meangreendork

...then they'll let the drilling progress continue. Don't be foolish - any smart plan for energy will open up the Strategic Oil Reserve (swapping out the light for heavy oil) as well as making use of shale formations, unused oil leases, and the Alaska Petroleum Reserve. To keep the drilling ban is a stupid idea since it's still a good ways until we get a good supply of any of the alternative fuel sources to go mass-market. Besides, I like the idea of a $1000 energy rebate to the average American.

Yay, awesome.

That's wrong on so many levels.

AGAINST THE STADIUM "The team's not winning, they don't deserve a new stadium." On the field performance should not be the standard for capital projects. Should we have built the stadium back when the team was winning? If the team wins in the new stadium, should be build them a bigger stadium? The issue at hand is that Fouts out dated. I love this argument. Here's a great counter for that: "If the biology department has poorly performing graduates and outdated equipment, would you think it didn't need an update of materials and facilities?"

As white as Biden is...he's got eyes that are distinctly...tiny and evil.

Yeah, apparently. I mean, there's "the" Ohio University. And then there's THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY BUCKEYES FOR THE WIN. LULZ.

Hard one on this - I'd say yes because odds are that if someone you don't know forces their way into your home, they're not there to bring you cookies and milk. I figure they don't need a warning, they need two lumps of metal, center-mass or they need to have their carotid artery ventilated. I would think that when criminals realize that they're probably going to have their gray matter scattered on the carpet when they try to break into someone's home, they may refrain from attacking people. But the real solution to this is something that'll take years to fix, and even with all the right socio-economic changes, still depends on the criminal-to-be's family and their own choices.

Let's get this straight. Up until McCain had chosen Palin as his running mate, I didn't have such a huge problem with him and was about 50/50 on voting for him. My main concern was if he'd be as spending-happy as Bush was, which would deviate away from what the classic idea of what a conservative should do. I'm more a fiscal conservative and a social liberal, and that would make me a moderate. I thought that Palin wasn't the right choice because there are so many people in the Republican party to choose from with better credentials than being a mayor of a small town and governor of a state with a smaller population than the DFW metroplex and who don't have lingering ethics investigations over their heads. Kay Bailey Hutchison would've been fine, I would've given an arm to see him somehow get Colin Powell in, or any number of US Senators. You want to know what my favorite website is right now? FactCheck.org. The site's staff reviews both sides' political campaign ads and researches them to see what is or what isn't true in them. They've picked apart Obama and McCain ads, finding faults in everyone's claims. And I like that, because it's one of the few places I can get pure information without much editorial. On Topic Here:: The investigation isn't so much focused on her brother in law, because I'll agree he needs to go. The alcohol and taser incident is a pretty big foul up of discipline. He should be kicked to the curb. Now if you'd read any decently written article, the problem is more with the firing of the state's uppermost police official, Walter Monegan. The investigation is trying to find out if he was fired for not giving in to demands that the brother (Wooten) be fired. And, to find out that if he was indeed fired by Palin, was there a vendetta behind it? Right now, it's one of those "where there's smoke, there's fire" situations. She was using a non-government email account to handle government communications. This is either bad internet use discipline, or this is her trying to avoid having her emails archived by Alaska's .gov servers. Either way, it looks bad on her. Hopefully, it's actually a case of Walter Monegan actually being insubordinate in other legal matters and Palin not being internet-savvy. For the sake of McCain's campaign, I hope that isn't true. Again, by himself, McCain isn't such a bad candidate. Not the ideal candidate (as Obama isn't either), but he's alright. And if she's cleared of the investigations and gets in at VP, I hope this woman decides to use her VP-email address before she coughs up a national secret like a QB holding a football like a loaf of bread as he scrambles. Jaydub: it's for the lulz.

Didn't do what? Set up multiple email accounts on Yahoo to make her government communications by? She's done this at least twice. The first one was hacked into by US FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS in order to peer into the ethics investigation she's under right now. Then there's the one hacked by the son of a TN state who's probably a member of Anonymous (State representative’s sons in my 4chan?), which is what's publicized now. I said that quote you posted from the AP article didn't say anything about an Obama supporter having anything to do with the hacking of the account. As a matter of fact, if you would go back, read and comprehend what I posted, you'll see all I did was mention that the hacking was basically something Palin was inviting because of her poor use of internet resources. I did say "I don't know how that line you quoted says anything about the likelihood of Obama supporters doing this." Why? Because the line you quoted was more a shot at Palin for being stupid with her email discipline. "The disclosure Wednesday raises new questions about the propriety of the Palin administration's use of nongovernment e-mail accounts to conduct state business." Who did I say probably did this? Members of the "Anonymous" group, who are pretty well known for hacking people they don't like. And thanks, JayDub. Do this: Open the AP article -> press ctrl+F in your internet browser -> type in "accusation" and scan for it. Then, do the same with "Obama" or "supporter" or "suspect" or "allegation" or "Democrat" and you'll never find them in the article. You'll find there's no mention of anyone blaming anyone but nameless hackers for this. The article actually spends more time blaming Palin for poor internet use than anyone else. I still want to know how you found an allegation of anyone but nameless hackers in that article. This is DEFINITELY improper use of email resources. 1.) It's a security risk. For any number of reasons. 2.) And this this the biggest one: Palin's use of Yahoo email raises questions of propriety because it allows her to send and receive communication without it being archived, which means that she can evade subpoenas (which is practically illegal if not frowned upon as foul play) about the ethics investigation. She's already under fire for evading questions about thousands of emails, and this is all revolving around this ethics investigation. Oh, I know. But one would think the DNC would get more use out of a hacking attack than just an uproar that could turn against them. Even if this kid is a supporter of Obama, what are the odds he's directly tied to Obama? Think about this - Obama's tried to put a stamping down on his own people when they took pointless jabs at Palin that didn't actually relate to the campaign. He's silenced his own campaign about Palin's daughter's pregnancy. Is he an Obama supporter? Possibly. Did Obama call for this? Probably not. There are countless cases of people on both sides of the political lines doing or saying stupid things, but these people aren't remotely tied to Obama or McCain. They're just planning to vote for them. What's more likely is this kid's attachment to Anonymous, since that group basically exists everywhere there's an existing internet connection. This is what Rengal said after he called her disabled: "There’s no question about it. Politically it’s a nightmare to think that a person’s foreign policy is based on their ability to look at Russia from where they live.” Rengal didn't display proper judgment here, but he does have a point. Palin said this about foreign policy as it pertains to Russia: "And, Charlie, you're in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They're very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor." That strip of water between Alaska and Russia is pretty much empty short of water and ice. There are some major cities in Siberia, but those cities are thousands of miles away from the Bering Strait. What Palin sees and anything within a few hundred miles of the Bering Straits is of little importance. Then when asked how proximity to Russia relates to policy: "They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska. " She goes on to mention that the proximity to Russia is a moral reminder of how it's important to maintain relations with Russia. Mind you, that is nice to hear, but she painted herself into a corner. In reality, she hasn't met with any foreign heads of state, ever. In terms of actual foreign policy experience, she doesn't have any beyond dealing with international customs and the like. In summary, Rengal shouldn't have been so loose with his words. However, he is right in that Palin lacks foreign policy experience AND that in the interview with Charlie Gibson, she didn't do a great job of covering that up. *All quotes taken directly from the ABC news transcripts of the 11Sep08 interview* This is awesome. Okay first off, FoxNews looked for the most sensational story they could, they did the usual media thing that every media network does. They got the story that would draw the biggest amount of empty hype and publicized it. For what? To get extra pay-per-click banner ad revenue. Even more amusing is that this article's byline is FOXNEWS.COM and not the actual writer of the article. The writer of the column attacking Palin is a random internet-based columnist. Not a journalist, and not really an accomplished writer. She's got two published books and not a long string of accolades. Why would anyone pay attention to anything she'd say but to generate empty hype. So she's basically spouting off at the mouth, calling all Palin's supporters white trash (not true), and while attractive, she isn't a porn actress or close to one. She may need to tone down the makeup, but that's it. However, the boyfriend has described himself as not just a redneck but a "f---in redneck" on his Myspace page. He also originally said he didn't want the child. This before he made his Myspace profile private. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/03/...in4409506.shtml Here's what I want to know: I want to know what you think of the ethics investigation for abuse of power that Palin is under? Abuse of power is probably the most worrisome issue she has to address right now. Because no matter what side of politics you may be on, taking power and going crazy with it is always of concern.

***Warning***Off Topic Reply-Reply: They set up another house in the last few years near Fry Street, but that didn't last more than a year or two before they left it and what I think is a Christian youth group bought the building.

Your English comprehension needs work. I don't know how that line you quoted says anything about the likelihood of Obama supporters doing this. If you go back and read it, it also goes into how political critics question how smart is it to use a public email host service government emails. And seriously, most businesses frown upon their employees conducting business communication via public email hosts. Why? Because sensitive information can be accidentally made public via hacking or just poor email habits on the part of the users. How much more so if it's a government official using it to communicate government information? Would you want your CENTCOM commander talking with his subordinates via AOL email? Do you think it'd be a smart idea for the chief of DARPA to talk with his colleagues through Hotmail? Is it a recommended practice for the mayor of Dallas to talk to the other city officials via Yahoo? No, it's not. Why? Because it's so incredibly difficult to maintain security through something like Yahoo. But it's easier to do it through a privately owned email host and domain.

She was done in by anonymous hackers. The same people that go in and mess with random computer systems, company databases and messageboards just to see what they can mess up. Honestly, attacking someone's email is as simple as hitting them with a phishing attack and having them bite it. Once they bite the attack, their email account's access is basically open to anything the hackers want to do with it. eBay's had and still has to deal with account holders having their accounts broken into. Yahoo even more so because it's an incredibly popular email hosting service. Looking at this objectively, she shouldn't be handling any government communications via a personal-style email system. But what I find amusing and a bit aggravating is that you somehow put it together that the Democratic party is behind this. Logically, there's no one that would think this is a great idea to gain political leverage over another person, especially since the information found wasn't really used for anything (which is another sign of a chaotically malicious hack). It's "Anonymous" and as Fox News once described them, they're "hackers on steroids", hahaha. So in short, the signs point to this just being a pointless and chaotically malicious hacking attack with no real purpose but to just aggravate people. It's essentially the same general group that attacked the Church of Scientology, and from I gathered, these are basically countless people from countless backgrounds. Oh, her other yahoo email address had been hacked by federal investigators in relation to her ethics investigation. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/...7,00.html?imw=Y

I like this, and she's right. Being able to use the new stadium as a venue for something like any number of the talented music department groups at UNT would be incredible. Or opening it up to other music performers would be incredible and help put the UNT name out.

Yeah...but Marvin Gaye was no fly-by-night pop singer. He's a legend, no doubt about it. DeLuna is just a flash in the pan comparison.

I didn't know who this lady was anyways. I guess it won't kill me to skip her songs on the radio.

This isn't even remotely close to a depression much less THE Great Depression. Don't get me wrong, the employment market isn't as great as it was in 2000, but it's not entirely impossible to find work (in general terms, as your industry results may vary). The mortgage crisis something that can be recovered from. I'm not sure if the great government buyout is best decision or not, but it's one of the few alternatives left to cover up for some MAJOR mistakes made in boardrooms and offices across America. But again, it can be recovered from.

I was actually thinking of setting up a separate NT roster in NCAA09 made up of NT's best and brightest players from the past and present. Funny how great minds think kind of alike.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Outstanding, and thank you. I too, saw the DMN coverage and wondered what wires were crossed in KRAM1's head.

Most definitely. No matter the arguments presented by the pro-Stadium advocates, nothing will speak louder than markings in the "W" column.

BWAHAHAHA, I agree. When we got our new coach, I think there was a collective hurrah here. When they got their new OC, they had a collective gasp of exasperation.

Wish our guys did that. Wish we'd do 5 games at home. And no, Thanksgiving doesn't count. I'd almost rather have players not even be on the field that weekend so they could spend time with loved ones.

Right now, as in within the last 24-48 hours, it's been gouging. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=5791480&page=1 YAY for price gouging in states where there's not even a risk of hurricane damage!

Yes unless there's some sort of tax law loophole or shelter that can be exploited. The main problem with corporate income is like a lot of problems in American law - it isn't so much the lack of taxing, but the ways in which they escape some of the taxing. Here's hoping that the next administration solves that.

It's like ROBOTJOX where the spectators have to sign death waivers before they go to a match lest a 50 foot robot come crashing down on them.

Do your research - both candidates are probably going to jump taxes and increase the national debt no matter what because both call for spending increases mainly since you can't just run a program and fund it with air. Obama's health program isn't really socialized medicine, it just provides an option for those without insurance and don't pull an income large enough for them to pay a program on their own. He's also not planning to tear down the military, according to his campaign website, he's actually planning to expand the US military quite a bit in both numbers and equipment. Frankly, I'm more concerned about McCain being elected...not because I don't like the idea of the middle class going without tax cuts (that bugs me, but that's something survivable) but mainly because I don't trust Palin. Her ethics investigations don't look good, that "Iraq was God's plan" scares me, and though she may have executive experience at the state governor level, her foreign policy knowledge scares the crap out of me. McCain alone I'm okay with. But if he were to die or fall ill, I would hope that his cabinet would be hounding Palin with advice because she needs it. At least if Obama were to die (probably by assassin's bullet, knowing this country), I know Biden knows enough to get by. That "McCain is old" ad made some sort of sense about him being out of touch. The hits on economy didn't really say much to me. Taxes are a by-gone conclusion because that's going to jump no matter what since the pay-down on national debt and the increase in government spending by both candidates is probably going to bring that higher anyways. What throws me off is this ad: Mainly because it's beyond a truth stretch. It's actually a huge falsehood. That's as if I asked any of you if you like to drink, then went around calling you a dangerous drunkard. I looked this commercial up on factcheck.org and got this: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/of..._on_sex_ed.html Actually, that site is pretty good about dissecting both campaign's ads and finding the inaccuracies in all of them. It's a good research tool.