be enticing for that group, because you could add email to that list if we eventually create a large wireless network. What an investment that would be.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 03:50 PM) You would have to convince an entire culture to shift how they move. This country is 100% about the car. Unless you can change that, you are going to have a really tough time pitching anything that isn't automotive related. People want to be able to jump into their cars and go. gas moves up to $5 again and I'll take my chances convincing them.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 03:46 PM) I have an interesting point of comparison here. My wife sells European Rail for a living and she cant begin to tell you how embarrassed she is of America's rail system. It's a total disgrace. Europeans are totally shocked when they come to America. "Plane? Who flys by plane? I have to drive from Chicago to St. Louis?" I have been a big proponent of completely replacing our current system, but it's just WAY too expensive. I cant find it, but I used the LA-Las Vegas rail line proposal and extrapolated those numbers out for a nation wide system. As a rider, it was cheaper than flying.. about half as fast... but expensive as hell to build. but, in what time could a return be made on that investment? I mean nuclear energy is through the roof to install, but many in the country find that worth it, in what time in America could this be made up, especially with a proposed rise in gas the next decade (forever)

so how many news papers are going to use the following pun: Flowers blooms in transition to catcher

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) I dont really have time to read through all the articles, but I'm just gonna say that I would love if we had a large system of high-speed rail travel in this country similar to that of Europe. Me too. Especially being in Columbia, MO and needing to travel back to Chicago, I would much rather take a train where you can move around, write, read then a plane, where you need to be there 4 hours in advance for a 30 minute flight and wait an hour for luggage. I would use the rail all the time.

yes, why can't we create Pinochet's chile??????

man doesnt getz look like morneau?

go missouri!

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 06:11 AM) Maybe my memory is wrong, but I thought Obama has expressed interest in keeping the supreme court "balanced". Basically, lean it to the left, but keep it 5-4... no "activist" supreme court. I may be totally wrong or misheard him. Probably are totally wrong. A big reason why people were pissed at hillary's win at all cost campaign was the high number of liberal court justices people felt were holding out for a democratic president. They were selling to her former supporters to remember that. Of course he supports a balanced court, but that would mean not appointing a conservative for a more liberal judge.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 23, 2009 -> 06:03 AM) In all fairness, how many times have movies with an "Indian theme" or cast (I'm thinking Monsoon Wedding or Bend It Like Beckham) ever even come close? And it wasn't directed by an Indian, either. Gay characters, the Holocaust, you can make some arguments, and musicals like Chicago, Moulin Rouge...but it's not like 1958-1968 when musicals just dominated that era in terms of the Academy. For real. People are mad that an actor who played a character nothing like him beat out an actor who played a character with many similarities. With Rourke as that character you say "oh that's the perfect match", with Penn you say "ooh I can't wait to see what he did with it". In terms of the history of the oscars, I thought Benjamin Button was the classic academy pick. Numerous locations and documents different era's and costumes, it's the 'epic' movie they love rewarding so much.