SDS

Is there another kind?

Rich people bad.

Looks like he hit the average to me.

According to Polian - 1/3 of all 1st rounders do not pan out as expected.

Sorry... Apple is releasing new macbooks at 1:00pm.... My life will have to wait until i see the new hardware.

You know - whenever you quote him it ruins my "ignore this member" setting.

Minnesota was the better pick this week.

Looking back, I think Ronald Reagan was a man driven by country/duty and not just a desire to be president.

are you saying that you disagree with the notion that this could have been financed by the private sector or that we shouldn't even bother because it is now considered "infractructure"? Dude, if it is the latter - that is retarded. Use $3M of public funding - that only exists because we finance it with foreign loans - or just have wealthy philanthropists pay for it? Wow, tough decision there. If the place is that worthwhile and that popular - financing it in the private sector is a no-brainer. How that is even arguable is beyond me.

In this instance - it is a waste. There are enough wealthy people connected to the Chicago area that raising $3M - if it were such a good cause - would be nothing. Oprah's rainbow-farting unicorn sleeps on $3M every night, with fresh bills laid out for it the next morning. Between Obama, Oprah, Jordon, all the professional sports teams, and the rest of businesses etc... there is no reason why a city the size of Chicago needs federal money for a science building. It's not a bridge. It's not a highway. It's a planetarium that I have no doubt could have been paid for by the generosity of private citizens.

Whenever someone is asked for a voter ID in Maryland - the screams of "voter intimidation" are deafening...

Many times a whole year's gains can be reduced to gains made over 10 days... Now which 10 days out of 250 should you invest in? That is why you don't buy and sell on your own....

Obama, from Illinois, raised $3 trillion dollars for his campaign. Surely he knows enough people that could fund a planetarium.

Well, I can only assume.... 1. Yes. 2. Good point. My gut says wages wouldn't go up as fast to keep up with the plans. Employers have a tough time doing that now when the baby is in their lap, let alone elsewhere. Of course, there is also the idea being allowed to cross state lines and having increased competition should provide some downward pressure on prices.

It doesn't matter. Congress would never pass anything he proposed, but for purely academic reasons, here is how it would work in theory: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/blog/diagnos...h-care-argument

But why is it nonsense? The implication here is that nothing a person has done in the past has any bearing on their candidacy?

Would you or would you not agree that given the 3rd party verification for some of the claims, that this is something that should have been investigated/known many, many moons ago? Don't you think items like this are just a tad more relevant than Sarah Palin's daughter or if Joe Biden exaggerates his Pakistan trips?

People like me? really. what exactly is a "person" like me?

The reason she is relevant is because she is another example of who Obama chooses to associate with. In fact, if you told me that the his choice of churches, led by Rev. Wright, were actually driven by her - it would seem to be entirely plausible. Again, maybe this wouldn't be an issue if Obama had anything but a paper thin record and a lot of fuzzy rhetoric. But, that is all we have to go on him. It is ridiculous that only a few weeks before the election - we are only starting to get wind of this: http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/...-obama-was.html which claims there is a paper trail that shows Obama was indeed a member of the socialist New Party in Illinois. I have no idea what he did then or what his involvement was, but how are we learning about all this now? Oh, that's right. No one bothered to ask...

I doubt I could provide anything to you that you would consider proof. It is my opinion of her based on her words, her associations, and her actions.

Would this be like the footage outside the RNC where the protesters couldn't tell you what they were protesting against? Uninformed people are everywhere.

that last paragraph dealt with the earlier votes, but whatever - I'm just saying you can't blow off the charge against him because he said it's not true and accept his reason for it. There is a lot more to it. as for the last part - your answer scares me as much as Palin supposedly scares other people. The entire problem with Obama is that he is a smart person with slick rhetoric, yet no one wants to contrast that picture with what (little) he has actually done. Smart people can say anything. They can manipulate you all day long. However, it is your past record that either supports or detracts from your rhetoric. I know everyone on the left wants to blow off William Ayers. I find that incomprehensible. Can you imagine if Palin was associated with anyone that bombed an abortion clinic? Do you have ANY idea what kind of sh-- storm that would cause? Yet there is the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. There are lots of these characters in Obama's past, yet time and again he has to disavow them. No one cares. No one cares that he has no one to vouch for his actions on the past. He's married to a woman who flat out hates America. She's a friggin' psycho. He marries someone who hates this country, he goes to church to listen to someone who hates this country, he raises money for people who bombed buildings, and yet no one cares. All these nutjobs that he surrounded himself with his entire life. Yet, no one cares. Because he talks nicely. I mean, WTF? It is the only thing we have to judge his words by - and no one voting for him really cares.

I didn't say that. The phrase I responded to was: "deserves everything she's getting" and that is a different story. Of course she deserves to be scrutinized, but it didn't have to come with inane BS that was thrown her way.

It is much more complicated than that: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ob...nfanticide.html but you see, that is what you get when you support intellectuals for the sake of intellectuals. You start arguing over the meaning of "is" and whether a bill is "exactly" the same to provide cover for one's self. Intellectuals can be just as dangerous as those "stupid" people you are so tired of.