meangreendork

EA pretty much runs a trust on NFL and NCAA games at this point through exclusivity agreements with both organizations. It's pretty annoying since there are 2 or 3 other studios that could do a far better job but can't do so because of those agreements. So the whole time, EA (really Tiburon as they're the actual dev studio) never gets a real need to improve the games drastically from one year to the next because unlike what's supposed to happen in a balanced free enterprise, no one is there to compete and therefore, force innovation.

Guess you better start rolling up a new dynasty then, Emmitt. On a sidenote, isn't this an earlier-than-normal release? Don't they normally release Madden in July/June, and then NCAA in August? I'm betting the earlier release may have something to do with the shoddy rosters (that we'll all end up doing over or downloading anyways).

Sounds like you advocate taking dangerous things away from everyone due to the misconduct of a minority. What's that about?

Regulate its production, tax it, medicine it, slap a minimum age (21 works), and set it under the same restrictions as alcohol use. We could use the money and it would make the drug dealers and traffickers think again. Not only are they running something across the borders illegally (because they won't have a trade agreement with the US), but now they're also competing against American companies that now produce it. Make use of other products that can from its production, and generally make some money out of it, both for taxing and capitalist venture. Btw, I don't smoke. Isn't really my thing.

Better to do it before than after or worse yet, the day of. It's not like she won't find someone anyways.

Well, that's something to fondly remember.

Read further in. This doesn't look like a situation where someone got a house they couldn't hope to afford in the long run. In fact, she was doing fairly well until the economic turn. She had about 15 other clients who dropped her when they lost their jobs. What you're looking at is her current income after the loss of 15 clients. So let's do the math here: Housekeeping can run between $80->$100 per session, minimum of roughly 4 hours for many agencies. Losing 15 clients, with each one having only one cleaning per week, she's lost about $1200/month of client work. Tie that in with losing a paying tenant and the fact the valuation rate changed, she's in some hot water that's not necessarily of her own doing. Now, she does need to ditch that house, or find new clients, or find another line of work in the meantime. However, this isn't like a McDonald's burger flipper getting a mortgage on a $140,000 home with variable rate interest. It's more like a hardworking full-timer having her schedule cut in half and losing half her pay in the process.

The electoral vote =/= popular vote, FFRick.

I'm pretty concerned with what happens if this year goes the same as last. I would assume that Dodge would be shown the door as well as at least a portion of his staff. In that event, who's on the short list of replacement coaches?

I'm not even there and it looks nice to me. Is Barry a butts man?

Mercer was replaced by another UNT alum, who is also very passionate about what UNT is. Give us a name of someone that's also an alum and maybe we won't hit you with a satchel full of bricks.

It's long over due that you get off this board, posting crap like this. Dunham just fits here. He cares about the program, he cares about the university, and while we could find another person with passion for the university, there's no real reason to get rid of Dunham. I don't care about how he looks; he's a radio voice, not really an on-screen personality, and when he is being filmed, he knows enough to still be more than a credible presence. There's no reason to change George out. At all. Now, go join the SMU forums or something. They'll probably like you over there.

Ugh. Okay, I think Michael Jackson was important to music. Mainly, he was important to music while he was still black, but that's besides the point. The real point is that he was a nutcase, and a pop star, and not really known for doing anything particularly humanitarian, etc. So yes, it's sad he died. But I don't think it's that important, especially when someone with real historical significance (AHEM, Robert McNamara) also died.

I freaking love this add-on in the game. I've got 2 or 3 other created schools in here already under 'RipperLancer'. Here's my NT rendition. I kind of liked the blue/green color we used to have, but I also like the emerald green (or whatever it's called), so I made that the brighter, more obvious color.

You should as they're significantly more credible than what you have. Yours have what amounts to conjecture, at best. One of my sources is an actual government entity, which basically matches the word-for-word information for your source in your original post. None of that says, "we're giving money to Hamas or Fatah". None of these statements mentions anything from your post. Come to think, aside from other postings of your same statements, I haven't seen anything else to back up your claims. In fact, 99% of what I've seen are copy-pasted chunks of text of your statement. Not a good sign, kid. Both sources are listings of government presidential documents. Both are government sponsored. The money is essentially going to the U.N., just like the money from a similar order from President Bush in 2007. Nothing bad happened back then. Will the money go to whom it's supposed to? It better, but the U.N. is in charge, so who knows. I do doubt that the money is earmarked to be spent on terrorists in the U.S. There are other, smarter, more low profile ways of funding terrorism that don't involve the U.N. bungling them. The other source is one that aims to debunk a lot of internet based hoaxes. It debunked your post through WorldNetDaily. It also did so through an official outlet. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/01/115587.htm The last post is the WorldNetDaily, which as right wing oriented as it is, is pretty good about bringing facts out. It even said that the statements in your original post are unfounded. Or did you read that? Probably not. Probably because it doesn't help your case. Or probably because you're reacting with knee-jerk patience and little, if any forethought. Just for fun, I'm gonna add Snopes.com, too. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/palestinians.asp And Snopes' sources? The Associated Press and WorldNetDaily. Your source? A presidential determination proving you wrong, and a message pushed out via anonymous chain email. By the way, Bush the same thing in 2007, this time including people from portions of Africa. I didn't suddenly see a flood of Sudanese or Somali refugees in the US, did you? And as for Fatah being listed as part of the US' list of terrorist organizations? http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm Officially, they're not. I said they weren't officially listed as a terrorist organization, and it looks like the US State Department agrees with me. Ask me personally, and I think they still are, either directly or by proxy. I don't trust Yasser Arafat and never really have. It's rather hard to "de-terrorize" an organization, especially one founded upon terrorism. I trust Arafat about as much I as I trust Ahmedinejad, Kim Jong Il, Putin, and his puppet, Medvyedev. You wanna talk about bad sources? I've got mine from 3 government outlets, a reputable hoax debunking outlet, and a news outlet that would probably wish for this story of your to be true, but they've also debunked it. You're the one taking random, anonymous chain emails as fact without giving them a look-up and two or three fact checks. You might want to brush up on that habit before you try to call me out for your failing.

Lots of editorial in that, sir. From an article from the U.S. Dept. of State: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/01/115587.htm From the actual document summary: Doesn't say anything about bringing people into the US and giving them freebies. The money, if improperly used, could go that way, but it's not explicitly in there. Oh. And from the WND: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89032 Plus, Fatah isn't listed as a terrorist organization. Hasn't been since like the late 80's. If it were Hamas, then there would be serious concern. The organizations are diametrically opposed to each other. Don't buy into everything you read in an email. You'd research a product for reviews on the internet before you bought one. It's a good idea to research stray emails.

It's not really clear to be honest.

You're right. And actual conservatism, as in, fiscal conservative measures in government. Not rampant hawkish measures, not ultra-religious social conservatism. Just stand-up smart spending and smart use of foreign policy tools and the military. It's just a matter of actual conservatives stepping away from old "moral majority" and the right-side conspiracy theorists. But it's going to be harder than ever to create an actual 3rd party because many seem to be very polarized these days. You are either deep blue or blood red, and looked at funny by both sides if you're anywhere in the middle. Also, I can't stand Pelosi.

The demon's more pinkish than blood red, probably has a puffy thing on his tail, and has pink angel wings instead of bat wings on his back. Great story, though.

Didn't already get a new one, or am I thinking of the Conditioning Coach?

Maybe he should find an actual politics forum like everybody else.

Oh, he knew. But there's nothing quite as good as selling the ol ball and chain out when you go down, too.

It's funny since one can be a mix of different things. Personally, and under most circumstances, I'm a social liberal, fiscal conservative, with a preference for a strong military and smart diplomacy. I look at the current stimulus package the same way I did the start of the 2nd Gulf War, which is to say, "I hope they know what they're doing. This can turn out really well, or it can go horribly wrong." and, "I hope they know something I don't because this is a huge gamble."

Sweeet stuff, but I'm gonna look forward to what Smitty has this season. Always good. Always.

Since there are strong signs this man may not make any real contribution to his home country or ours, I could get behind this. He's totally up for a Darwin Award, though.