JimBob2232

Ask yourself this question. How has the stock market performed under george w. bush? Answer the question then click on this link for the answer. http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/chart...t=Refresh+Chart I understand stock market does not (necessarily) indicate economy growth.

I was really expecting to see a listing of "Jim Rome is burning" and "Quite Frankly"

Exactly. This is my policy: Vote Libertarian or Constitutional party unless the election appears to be very close, then vote republican. 3rd parties hate me because I dont automatically vote for them...but I cant let us be peroted into 8 years of bill clinton again. (and I assume the dems will say nadared into 8 years of bush).

His Brother Mo?

So his options are 1) Work and Get paid 2) Dont work and get paid. Doesnt seem like such a tough decision after all!

I think this would require 2 bumper stickers.

I know this does not seem like a priority, but if Moulds IS let go, are you really ready to go into next season with Josh Reed or Roscoe Parrish being our #2? And our only depth being Aiken and George Wilson? Evans/Reed/Parrish...wow, we really need some size.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvJN...ov=ap&type=lgns "A woman answering the phone at Mularkey's house said he was unavailable." Gee.. I really hope that was his wife!

More proof its atlanta http://www.citiscapes-art.com/cities2/atlanta.htm For arguments sake..here is philadelphia http://www.citiscapes-art.com/cities2/philadelphia.htm and here is what they SHOULD have used http://www.citiscapes-art.com/cities2/buffalo.htm

Duh. I still cant believe someone (or a bunch of someones) actually sat around and said "ya know what...I bet if we federalize airport security, we can do a much better job at a much cheaper price" Morons. Name ONE area of government where they actually do a good job of responsibly managing their finances.

Of course they can always change the rules...but I dont believe they will because its not in the best interest of the NFL to allow public ownership.

Because the league is money hungry. I'm not saying it will happen, but by making the bills a publicly owned team, it can NEVER happen...and im not sure that will sell well with the NFL, especially whaile tagliabue is there... Now condi... At any rate, I dont know how much thought these guys put into this...my guess is not much. Besides the picture of some city other than buffalo, they plan on raising "10,000,000 shares at $100 per share." or...cue dr. evil...one billion dollars. I dont know about you, but somehow i dont think the bills are worth that. Its an interesting idea. One which if done properly and professionally MIGHT warrant attention, but for some reason I dont think these "players" are up for the task. And a domed stadium...pfff...please.

Sadly...no. Any sale of a team has to be approved by the league. The league would not approve such a sale because it might not be in the best (read financial) interest of the league to have a team in buffalo vice Los Angeles or Vegas or wherever. The NFL has allowed Green bay to be a publicly owned team, but it is HIGHLY unlikely that this will be allowed for us.

Wow. Good game. Great game for the big east!

Does it? Duke has come back pretty nicely here. Good game. Duke down b 4 with 2:35 left....

Yeah, louisville is a tough team to get a read on. All their losses (except st johns) have been to ranked teams. They win the games they are supposed to, and lose the games they are supposed to. They havent really defined themselves to me either. They have a fairly easy big east schedule left (if there is such a thing when playing uconn twice and 5 games against ranked teams)... We shall see. And 14 is alot, even for a duke team to overcome. I am sure they CAN do it..but I hope they don't!

Im not so sure st johns wont make the touny. They are 10-6 right now, with 2 big wins (Louisville and Pittsburgh). If they can make a good showing against the rest of the non-ranked big east schedule (i.e. rutgers, depaul, seton hall, providence, georgetown, marquett, etc..) and pick up one more win against ucon, wvu, syr or villanova, they could make it. Big east will put 7-8 teams in the tourney IMO. IN: UConn, Villanova, Pitt, WVU. Likely In: Syracuse, Louisville Probable: Marquette, Cincinnatt, Georgetown Possible: Rutgers, St. Johns, Notre Dame Out: Depaul, Providence, South Florida, Seton Hal

Though CBS needs to get their act together. This is a horribly produced game. Music starts at ranom times....screen goes black ocasionally... G-Town up by 7...4 mins left in 1st

Was up by 10, duke came back to tie it. Right now its 22-22. Could be a very good game.

First of all, you cant go by this. If you found this same poll in 2001, the top name would be Al Gore. Its a name recognition contest at this point. Everyone knows who hillary is. Same with John Kerry and John Edwards. Same poll in 2001 would show them both in the 1-3% range. 2nd issue is that she is imploding right now. Plantation, Belafonte, etc. She keeps this up she will be hurting not only in the general electoin but the primaries as well. Long way to go, but she is really going out on a limb to make herself appear crazy. The biggest mistake democrats made in 2000 and 2004 is putting up horrible national candidates. Bush is a below average candidate, but he could run circles around kerry and gore. It was so easy to do. A chimp could have beaten bush in 04, but they dug up kerry. IF the democrats get their act together and put up someone good for national debate, a likeable candidate with a history of bipartsan support, they can beat a decent republican candidate. And I would be happy to support him/her. All im asking for here is a chance to not pick between two horrible candidates interested in political power and instead focus on the future of america.

MARK WARNER...I cant yell any louder...MARK WARNER

Sorry I try as best I can not to play this "liberal vs. conservative" label game. Also, although i read and post in this forum fairly often, I dont really keep up with who says what, and whos opinion is what on what. I have to take every post at face value or I will go crazy. There are much more important things in my life than remembering where everyone here stands on every issue. Since we evidently agree on this issue, I would hope that you could see where I was coming from when i jumped on ya! I just go crazy when i hear rhetoric which is factually incorrect spewed forth like its common knowlege. Both political parties are hurting america. I tend to side with the republican side of things, because I expect more of them. They typically run on morality, fiscal responsibility and accountability, but then they do the opposite. The vast majority of democrats havent run on anything since at least 1996. Since I dont trust republicans anymore to be fiscally responsible, acconutable and moral, I would consider voting for a democrat who claims to be. Unfortunatly this democratic candidate would need to also have some credibility that they would uphold these promises. Hillary, Biden, Daschle...good night. MARK WARNER. End of Story. I WILL vote for mark warner if he runs unless the republican candidate knocks me away... but unfortunatly it will be hillary clinton vs. some crazy right winger and we are back where we started. Its time for a real 3rd party.

Amusing..yet typical "He said there was no change in France's overall policy, which rules out the use of nuclear weapons in a military conflict." yet...he says he woulndt rule them out in response to an attack. Seems contridictory to me

I dont know how you can read into my post and infer than I am pro-spending and pro-big government, but I can clearly see in your post where you infered that the problem was cutting taxes and increasing spending, which is a completly asinine thing to allege because one has nothing to do with the other. It is a common left wing talking point which, as usual, has no basis in reality. But I dont think you and I disagree as much as you would like us to. I agree with you on one half your argument. Spending is out of control. Bush had some extenuating circumstances over the last 5 years, but that does not obsolve him of any responsibility in controlling spending. Its like saying a child molester was abused as a child. It may help to explain why the situation occured, but it does not make what was done acceptable. We are severly overtaxed as a society, even with the recent tax cuts. I would call for even more tax cuts at regular intervals, and monitor federal revenues. Once federal revenues are actually begin to decline with decreasing taxes, keep going. Take some of the money out of politics. Let people keep their own money, and decrease the "need" for goverment handouts. Let people invest. Let companies afford to do business in america again. If the top marginal tax rate in this country was 20%, I think we would be going in the right direction.

Please check to see how federal revenue has changed with regard to the tax rate, then come back here and try to prove your argument. If you cant see how federal revenue could increase with a tax cut, and how that would indicate we are overtaxed as a society...sorry.