BeanCounterGrad'03

I thought voting gives the individual a voice. Maybe its the way its portrayed in the media, but it seems that business interests have overshadowed individual interests for the last few decades. I wasn't refering to investment income in my original post (wasn't even thinking of investments as I was writing it). Being a former auditor for a public accounting firm, I can tell you that first statement of this response is not really true cause its been done for many years. As you may know, there is regulation on what an external auditor (heavier regulation on managers and partners) can hold investments in. Maybe I'm comparing apples and oranges on this point, but why not have some of these same types of restrictions for public officials. I do agree with you on the better disclosure and voter giving crap points. I think you're twisting the meaning of my words a bit. Of course its the People that make this country better, but as representatives of the people, we, in essence, transfer this power to our elected officials that are suppose to work for the People to make the country better. I agree with the second half of the statement but would also argue that our representatives have forgotten that ALL the people hold the power, not just the ones with deep pockets.

This is not a surprise (to me at least). How is this different from most politicians today? Need we start researching "drill here, drill now" advocates and how much they've received from oil companies? (I'm not a huge fan of Pelosi and how she gets things done, either.) Personally, I'd like to see all lobbyist greatly limited (if not banned) in their access to public officials. While we're at it, lets make it illegal for an elected official to receive any income from corporate, special interest, or PAC groups (maybe make it illegal for any business a politician owns to receive monies from these organizations while they hold office as well). I think it would help weed out those that are holding public office for reasons other than serving their country and making it better. Would this work or am I not factoring in something? Would it be an infringement on freedom to do business or is this a right we should expect our elected officials to sacrifice if they want to truely make our country better?

Hey-yo!!!

Actually...they did. But not militarily (sp?) I'll give them credit if the peace lasts and leads to a full resolution.

Or super fast/strong bionic leg replacements. Go-go gadget feet!

Wow, didn't see that coming. I didn't know people still died of pneumonia in this country. (except the elderly and AIDS patients)

Won't be going WITH you as we are coming from a different direction, but my wife and I (and possibly a coworker friend who's a Kstate fan...BOOOOO!) will be making the 7 hour drive. See you there! Yay football!

When does the part come when everyone agrees to disagree?

Sounds good...hope it passes when they start up again.

Famed (or infamous) Gainsville reporter and UNT journalism alum Andy Hogue was an aquaintence of mine back in college. Therefore, the logic follows that I should be an anti-football, bible-thumping, ultra-conservative, prayer warrior.

I watched it last night, and thought it was great. It got my football pants all excited. Can't wait for the season to start.

I would agree with that statement.

The same could be said for 98% of all politicians including his opponent. While we're straying into 3rd, 4th, and 5th party candies, Nader is probably in the 2%. I think he's lost it in his older age, but he's not afraid say what he believes no matter how unpopular it may be with the masses. I gotta respect it.

A good point...from the articles I've read on ethanol production, I'm getting the sense that the cost of producing may be partially affected by geography and the proximity of available inputs. Corn and other grain based ethanol will always be pretty expensive because they aren't that efficient. Cellulosic ethanol is already yielding some real, tangible results as illustrated by a conversation I had with a controller at a small ethanol "refinery" in Wyoming. She was telling me that they just started up production a couple of months ago and that they were producing ethanol at about 1 - 1.25 a gallon. This is because they are using deadwood and excess forest cover from the blackhills forest of SD and turning it into cellulosic ethanol. Now, after transport, marketing, etc. costs are factored in, I'm sure we may still be sitting at 2-2.50 a gallon, but that would illustrate the need for there to be more smaller regionalized refinery operations to at least keep the cost of transport down. But that's just my theory. OK, I'm done being an armchair economist for now...my head hurts.

I'm no petrol expert, but the effect of releasing oil reserves would be almost immediate (relatively) compared to new drilling which I've heard anywhere from 2-7 years for it to affect supply. Your take?

Going on 4 months of suck since March Madness ended.

Did we see this coming for Padron...I believe this was the first time I heard that he had diabetes. It sux but he's gotta do what's best for his health.

Speak for yourself... I'd like to think the world hang on every sarcastic, smart-ass word I post.

Interesting little article and the comments are fun to read, too: Poo Poo on MTSU

Good post and good answers, Flyer!

Save some of that for game day, GGII

oooh!...very dark

Congradulations!

These are my favorite types of posters:

Here! Here!