PDA

View Full Version : THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 [211] 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 10:02 AM
We only disagree with the order.</P>



No, YOU only disagree on the order. Everyone else in THEE Thread agrees. Even a fellow Celtics fan...
</P>


I am clearly the lone voice of reason in this wilderness that is THEE thread.</P>


Of course, I'm disagreeing with those who have only seen one of these players actually play.</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 10:04 AM
Can we all at least agree that "Hill Street Blues" was the greatest TV show of all time?

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:05 AM
Can we go back to talking politics now, cause this **** is boring.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:05 AM
Can we all at least agree that "Hill Street Blues" was the greatest TV show of all time?

21 Jump Street

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:06 AM
Can we all at least agree that "Hill Street Blues" was the greatest TV show of all time?

not even the greatest show with "street" in the name, that'd be 21 jump street.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:06 AM
Can we go back to talking politics now, cause this **** is boring.


Urs a mets fan, you bask in boringness

u should be use to it

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:07 AM
Can we all at least agree that "Hill Street Blues" was the greatest TV show of all time?

not even the greatest show with "street" in the name, that'd be 21 jump street.


lol thats gross

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:15 AM
so like i was saying, the mets should just trade reyes, the guys always injured.

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 10:15 AM
morning gents! [C]

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:16 AM
so like i was saying, the mets should just trade reyes, the guys always injured.


I actually agree now, I didn't before but recently, I've been in a get rid of everyone mood.

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:17 AM
Anyone been to the Chelsea pub and inn down in AC next to the trop?

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:17 AM
so like i was saying, the mets should just trade reyes, the guys always injured.


actually before his injury last year he missed 15 games in 4 years before that

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:18 AM
I am clearly the lone voice of reason </p>
There is no reason in your voice regarding this subject. You have not even elaborated on what your specifications are and why this is your stance. It's not stats, defense or championships so I'm not sure what you are basing your assessment on...

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:19 AM
so like i was saying, the mets should just trade reyes, the guys always injured.


I actually agree now, I didn't before but recently, I've been in a get rid of everyone mood.


the only people u need to get rid of is Murphy, Delgado, and Minaya

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:22 AM
morning gents! [C]

no spring training updates today?

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:23 AM
Can we go back to talking politics now, cause this **** is boring.
lol did anyone see hannity last night??? he had congressman masse or massa or whatever the hell.


"When I voted against the cap and trade bill, the phone rang and it was
the chief of staff to the president of the United States of America,
Rahm Emanuel, and he started swearing at me in terms and words that I
hadn't heard since that crossing the line ceremony on the USS New
Jersey in 1983," Massa said. "And I gave it right back to him, in terms
and words that I know are physically impossible."

“Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil’s spawn,” he said. “He is an
individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his
children to the front end of a steam locomotive.”


massa also accused emanuel of trying to intimidate him in a congressional shower over health care.
im trying to look for the whole quote. i hope this brings down the administration, not that hell need any help anyway

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:25 AM
heeeere we gooooo
http://newsmax.com/Headline/massa-emanuel-healthcare-obama/2010/03/08/id/351976?s=al&amp;promo_code=98E6-1

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:27 AM
Hey Doc, I mean you played against both players. Do you know why Morehead thinks that?

http://www.thesunblog.com/sports/dockggame5.jpg

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:29 AM
Here Morehead, call anyone you want and ask them who is better...

http://www.sixuntilme.com/blog-mt2/blog_images/2009February/larry_bird_diabetes_3.gif

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:30 AM
Larry could not even beat MJ at horse

http://paxholley.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/jordan_bird2.jpg

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:30 AM
Take some advice from Larry on this one Morehead and just

http://img.vpimg.net/1334818.large.jpg

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:30 AM
so like i was saying, the mets should just trade reyes, the guys always injured.


I actually agree now, I didn't before but recently, I've been in a get rid of everyone mood.


the only people u need to get rid of is Murphy, Delgado, and Minaya



I actually like Murphy, but Delgado and Minaya should go yes.

Chelsea Pub and Inn people, I know someone must have been there it's right by the trop, need opinions.

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 10:31 AM
morning gents! [C]

no spring training updates today?

shut up matt... i said good morning gents not good morning ******* therefore i was not talking to you [;)]

did you end up going to hoboken on sat??

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:32 AM
Can we go back to talking politics now, cause this **** is boring.
lol did anyone see hannity last night??? he had congressman masse or massa or whatever the hell.


"When I voted against the cap and trade bill, the phone rang and it was
the chief of staff to the president of the United States of America,
Rahm Emanuel, and he started swearing at me in terms and words that I
hadn't heard since that crossing the line ceremony on the USS New
Jersey in 1983," Massa said. "And I gave it right back to him, in terms
and words that I know are physically impossible."

“Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil’s spawn,” he said. “He is an
individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his
children to the front end of a steam locomotive.”


massa also accused emanuel of trying to intimidate him in a congressional shower over health care.
im trying to look for the whole quote. i hope this brings down the administration, not that hell need any help anyway


But Dez, you don't understand, they are draining the swamp, they are letting the sunshine disinfect their party.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:32 AM
Ben Roethlisberger's alleged sexual assault victim is at home with her parents after dropping out of school, TMZ has learned.

Multiple sources tell us the 20-year old woman dropped out of Georgia College &amp; State University over the weekend.

Big Ben is ****ed. Everything is just stacking up against him. lol

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:36 AM
so like i was saying, the mets should just trade reyes, the guys always injured.


I actually agree now, I didn't before but recently, I've been in a get rid of everyone mood.


the only people u need to get rid of is Murphy, Delgado, and Minaya

iv been in the exact same mood. haha but matts dead on you really need to toss minaya, and omar.

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:39 AM
Can we go back to talking politics now, cause this **** is boring.
lol did anyone see hannity last night??? he had congressman masse or massa or whatever the hell.


"When I voted against the cap and trade bill, the phone rang and it was
the chief of staff to the president of the United States of America,
Rahm Emanuel, and he started swearing at me in terms and words that I
hadn't heard since that crossing the line ceremony on the USS New
Jersey in 1983," Massa said. "And I gave it right back to him, in terms
and words that I know are physically impossible."

“Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil’s spawn,” he said. “He is an
individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his
children to the front end of a steam locomotive.”


massa also accused emanuel of trying to intimidate him in a congressional shower over health care.
im trying to look for the whole quote. i hope this brings down the administration, not that hell need any help anyway


But Dez, you don't understand, they are draining the swamp, they are letting the sunshine disinfect their party.
still it shows the corruption of the obama administration. first it was bribes now its intimidating dem congressmen that wont vote yes. theyre starting to eat eachother alive

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 10:40 AM
Was just helping a member, and brought up that I noticed that they live around the corner from me.

They confirmed what I already suspected. My 55 year old neighbor across the street is into drugs.....dealing them most likely lol

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 10:40 AM
Take some advice from Larry on this one Morehead and just

http://img.vpimg.net/1334818.large.jpg
</P>


I believe what I believe. Not based onwhat I've heard others say, but based on what I've seen from all three players.</P>


We all have an opinion and thats fine, but my view IS NOT based on just the recital of stats and the word of others.</P>


So we should probably move on to the spawn of Satan that Rahm Emmanual truly is.</P>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:41 AM
Ben Roethlisberger's alleged sexual assault victim is at home with her parents after dropping out of school, TMZ has learned.

Multiple sources tell us the 20-year old woman dropped out of Georgia College &amp; State University over the weekend.

Big Ben is ****ed. Everything is just stacking up against him. lol
wow, is the only word i can think of.......just wow..........now scumbags entering my mind.....

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:44 AM
Was just helping a member, and brought up that I noticed that they live around the corner from me.

They confirmed what I already suspected. My 55 year old neighbor across the street is into drugs.....dealing them most likely lol
what kind? we should all get fake badges and bb guns and raid his house.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 10:46 AM
Was just helping a member, and brought up that I noticed that they live around the corner from me.

They confirmed what I already suspected. My 55 year old neighbor across the street is into drugs.....dealing them most likely lol
what kind? we should all get fake badges and bb guns and raid his house.
</P>


lol no idea....</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:47 AM
my view IS NOT based on just the recital of stats and the word of others.</p>


</p>

But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?</p>

I agree, we can drop it. But like I said, walk up to anyone you want and ask them who the greatest player in the NBA was? You will get the same answer from every person...</p>

When does a century start again?</p>


</p>

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:48 AM
still it shows the corruption of the obama administration. first it was bribes now its intimidating dem congressmen that wont vote yes. theyre starting to eat eachother alive


I know dez :P I was being sarcastic, Pelosi had stated that she was going to "Drain the Swamp" (of Corruption) and "Let Sunshine disinfect the party"

pretty much if you look at what's been going on over the last year, politics, (that are always dirty) are getting dirtier and dirtier with these closed door deals and the brides traded for votes by the Obama administration, it's really hilarious when you think back to what they ran on, that that would clean Washington up...HAH they are doing "Exactly" the opposite.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 10:49 AM
Hey Granmama...where does MJ rank on your list?</P>


http://www.hooplog.com/images/johnson_910626_350.jpg</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:51 AM
Ben Roethlisberger's alleged sexual assault victim is at home with her parents after dropping out of school, TMZ has learned.

Multiple sources tell us the 20-year old woman dropped out of Georgia College &amp; State University over the weekend.

Big Ben is ****ed. Everything is just stacking up against him. lol
wow, is the only word i can think of.......just wow..........now scumbags entering my mind.....

The Steelers brass is shaking in their shoes...

Think of all the dumb **** he has done. 2 alleged rape charges, bike accident, countless drunk and party pictures. The dude just doesn't get it man.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 10:53 AM
my view IS NOT based on just the recital of stats and the word of others.</P>


</P>


But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?</P>


I agree, we can drop it. But like I said, walk up to anyone you want and ask them who the greatest player in the NBA was? You will get the same answer from every person...</P>


When does a century start again?</P>



</P>


</P>


<FONT size=4>Morehead is a rebel.</FONT></P>


http://www.gotomycodes.com/userpics/myspacegraphics/Male-Celebrity/James-Dean.jpg</P>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 10:54 AM
my view IS NOT based on just the recital of stats and the word of others.</p>


</p>

But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?</p>

I agree, we can drop it. But like I said, walk up to anyone you want and ask them who the greatest player in the NBA was? You will get the same answer from every person...</p>

When does a century start again?</p>


</p>larry bird?

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 10:54 AM
Hey Granmama...</p>
One of my favorite athletes of alllll time. Runnin Rebels baby!!!

http://www.tjscollectiblesinc.com/i//1990_UNLV_Champs_ring.jpg

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:55 AM
morning gents! [C]

no spring training updates today?

shut up matt... i said good morning gents not good morning ******* therefore i was not talking to you [;)]

did you end up going to hoboken on sat??

yea met up with kase

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 10:55 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 10:56 AM
Was just helping a member, and brought up that I noticed that they live around the corner from me.

They confirmed what I already suspected. My 55 year old neighbor across the street is into drugs.....dealing them most likely lol


niccce

its always good to pick up a new connect lol

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 10:57 AM
Ben Roethlisberger's alleged sexual assault victim is at home with her parents after dropping out of school, TMZ has learned.

Multiple sources tell us the 20-year old woman dropped out of Georgia College &amp; State University over the weekend.

Big Ben is ****ed. Everything is just stacking up against him. lol
wow, is the only word i can think of.......just wow..........now scumbags entering my mind.....

The Steelers brass is shaking in their shoes...

Think of all the dumb **** he has done. 2 alleged rape charges, bike accident, countless drunk and party pictures. The dude just doesn't get it man.
</P>


yea...i know alot of accusations get thrown around at celebrities, and athletes in particular...but this one just struck me as like...really bad...
The fact that nobody knows who this girl is.. meaning literally just some random young girl, concerns me. This is probably the real deal.
Time will tell. ****, I hated Worthlessberger already....now I think he should die in a fire</P>

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 10:57 AM
morning gents! [C]

no spring training updates today?

shut up matt... i said good morning gents not good morning ******* therefore i was not talking to you [;)]

did you end up going to hoboken on sat??

yea met up with kase

thanks for the invite ******bags.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 10:58 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.
</P>


yea it's all opinion. so if I seen exactly what he has, i'm still wrong?</P>


<FONT color=#ff0000>but what do I know, I'm only 26, rt? Therefore i know nothing of sports prior to 1995</FONT></P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 10:59 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.
</P>


Thanks Daven....But Braylon still sucks.</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:00 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.
</P>


yea it's all opinion. so if I seen exactly what he has, i'm still wrong?</P>


<FONT color=#ff0000>but what do I know, I'm only 26, rt? Therefore i know nothing of sports prior to 1995</FONT></P>


</P>


Now you're whining like a schoolgirl.</P>


Its very unattractive.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:01 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <font color="#0000ff">statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</font>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:02 AM
my view IS NOT based on just the recital of stats and the word of others.</p>


</p>


But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?</p>


I agree, we can drop it. But like I said, walk up to anyone you want and ask them who the greatest player in the NBA was? You will get the same answer from every person...</p>


When does a century start again?</p>



</p>


</p>


<font size="4">Morehead is a rebel.</font></p>

http://brendaconlan.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Dennis-Rodman-Wedding-Dress_7338FA65.jpg

</p>

thats cool i guess

ny06
03-09-2010, 11:03 AM
http://i48.tinypic.com/28stvuc.jpg

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:03 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <FONT color=#0000ff>statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</FONT>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?


</P>


By a mile.</P>

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 11:03 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.
</p>


yea it's all opinion. so if I seen exactly what he has, i'm still wrong?</p>


<font color="#ff0000">but what do I know, I'm only 26, rt? Therefore i know nothing of sports prior to 1995</font></p>

who said you are wrong? you can't see what he see's that technology hasn't been released yet.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 11:04 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.
</P>


yea it's all opinion. so if I seen exactly what he has, i'm still wrong?</P>


<FONT color=#ff0000>but what do I know, I'm only 26, rt? Therefore i know nothing of sports prior to 1995</FONT></P>


</P>


Now you're whining like a schoolgirl.</P>


Its very unattractive.</P>


</P>


I'm not whining...i'm pulling the Morehead card.</P>

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 11:04 AM
who said you are wrong? you can't see what he see's that technology hasn't been released yet.
</P>


lmao! So clever, that Daven guy [:)]</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:06 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <font color="#0000ff">statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</font>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?


</p>


By a mile.</p>
Why?

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:08 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <FONT color=#0000ff>statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</FONT>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?


</P>


By a mile.</P>



Why?
</P>


Do you really want to know?</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:09 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <font color="#0000ff">statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</font>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?


</p>


By a mile.</p>



Why?
</p>


Do you really want to know?</p>

Tiger is better

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 11:10 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <font color="#0000ff">statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</font>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?


</p>


By a mile.</p>



Why?
</p>


Do you really want to know?</p>

oh oh I know, it's because he didn't sleep around on his wife get caught and then go to rehab and miss a year of golf.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:13 AM
But you have not said what your view is based on except what you have seen?

What's been "seen" is just as important as statistics.

it's Morehead's opinion, I don't understand why you guys are all jumping on him for it, <font color="#0000ff">statistics and popular opinion don't prove he's wrong anymore then what he's seen prove that he's right.</font>

Daven sticking up for Morehead, the apocalypse is here.

Bull**** they don't.

Is Jack Nicklaus the greatest golfer of all time?


</p>


By a mile.</p>



Why?
</p>


Do you really want to know?</p>
Most definitely...

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:18 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</P>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</P>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</P>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</P>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</P>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</P>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</P>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 11:19 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:22 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</p>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</p>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</p>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</p>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</p>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</p>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</p>

uhg the competition argument again...

moorehead believe it or not the best competition in sports wasn't pre 90s

its man vs hole.. not man vs man in reality.. who shot better scores on the same coarses?

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:23 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</P>


The greatest sport known to man.</P>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</P>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:25 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</p>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</p>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</p>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</p>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</p>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</p>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</p>

uhg the competition argument again...


Exactly, thank you for proving my point. So Morehead thinks Bird is better because of who he played against...

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 11:26 AM
still it shows the corruption of the obama administration. first it was bribes now its intimidating dem congressmen that wont vote yes. theyre starting to eat eachother alive


I know dez :P I was being sarcastic, Pelosi had stated that she was going to "Drain the Swamp" (of Corruption) and "Let Sunshine disinfect the party"

pretty much if you look at what's been going on over the last year, politics, (that are always dirty) are getting dirtier and dirtier with these closed door deals and the brides traded for votes by the Obama administration, it's really hilarious when you think back to what they ran on, that that would clean Washington up...HAH they are doing "Exactly" the opposite.
lol yea i should of picked up on that. but seriously, wheres the ethics committee or whatever the **** on this issue? its a joke man

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:26 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</P>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</P>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</P>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</P>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</P>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</P>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</P>




uhg the competition argument again...

moorehead believe it or not the best competition in sports wasn't pre 90s

its man vs hole.. not man vs man in reality.. who shot better scores on the same coarses?
</P>


The players today have their clubs and golf balls engineered to there specific game.</P>


Ever tried playing golf with a Spalding Dot ball and tiny woods and blade thin irons? Technology has made golf so much easier to play today. The flaws in a guys swing can be often disguised by the technology.</P>


I love it, it makes me a lot better player. But the game has changed as a product.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:27 AM
I do see where he is coming from somewhat however in regards to tennis.

Federer has more slams than anyone in history but his competition is not the same as when Agassi and Sampras played.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:27 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</p>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</p>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</p>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</p>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</p>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</p>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</p>

uhg the competition argument again...


Exactly, thank you for proving my point. So Morehead thinks Bird is better because of who he played against...


it at least makes sense when referring to basketball

not golf...

theres no defenses, its you, nature, the ball, the club, the hole

who is doing the same thing has no effect what so ever

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:31 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</p>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</p>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</p>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</p>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</p>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</p>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</p>




uhg the competition argument again...

moorehead believe it or not the best competition in sports wasn't pre 90s

its man vs hole.. not man vs man in reality.. who shot better scores on the same coarses?
</p>


The players today have their clubs and golf balls engineered to there specific game.</p>


Ever tried playing golf with a Spalding Dot ball and tiny woods and blade thin irons? Technology has made golf so much easier to play today. The flaws in a guys swing can be often disguised by the technology.</p>


I love it, it makes me a lot better player. But the game has changed as a product.</p>

well sir it seems like ur reasoning has changed from response to response

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:32 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.

byron
03-09-2010, 11:32 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</P>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</P>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</P>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</P>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</P>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</P>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</P>

uhg the competition argument again...

moorehead believe it or not the best competition in sports wasn't pre 90s

<FONT color=#0000ff>its man vs hole</FONT>.. not man vs man in reality.. who shot better scores on the same coarses?
there you go....when it come's to hoe's you have to be selective....they can do ya in

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 11:33 AM
First of all, Tiger has way too many moving part in his golf swing. This is why he drives it sideways all the time. he thinks he's still a 21 year old kid. His lower body constantly gets out in front and he either blocks everything right or overcompensates and hits huge pull hooks.</p>


He IS a truly great putter and thats what seperates him from todays field.</p>


Now lets talk about todays field. There are no truly great champions other than Tiger. Phil is actually a better technical player than Tiger but his head kills him in clutch spots. The other guys like Vijay, Sergio, Ernie etc... all have huge holes in there games.</p>


When Jack was dominating, he did so amongst some truly great champions in there own right. Tom Watson, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Wieskopf. etc...</p>


There are no guys like that to compete against Tiger.</p>


Tiger is great, but he hasn't been challenged like Jack. Jack not only won 18 majors but he had 19 seconds in majors. He could adapt his game to a distance type course like Augusta National, a links type course that we see in the Brittish opens or short tight courses like Marion. The guy had no weaknesses.</p>


Tiger drives it too inconsistently and doesn't have sufficient distance control with his short irons to dominate on all different types of courses.</p>

uhg the competition argument again...


Exactly, thank you for proving my point. So Morehead thinks Bird is better because of who he played against...
well yea, in a way id have to agree with morehead. if the giants beat the cards instead of THEE UNDEFEATED PATS would it have been that epic??? no because competition would of dumbed down. moreheads logic is used ALL the time in boxing. sugar ray robinson was better then floyd mayweather because he fought better fighters. ali was better then tyson because ali fought better fighters.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:34 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.
I also agree Jack is better than Tiger.

I still can't believe how many times he finished second...

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 11:36 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>mehhh sooo is baseball.....

ny06
03-09-2010, 11:39 AM
Best baseball player ever?

http://i46.tinypic.com/23jpy7q.jpg

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:39 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</P>


The greatest sport known to man.</P>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</P>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</P>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</P>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:40 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.

na i just said tiger to piss you off... i dont know and could care less

i'd rather swing my own club to some porn at home for 5 minutes than go play golf

but the competition argument is void in the game of golf

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:42 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</p>

i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:44 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.

na i just said tiger to piss you off... i dont know and could care less

i'd rather swing my own club to some porn at home for 5 minutes than go play golf

but the competition argument is void in the game of golf
</P>


Greatness in golf is measured by wins. Wins are measured by your standing vs. other players.</P>


If you shoot four 62's you may have beaten the course but if someone else shoots three 62's and a 61, you still lose.</P>

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 11:44 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play.** Nothing is better.</p>

i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch

and one tackle at a time........

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:44 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</P>


The greatest sport known to man.</P>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</P>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</P>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</P>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</P>




i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
</P>


You don't believe that at all, you think that the government should just hand you everything.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:46 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.

na i just said tiger to piss you off... i dont know and could care less

i'd rather swing my own club to some porn at home for 5 minutes than go play golf

but the competition argument is void in the game of golf
</p>


Greatness in golf is measured by wins. Wins are measured by your standing vs. other players.</p>


If you shoot four 62's you may have beaten the course but if someone else shoots three 62's and a 61, you still lose.</p>

so by ur theory Jack could hit 75 consistently on a specific course throughout his life time, while Tiger hit for 60...

Jack always won there cuz the rest of the field was at 80, but Tiger always loses cuz somebody always hits 59...

ur gonna crown Jack as being better?

Thats where I have to disagree

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:47 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</p>




i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
</p>


You don't believe that at all, you think that the government should just hand you everything.</p>

what i believe should be ( and don't generalize so much, it takes away from all of my points) and what is are two totally different things

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 11:48 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</p>

i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
haha. yea true. but baseball is just a bunch of nothing till something great happens for a split second and then its a bunch of nothing again. that sums up my life pretty well.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:51 AM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:51 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.

na i just said tiger to piss you off... i dont know and could care less

i'd rather swing my own club to some porn at home for 5 minutes than go play golf

but the competition argument is void in the game of golf
</P>


Greatness in golf is measured by wins. Wins are measured by your standing vs. other players.</P>


If you shoot four 62's you may have beaten the course but if someone else shoots three 62's and a 61, you still lose.</P>




so by ur theory Jack could hit 75 consistently on a specific course throughout his life time, while Tiger hit for 60...

Jack always won there cuz the rest of the field was at 80, but Tiger always loses cuz somebody always hits 59...

ur gonna crown Jack as being better?

Thats where I have to disagree
</P>


Jacks stroke average at Augusta is better than Tigers. He did it with Drivers that were half the size as today's.</P>


My standard is if you put the same players on the same course with equal equiptment. The best golfer would win more often.</P>


If you put Jack in his prime against Tiger in his prime on any number of courses, and gave them both the option to use today's equiptment, I believe Jack would score better than Tiger all other things being the same.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:52 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</p>

i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
haha. yea true. but baseball is just a bunch of nothing till something great happens for a split second and then its a bunch of nothing again. that sums up my life pretty well.


hahaha i like that actually

and in the middle to kill time, alot of nut scratching

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 11:53 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</p>




i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
</p>


You don't believe that at all, you think that the government should just hand you everything.</p>lmao zzzzzziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:53 AM
I may be in the vast minority with the Larry vs. MJ thing. But among those who know golf, a LOT of people agree with me about Jack vs. Tiger.

na i just said tiger to piss you off... i dont know and could care less

i'd rather swing my own club to some porn at home for 5 minutes than go play golf

but the competition argument is void in the game of golf
</p>


Greatness in golf is measured by wins. Wins are measured by your standing vs. other players.</p>


If you shoot four 62's you may have beaten the course but if someone else shoots three 62's and a 61, you still lose.</p>




so by ur theory Jack could hit 75 consistently on a specific course throughout his life time, while Tiger hit for 60...

Jack always won there cuz the rest of the field was at 80, but Tiger always loses cuz somebody always hits 59...

ur gonna crown Jack as being better?

Thats where I have to disagree
</p>


Jacks stroke average at Augusta is better than Tigers. He did it with Drivers that were half the size as today's.</p>


My standard is if you put the same players on the same course with equal equiptment. The best golfer would win more often.</p>


If you put Jack in his prime against Tiger in his prime on any number of courses, and gave them both the option to use today's equiptment, I believe Jack would score better than Tiger all other things being the same.</p>

and there you go, thats the first argument today that I dont think anybody can argue with

great job moorehead, glad to have u back making sense

ur davenism was becoming frightening

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 11:53 AM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</P>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</P>

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 11:56 AM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play.** Nothing is better.</p>

i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
haha. yea true. but baseball is just a bunch of nothing till something great happens for a split second and then its a bunch of nothing again. that sums up my life pretty well.


hahaha i like that actually

and in the middle to kill time, alot of nut scratching

ewwww.... lol

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 11:57 AM
<h1>Idiot Driver vs. Ladder User (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjbJxn1o0j8&amp;feature=popt00us0a)</h1>WOW!!! Can anyone try to explain what this person was doing? LMAO

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 11:57 AM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>

while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 11:57 AM
I just walked back to my office from the teller office....cant find my pen...
Check my drawer...ALL my pens are gone...wtf??

I go to the front desk, my coworker's 1 year old son had 2 fistful of pens. not doing anything......just holding them. lol

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 12:01 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that


You do realize that Obama personally selected former high end managment from Goldman Sachs to serve the government by overseeing Banks correct?

I mean Obama is a bigger supporter of Goldman Sachs then any president previous to him by FAR.

I hated the bailouts, and unlike Morehead, I don't think any company is "too big to fail" and I don't think we should have bailed anyone out.

but what's done is done, the fact that Obama personally selected former failures, people that couldn't run Goldman Sachs correctly, and put them in charge of overseeing "all" banks is the real scary part.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 12:02 PM
So....after someone mentioned Len Bias and I think Lewis...i started thinking about, reading more about it.
I find that stuff fascinating. Do you any otherathletes whos careers barely began, or were cut short prior due to sudden death, drug use or anything?? Call me weird, but i love reading about that stuff.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:02 PM
I just walked back to my office from the teller office....cant find my pen...
Check my drawer...ALL my pens are gone...wtf??

I go to the front desk, my coworker's 1 year old son had 2 fistful of pens. not doing anything......just holding them. lol

haha it woulda been funny if he said 1 dollar *****

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:02 PM
no no no, were not having a golf debate. please, for my sanity
</p>


The greatest sport known to man.</p>


It most closely simulates the difficulties of life than any other sport.</p>


Like life, golf is about "overcoming".</p>


mehhh sooo is baseball.....
</p>


Baseball is the greatest game to play. Nothing is better.</p>

i'd say football is more like life...

you gotta fight for every inch
haha. yea true. but baseball is just a bunch of nothing till something great happens for a split second and then its a bunch of nothing again. that sums up my life pretty well.


hahaha i like that actually

and in the middle to kill time, alot of nut scratching
yea i herd something similar in a movie. i liked it. deff a lot of nut scratching and nut rearranging going on. i understand, tight pants.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:03 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</P>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</P>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</P>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</P>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</P>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:04 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that


You do realize that Obama personally selected former high end managment from Goldman Sachs to serve the government by overseeing Banks correct?

I mean Obama is a bigger supporter of Goldman Sachs then any president previous to him by FAR.


Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 12:05 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>

Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:07 PM
So....after someone mentioned Len Bias and I think Lewis...i started thinking about, reading more about it.
I find that stuff fascinating. Do you any otherathletes whos careers barely began, or were cut short prior due to sudden death, drug use or anything?? Call me weird, but i love reading about that stuff.kenny phillips[:O]

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 12:08 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:09 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>

Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.


thats false, most of the deregulation happened DURING bush's presidency

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:11 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</P>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</P>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</P>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</P>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</P>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</P>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</P>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</P>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</P>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</P>


And they failed.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:11 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 12:13 PM
So....after someone mentioned Len Bias and I think Lewis...i started thinking about, reading more about it.
I find that stuff fascinating. Do you any otherathletes whos careers barely began, or were cut short prior due to sudden death, drug use or anything?? Call me weird, but i love reading about that stuff.kenny phillips[:O]
</P>


you should probably go jump off an overpass</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:15 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</p>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</p>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</p>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</p>


And they failed.</p>

yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:16 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</p>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</p>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</p>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</p>


And they failed.</p>

yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:17 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</P>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</P>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</P>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:20 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.
and how in the **** do you hire the lawyers that defended terrorists to the god damn justice department?!?!? sometimes i think he does **** like this on purpose.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:20 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</P>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</P>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</P>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</P>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</P>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</P>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</P>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</P>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</P>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</P>


And they failed.</P>




yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.
</P>


Why do you have so many double posts?</P>


People who can't afford to own houses should rent. there is no disgrace in that. And there should be no tax benifit to own a home either. Its rewarding people who be definition are better off. They should eliminate the mortgage interest deduction and drop everyone's rates.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:21 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>

just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:22 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</p>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</p>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</p>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</p>


And they failed.</p>




yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.
</p>


Why do you have so many double posts?</p>


People who can't afford to own houses should rent. there is no disgrace in that. And there should be no tax benifit to own a home either. Its rewarding people who be definition are better off. They should eliminate the mortgage interest deduction and drop everyone's rates.</p>

the server sucks at my job...

there isn't much difference in renting and having a 200k mortgage.. it comes out to the same thing a month typically (in north jersey anyway

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:24 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</P>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</P>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</P>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</P>


Well then its settled.</P>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</P>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:25 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>

i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:25 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</P>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</P>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</P>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</P>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</P>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</P>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</P>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</P>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</P>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</P>


And they failed.</P>




yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.
</P>


Why do you have so many double posts?</P>


People who can't afford to own houses should rent. there is no disgrace in that. And there should be no tax benifit to own a home either. Its rewarding people who be definition are better off. They should eliminate the mortgage interest deduction and drop everyone's rates.</P>




the server sucks at my job...

there isn't much difference in renting and having a 200k mortgage.. it comes out to the same thing a month typically (in north jersey anyway
</P>


What about the down payment, closing costs, taxesand all the upkeep to the house.</P>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:26 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>some yes but the majority are still in the afghan paki border. why we let our enemies know a buildup of troops is coming is ridiculous. "oh it says a surge is coming, lets go to back to pakistan "its too easy for them. these pidapada raids ant doing ****. bull**** rules of engagement enforced by obama. he doesnt understand you cant win the hearts and minds of jihadist. cross the border and wip them out or get out.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:26 PM
what happened tlaking about Reyes, Bird vs Magic vs Jordan, and Yanks vs Phils

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:28 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</P>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</P>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</P>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</P>


Well then its settled.</P>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</P>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</P>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</P>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 12:30 PM
Morehead needs food!

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:31 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>

i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
its called patriotism.....

bandwgn86
03-09-2010, 12:31 PM
Double B will you be on later watching the Lakers lose? </P>


</P>


afternoon folks </P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:31 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</p>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</p>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</p>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</p>


And they failed.</p>




yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.
</p>


Why do you have so many double posts?</p>


People who can't afford to own houses should rent. there is no disgrace in that. And there should be no tax benifit to own a home either. Its rewarding people who be definition are better off. They should eliminate the mortgage interest deduction and drop everyone's rates.</p>




the server sucks at my job...

there isn't much difference in renting and having a 200k mortgage.. it comes out to the same thing a month typically (in north jersey anyway
</p>


What about the down payment, closing costs, taxesand all the upkeep to the house.</p>

all of those are normally built in to one another... basically the only difference is if u have the amount to front...

but even in this crisis, the lowest % down payment u can have is 3.5 and thats only if your buying in "work in progress" cities or first time home buyer

if u dont have that stack to throw up ur not gonna be able to afford it...

FOr instance I am currently looking at a condo to buy, for aorund 150k... talking with the banks we'd be looking at like 1100-1200 mortgage in it. Similar apartments for rent in the area are going for 1500...

its not always cheaper to rent

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 12:32 PM
what happened tlaking about Reyes, Bird vs Magic vs Jordan, and Yanks vs Phils

That is what I'm saying...

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:32 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>

i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
its called patriotism.....


no go re-read what he says, supporting the troops is patriotism...

he totally gave to seperate answers about his opinion on the war in afghanistan

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:34 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>

Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:36 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:37 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 12:45 PM
From Peter King...

he Julius Peppers deals could be interesting after this season. As I Tweeted (http://twitter.com/SI_PeterKing/status/10190334590)
on Monday, Peppers' contract with the Bears is guaranteed for the first
three years, at $40.5 million. But then ProFootballTalk.com's Mike Florio
clarified, saying the second and third years are guaranteed -- as of
now -- for injury only, raising a very interesting possibility:

What
if the Bears stink this year, Peppers has one of his so-so seasons
<font color="#0000ff">(which he's had several of in an overrated eight-year career)</font>, and the
Bears clean house, firing GM Jerry Angelo, coach Lovie Smith
and staff? What if the new regime doesn't want to be hamstrung for
$11.5 million ($900,000 in salary, $10.5 million in a roster bonus due
Feb. 10, 2011, $100,000 in an offseason workout bonus) with a player
they think isn't worth it? It's probably not going to happen, but it's
possible. </p>

As I read the verbiage of Peppers' contract
summary this morning, I see that "2011 roster bonus guaranteed for
injury at signing then guaranteed for skill on 2/10/11.'' I doubt
sincerely if the current regime survives it'll admit such a costly
mistake then, but if there's a new coach and GM? You never know. It's
an interesting little motivational tool for the Bears with Peppers --
but Peppers could also view it this way, "If I play poorly, I might be
able to be a free agent AGAIN in 2011.''</p>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 12:46 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?
no, i truly dont believe that the war was based on lies. if it was we would of found out about it. why you ask? because to many people would have known, just like this 9/11 truth bull****. when more then one person knows, its not a secret

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:54 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?
no, i truly dont believe that the war was based on lies. if it was we would of found out about it. why you ask? because to many people would have known, just like this 9/11 truth bull****. when more then one person knows, its not a secret


great reasoning lol

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 12:54 PM
Morehead needs food!
http://bestnewyorkfoods.com/drakescakesonline-com/images/DDRF8PK.jpg

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 12:58 PM
http://www.alternet.org/story/16274

the fundamentals of why bush started this war, has all been proven to be lies..

again, im not sure its an opinion any more. The proof and facts are there... at this point its just denial on your point

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:00 PM
again, im not sure its an opinion any more. <font color="#0000ff">The proof and facts are there...</font> at this point its just denial on your point

That doesn't matter. It's only what you think and saw during that time...

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 01:07 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?
no, i truly dont believe that the war was based on lies. if it was we would of found out about it. why you ask? because to many people would have known, just like this 9/11 truth bull****. when more then one person knows, its not a secret


great reasoning lol
what you dont think so? you dont think if that was what happened someone would of said "well, this is a pretty big secret. i wonder how much i could make off this." its common sense, use your head. plus no person in their right mind would want a 2 war front matt. bush wasnt alot of things, but when it came to our troops he was scencere. he jogged with a wounded vet who lost his leg in iraq everyday. i dont think anyone would be able to live a lie, that big.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:08 PM
Double B will you be on later watching the Lakers lose? </p>


</p>

I don't get NBA TV in my office but I will be checking in just to give you hell.
</p>

In the mean time here is a video to keep you entertained...</p><h1>Chad Ochocinco Butt Naked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTfmW4KLvdg)</h1>

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 01:09 PM
by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?


It's astounding how incredibly naive you are.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:11 PM
NEW YORK -- Hal Steinbrenner says the New York Yankees (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/clubhouse?team=nyy) won't alter their policy against contract extensions and will deal with Derek Jeter (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3246), Mariano Rivera (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3240) and Joe Girardi after the season.</p>

Speaking
Tuesday following a news conference to announce details of the first
bowl game at new Yankee Stadium, the team's managing general partner
says he doesn't believe in extensions "no matter who it is."</p>

Jeter and Rivera can become free agents after the World Series, and Girardi's three-year contract expires after the season.</p>

Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>

bandwgn86
03-09-2010, 01:12 PM
Double B will you be on later watching the Lakers lose? </P>


</P>


I don't get NBA TV in my office but I will be checking in just to give you hell.
</P>


In the mean time here is a video to keep you entertained...</P>
<H1>Chad Ochocinco Butt Naked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTfmW4KLvdg)</H1>well no way i'm watching the game or that vid.. i love me some Ocho, a fully clothed Ocho lol

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 01:13 PM
NEW YORK -- Hal Steinbrenner says the New York Yankees (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/clubhouse?team=nyy) won't alter their policy against contract extensions and will deal with Derek Jeter (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3246), Mariano Rivera (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3240) and Joe Girardi after the season.</P>


Speaking Tuesday following a news conference to announce details of the first bowl game at new Yankee Stadium, the team's managing general partner says he doesn't believe in extensions "no matter who it is."</P>


Jeter and Rivera can become free agents after the World Series, and Girardi's three-year contract expires after the season.</P>


Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</P>


</P>


thats not news! lol</P>


That's just the way it is with them...and if they do decide to work on a contract, they dont make it public lol</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:14 PM
by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?


It's astounding how incredibly naive you are.


soooo bush didn't lie? And i'm the naive one?

what was the purpose of iraq daven?

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:15 PM
by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?


It's astounding how incredible you are.

That was nice...

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:15 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?
no, i truly dont believe that the war was based on lies. if it was we would of found out about it. why you ask? because to many people would have known, just like this 9/11 truth bull****. when more then one person knows, its not a secret


great reasoning lol
what you dont think so? you dont think if that was what happened someone would of said "well, this is a pretty big secret. i wonder how much i could make off this." its common sense, use your head. plus no person in their right mind would want a 2 war front matt. bush wasnt alot of things, but when it came to our troops he was scencere. he jogged with a wounded vet who lost his leg in iraq everyday. i dont think anyone would be able to live a lie, that big.


out of all the posts on here daven, you let this post slide and then call me niave?

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:16 PM
Double B will you be on later watching the Lakers lose? </p>


</p>


I don't get NBA TV in my office but I will be checking in just to give you hell.
</p>


In the mean time here is a video to keep you entertained...</p>
<h1><font size="2">Chad Ochocinco Butt Naked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTfmW4KLvdg)</font></h1>well no way i'm watching the game or that vid.. i love me some Ocho, a fully clothed Ocho lol
I am really not sure why he was running around in the park naked. But hey, whatever he likes I guess. lol

Why aren't you watching the game? You going to listen at least?

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 01:17 PM
by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?


It's astounding how incredibly naive you are.


soooo bush didn't lie? And i'm the naive one?

what was the purpose of iraq daven?
like i said, they found 500 barrels of uranium.....thats the main ingredient to make a nuke. so because there was no rocket with a warhead on it, you think bush lied. THATS naive.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:18 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>


</p>


thats not news! lol</p>

<font color="#ff0000">My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</font> [;)]

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:20 PM
<h1 id="firstHeading" class="firstHeading">Iraq War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War)</h1>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 01:20 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?
no, i truly dont believe that the war was based on lies. if it was we would of found out about it. why you ask? because to many people would have known, just like this 9/11 truth bull****. when more then one person knows, its not a secret


great reasoning lol
what you dont think so? you dont think if that was what happened someone would of said "well, this is a pretty big secret. i wonder how much i could make off this." its common sense, use your head. plus no person in their right mind would want a 2 war front matt. bush wasnt alot of things, but when it came to our troops he was scencere. he jogged with a wounded vet who lost his leg in iraq everyday. i dont think anyone would be able to live a lie, that big.


out of all the posts on here daven, you let this post slide and then call me niave?
thanks for going into detail as to why its naive.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 01:24 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</P>


</P>


thats not news! lol</P>



<FONT color=#ff0000>My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</FONT> [;)]
</P>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</P>


answer: yes.</P>

bandwgn86
03-09-2010, 01:25 PM
Double B will you be on later watching the Lakers lose? </P>


</P>


I don't get NBA TV in my office but I will be checking in just to give you hell.
</P>


In the mean time here is a video to keep you entertained...</P>
<H1><FONT size=2>Chad Ochocinco Butt Naked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTfmW4KLvdg)</FONT></H1>well no way i'm watching the game or that vid.. i love me some Ocho, a fully clothed Ocho lol
I am really not sure why he was running around in the park naked. But hey, whatever he likes I guess. lol

Why aren't you watching the game? You going to listen at least?
uhh cuz its basketball lol.. maybe i'll watch the last 2 or 3 minutes

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:29 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>everyone wanted to go into iraq. there was bad intel, well techically, but like i said we found over 500 barrels of uranium and its been over 6 years. we would of had to deal with him sooner or later....thats a fact


by bad intel, you mean lies by our president right?
no, i truly dont believe that the war was based on lies. if it was we would of found out about it. why you ask? because to many people would have known, just like this 9/11 truth bull****. when more then one person knows, its not a secret


great reasoning lol
what you dont think so? you dont think if that was what happened someone would of said "well, this is a pretty big secret. i wonder how much i could make off this." its common sense, use your head. plus no person in their right mind would want a 2 war front matt. bush wasnt alot of things, but when it came to our troops he was scencere. he jogged with a wounded vet who lost his leg in iraq everyday. i dont think anyone would be able to live a lie, that big.


out of all the posts on here daven, you let this post slide and then call me niave?
thanks for going into detail as to why its naive.


the yellowcake was SUCH a cop out for what the situation was. Lets first be real and talk about the initial reason Bush first waged the war on Iraq... he said Saddam was in cahoots wiht Osama Bin Ladin. Which was false...

the one thing that I agree with is that the yellowcake was a situation that would of had to of been handled eventually, it wasn't enough to wage a war over. Infact, with the yellowcake being the ONLY components found, the invasion is deemed as a failure. There was suppose to be ALOT more things there that were not there. The yellowcake alone, while a main component was not enough.

Plus they had been selling the Yellowcake to Canada for YEARS to one of their Uranium producers.... so agian be real about the situation. We ALWAYS knew that Iraq had the Yellowcake

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:32 PM
Double B will you be on later watching the Lakers lose? </p>


</p>


I don't get NBA TV in my office but I will be checking in just to give you hell.
</p>


In the mean time here is a video to keep you entertained...</p>
<h1><font size="2">Chad Ochocinco Butt Naked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTfmW4KLvdg)</font></h1>well no way i'm watching the game or that vid.. i love me some Ocho, a fully clothed Ocho lol
I am really not sure why he was running around in the park naked. But hey, whatever he likes I guess. lol

Why aren't you watching the game? You going to listen at least?
uhh cuz its basketball lol.. maybe i'll watch the last 2 or 3 minutes
We will be up by 15 at that point. Just watch the beginning if anything...

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:33 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>


</p>


thats not news! lol</p>



<font color="#ff0000">My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</font> [;)]
</p>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</p>


answer: yes.</p>
For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:34 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>


</p>


thats not news! lol</p>



<font color="#ff0000">My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</font> [;)]
</p>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</p>


answer: yes.</p>
For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.


when he was young and athletic he was really sick

OMG, how did i not mention Karl Malone in those great 90s players debated

He was the mailman, cuz he always delivered

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 01:35 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</P>


</P>


thats not news! lol</P>



<FONT color=#ff0000>My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</FONT> [;)]
</P>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</P>


answer: yes.</P>



For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.
</P>


yep. I always hated Malone. Loved Stockton, hated Malone.

Was Malone better because of Stockton? Nobody that boring and bland can have those kinda numbers haha =p</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 01:37 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</P>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</P>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</P>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</P>


Well then its settled.</P>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</P>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</P>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</P>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</P>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</P>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</P>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:41 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>


</p>


thats not news! lol</p>



<font color="#ff0000">My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</font> [;)]
</p>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</p>


answer: yes.</p>



For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.
</p>


yep. I always hated Malone. Loved Stockton, hated Malone.

Was Malone better because of Stockton? Nobody that boring and bland can have those kinda numbers haha =p</p>
Of course he was. lol 30% of his assists probably went to Malone. lol

I wish he never would have came to the Lakers in 04. Gary Payton to, Jesus. Stupid Pistons.

Crazy to think that Kobe could have 6 rings right now...

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 01:42 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>


</p>


thats not news! lol</p>



<font color="#ff0000">My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</font> [;)]
</p>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</p>


answer: yes.</p>



For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.
</p>


yep. I always hated Malone. Loved Stockton, hated Malone.

Was Malone better because of Stockton? Nobody that boring and bland can have those kinda numbers haha =p</p>"you might know him as Downtown Funky Stuff Malone"

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 01:43 PM
Jeez Matt, he used chemical weapons against the Kurds and against the Iranians in the Iran/Iraq war. He had them at one point and Saddam refused to give evidence that they were all destroyed. As a matter of fact he kicked out the inspectors sent by the UN to supervise their destruction.</P>


Every intelligence service around the world concluded that he had them. Every member of Congress believed he had them. You can say that Bush was wrong. I have no problem with that, but this "Bush lied" crap is just that.</P>


I disagreed with the policy, but I believe he thought he was doing the right thing.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:43 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</p>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</p>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</p>

well i dunno, im going to leave the war tactics to those that have been ther ebefore. IF they say they need the troops, then I have to say give it to them

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 01:44 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</p>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</p>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</p>were doing that now, its not enough. "grab them by the belt and kick them in the ***" come on morehead, you know this

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:45 PM
Jeez Matt, he used chemical weapons against the Kurds and against the Iranians in the Iran/Iraq war. He had them at one point and Saddam refused to give evidence that they were all destroyed. As a matter of fact he kicked out the inspectors sent by the UN to supervise their destruction.</p>


Every intelligence service around the world concluded that he had them. Every member of Congress believed he had them. You can say that Bush was wrong. I have no problem with that, but this "Bush lied" crap is just that.</p>


I disagreed with the policy, but I believe he thought he was doing the right thing.</p>

so 15 years later after a war, we are going to up and decide its an issue...

what was found there was not enough to warrant the war. We KNEW he was selling Yellowcake to the Canadians and thats all we found = mission failed.

And i've YET to see any of you mention the fact he lied about Osama and Saddam having legit ties to 9/11.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 01:46 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</P>


</P>


thats not news! lol</P>



<FONT color=#ff0000>My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</FONT> [;)]
</P>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</P>


answer: yes.</P>



For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.
</P>


yep. I always hated Malone. Loved Stockton, hated Malone.

Was Malone better because of Stockton? Nobody that boring and bland can have those kinda numbers haha =p</P>



Of course he was. lol 30% of his assists probably went to Malone. lol

I wish he never would have came to the Lakers in 04. Gary Payton to, Jesus. Stupid Pistons.

Crazy to think that Kobe could have 6 rings right now...
</P>


hahahaha. no offense to the Lakers, but i was so glad they didnt win that year just cuz of Malone!!

He's all like, Oh! the Lakers are winnin! ima get me a ring that I was never good enough to get!!</P>


and then lose....lol

Gary Payton I liked though for the most part....except the weird ****y faces he made</P>

byron
03-09-2010, 01:46 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</P>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</P>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</P>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</P>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</P>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</P>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</P>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</P>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</P>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</P>


And they failed.</P>

yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.
As the old saying goes money is the root of all evil....the fat cats are greedy and ignorant...where there is money there is crime it has to be policedyou just can't let them go....they are already finding new ways to beat the system....This is the secondbanking crisisin my life time untilthe fat catsget real and get honest it will happen again....As for rent some will always have to.. sadly..the american dream and thebetter investment is to own....I believe this... the minimum wage should afford a man and his family a home and healthcare......crazy... probably it is.. hamburgers would cost us fortunate ones to much...sadly there are a lot of jobs out there that someone has to dowith little reward.......just saying.... things could be alot better if the fat cats didn't take some much......

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:47 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</p>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</p>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</p>were doing that now, its not enough. "grab them by the belt and kick them in the ***" come on morehead, you know this


we're not slowly withdrawling? we just sent more troops

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:49 PM
im sure you guys all hate Michael Moore but he made a GREAT comment that really put things in perspective.....

he was standing in front of Goldman Sachs and said just think about thousands years from now when our civilization is reserached and discovered... .we are going to look like *******s because we let people steal BILLIONS of dollars from us for years and nearly bankrupt this country. How do we punish them? Give them 700billion more dollars and let them take bigger bonuses

hate him or love him... its hard to argue with the common sense of that
</p>


I hated the bank bailouts but I do understand that if we hadn't spent that 700B to do it, the entire economy would have been devistated. And we all would have been hurt.</p>




while thats true, i guess, there have been no regulations enforced or put in to make these guys straighten up...

and to hear they are getting bigger bonuses actually turns my stomach
</p>


I'll also tell you this, I put the banking meltdown squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Especially the SEC chairman, Christopher Cox. He turned a blind eye to the entire catastrophe.</p>


I do hold some democrats in congress partially to blame for their lack of oversight, but its the administartions job to oversee and enforce existing regulation, which they failed miserably in.</p>


The result was we got ourselves a well intentioned, but unqualified and incompitent new President.</p>




Alot of the deregulation started before Bush's presidency, that said, he certainly did NOT help matters.
</p>


Yes, the whole thing started with the Clinton administration with its desire to force lower lending standards so more people could own homes. BUT the existing regulations were sufficient to prevent this meltdown. They were ignored by the SEC and the entire collapse was a product of a lack of ability to identify it as it was happening.</p>


there is no excuse for an administration to come to the congress claiming that if they don't get $700B right now, the entire banking system will collapse.</p>


Both Congress and the Bush administration were to blame, but its the responsibilty of the administration to govern.</p>


And they failed.</p>

yes and I have no problem with Clinton doing it for a purpose... then its one of two things when it came to bush letting it get out of hand: ignorance or greed.
As the old saying goes money is the root of all evil....the fat cats are greedy and ignorant...where there is money there is crime it has to be policedyou just can't let them go....they are already finding new ways to beat the system....This is the secondbanking crisisin my life time untilthe fat catsget real and get honest it will happen again....As for rent some will always have to.. sadly..the american dream and thebetter investment is to own....I believe this... the minimum wage should afford a man and his family a home and healthcare......crazy... probably it is.. hamburgers would cost us fortunate ones to much...sadly there are a lot of jobs out there that someone has to dowith little reward.......just saying.... things could be alot better if the fat cats didn't take some much......

watch out, they are gonna start calling you a commie or a socialist

but amen brotha

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 01:50 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</P>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</P>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</P>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</P>


Well then its settled.</P>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</P>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</P>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</P>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</P>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</P>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</P>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</P>


were doing that now, its not enough. "grab them by the belt and kick them in the ***" come on morehead, you know this
</P>


Kick who?</P>


Its an enemy that we couldn't care less about. They're just a bunch of simpletons who haven't done a thing to us. The real Taliban, the real supporters of Al Qaida, are long gone. </P>


We disempowered them in Afghanistan. All we have to do is maintain a token presence to keep them in check.</P>


Nation building goes against every conservative principle. I'm a true conservative, not a "neo-con". I believe that military action should only be taken when our security is at risk.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 01:54 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</p>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</p>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</p>


were doing that now, its not enough. "grab them by the belt and kick them in the ***" come on morehead, you know this
</p>


Kick who?</p>


Its an enemy that we couldn't care less about. They're just a bunch of simpletons who haven't done a thing to us. The real Taliban, the real supporters of Al Qaida, are long gone. </p>


We disempowered them in Afghanistan. All we have to do is maintain a token presence to keep them in check.</p>


Nation building goes against every conservative principle. I'm a true conservative, not a "neo-con". I believe that military action should only be taken when our security is at risk.</p>

well I think thats debatable... im not sure a token presence is enough...

this is a type of threat that has never really been dealt with before. Your talking country vs country and I agree, we're dealing with a set of renegades that have the impact to be VERY dangerous, as we've unfortunately learned from 9/11

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:57 PM
Steinbrenner says his policy is "nothing personal."</p>


</p>


thats not news! lol</p>



<font color="#ff0000">My Bad, lets get back to politics!!!</font> [;)]
</p>


no thx!! Lets have our own conversation.

Was Karl Malone as boring a basketball player as he looks like he'd be?</p>


answer: yes.</p>



For sure...lol But he was one of the best Forwards of all time.
</p>


yep. I always hated Malone. Loved Stockton, hated Malone.

Was Malone better because of Stockton? Nobody that boring and bland can have those kinda numbers haha =p</p>



Of course he was. lol 30% of his assists probably went to Malone. lol

I wish he never would have came to the Lakers in 04. Gary Payton to, Jesus. Stupid Pistons.

Crazy to think that Kobe could have 6 rings right now...
</p>


hahahaha. no offense to the Lakers, but i was so glad they didnt win that year just cuz of Malone!!

He's all like, Oh! the Lakers are winnin! ima get me a ring that I was never good enough to get!!</p>


and then lose....lol

Gary Payton I liked though for the most part....except the weird ****y faces he made</p>
As I like to call it, The Karl Malone Kurse.

But on the other hand, nothing like wearing a Malone Lakers jersey to j*** games. [:)]

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 01:57 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</P>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</P>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</P>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</P>


Well then its settled.</P>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</P>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</P>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</P>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</P>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</P>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</P>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</P>


were doing that now, its not enough. "grab them by the belt and kick them in the ***" come on morehead, you know this
</P>


Kick who?</P>


Its an enemy that we couldn't care less about. They're just a bunch of simpletons who haven't done a thing to us. The real Taliban, the real supporters of Al Qaida, are long gone. </P>


We disempowered them in Afghanistan. All we have to do is maintain a token presence to keep them in check.</P>


Nation building goes against every conservative principle. I'm a true conservative, not a "neo-con". I believe that military action should only be taken when our security is at risk.</P>




well I think thats debatable... im not sure a token presence is enough...

this is a type of threat that has never really been dealt with before. Your talking country vs country and I agree, we're dealing with a set of renegades that have the impact to be VERY dangerous, as we've unfortunately learned from 9/11
</P>


Now you're friggin George Bush?</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 01:58 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 01:58 PM
But on the other hand, nothing like wearing a Malone Lakers jersey to j*** games. [:)]
</P>


hahaha. ppl bought those!??!</P>

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 01:59 PM
like the new sig? =]

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 01:59 PM
Jeez Matt, he used chemical weapons against the Kurds and against the Iranians in the Iran/Iraq war. He had them at one point and Saddam refused to give evidence that they were all destroyed. As a matter of fact he kicked out the inspectors sent by the UN to supervise their destruction.</p>


Every intelligence service around the world concluded that he had them. Every member of Congress believed he had them. You can say that Bush was wrong. I have no problem with that, but this "Bush lied" crap is just that.</p>


I disagreed with the policy, but I believe he thought he was doing the right thing.</p>

so 15 years later after a war, we are going to up and decide its an issue...

what was found there was not enough to warrant the war. We KNEW he was selling Yellowcake to the Canadians and thats all we found = mission failed.

And i've YET to see any of you mention the fact he lied about Osama and Saddam having legit ties to 9/11.

there was intel that saddam was funding osama whether it was bad or not i dont know. hes been recorded several times saying he supports al qaida. saddam was given over 20 separate chances by the un inspectors to let them inspect. and that certainly doesnt mean "=mission failed". were helping to set up 2 democracies in the middle of the middle east, far from mission failed if you ask me.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:01 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:02 PM
like the new sig? =]
LOL, hell yeah

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:02 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:03 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>
Whatever man, they are having fun I guess. But none of them have an ounce of control of what happens. Maybe they should take all that energy they are debating with and get off their *** and do something about it if it's such a huge deal to them....

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:04 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 02:04 PM
so 15 years later after a war, we are going to up and decide its an issue...

what was found there was not enough to warrant the war. We KNEW he was selling Yellowcake to the Canadians and thats all we found = mission failed.

And i've YET to see any of you mention the fact he lied about Osama and Saddam having legit ties to 9/11.

This is what I get from what you are saying Matt.

you seem to think Bush "ALONE" wanted this war, and went out to convince everyone by lying or whatever means necessary that it's what we needed to do.

That is why I'm calling you naive, first off, I don't think Bush is even smart enough to accomplish that goal, but secondly, do you think "Bush" was really the guy making the decisions and everyone else just followed suit?

the entire congress, the entirety of the governing body wanted to go to Iraq, The Dem's the Republicans EVERYONE....before Bush even opened his mouth on the subject....**** the UN wanted to go there.

so your "Bush Lied" "Bush caused the war" crap is really naive, EVERYONE wanted the war.

you can look at that issue and compare it to say Health Care, were the polling shows that the American Public, Te Republican's and a growing amount of Democrates DON'T want it, and yet Obama is "forcing" it through.

you blame a war on Bush when you probably wanted the war at the time and at the very least, the majority of the public and the governing body and the "world" as a whole, wanted...they WANTED it.

but you refuse to look at something nobody wants, as a negative thing when it's Obama's.

you are exactly the type of guy you suggested should have their balls cut off, you BLINDLY follow one guy.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:04 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:06 PM
<FONT size=5>"I Chuck....Therefore I am"</FONT></P>


http://jefferykrit.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/michael_jordan.jpg</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:07 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>


</P>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</P>


WTF!</P>

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:08 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>


</P>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</P>


WTF!</P>


</P>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</P>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:09 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</p>

You all goat him into it...Dezz started the whole bull****

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:09 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</p>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</p>


</p>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</p>


</p>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</p>


WTF!</p>


</p>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</p>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</p>
You didn't see every single one of Birds shots so that doesn't matter...

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:10 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>


</P>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</P>


WTF!</P>


</P>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</P>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</P>


</P>


I don't know what stat you are quoting.I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:11 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>



You all goat him into it...Dezz started the whole bull****
</P>


Its more romantic to blame Matt.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:12 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>
Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:12 PM
Daven, any person that loves any politician and 100% of what they do should just have their nuts chopped off because they obviously can't think for themselves and are morons and we don't need people like that procreating


whats your point here?

I'm going to lunch, but this has nothing to do with who likes who, how do you take a group of guys, who failed at running a bank, and then put them in charge of overseeing ALL banks?

how is that a "good" idea.

I generally agree with your statement, but I feel like what you said...applies "directly" to you.


how do u figure, its like ur saying it to me likes its Obama and im sititng here sticking up for EVERY SINGLE thing he does. No I just stick up for the things I think hes doing a good job of, opposed to you who (and the rest of the republican party) tries to bash EVERYTHING the man does.


</p>


Because Uncle Barack has a " government" based philosophy, and the Republicans have a "market" based philosophy.</p>


They simply fundamentally disagree. You notice they do support him in Afghanistan. I don't however. The terrorists have gone to Yeman and Samalia.</p>




just saw my marine buddy on sat, hes being sent to afg this friday. I actually asked him how do u feel about that, its gonna be his second tour of duty...

he said its needed, Iraq is a waste of time tho
</p>


Well then its settled.</p>


We have to follow through now in Afghanistan because to pull out would endanger all those who supported us. it would be a betrayal to the Afgans and be devistating to our standing and credibility.</p>


My problem was not getting out after we displaced the Taliban 6 years ago. And maintain a small force to attack wherever they grow in force.</p>




i totally agree with that

but u say u don't support the war, but in reality u do? Its confusing
</p>


I supported our going into Afghanistan after 9/11. thats where the terrorists planned the attack and thats the government who enabled them. But then we took on the mission of nation building which was a huge mistake. I disagreed with our going into Iraq because we already had Saddam in a box with the enforcement of the no fly zone and our presence in Kiuwait.</p>




Okay but then what are you not supporting in Afghanistan?
</p>


Right now, I support a slow withdrawal. Very slow. We need to reduce our footprint there without comprimising our prestige. We can't give the Taliban a perceived victory.</p>


Ultimately we should draw down to the point where we can launch drone or other air attacks along with some special forces capabilities to prevent terrorists from re-establishing themselves there.</p>


were doing that now, its not enough. "grab them by the belt and kick them in the ***" come on morehead, you know this
</p>


Kick who?</p>


Its an enemy that we couldn't care less about. They're just a bunch of simpletons who haven't done a thing to us. The real Taliban, the real supporters of Al Qaida, are long gone. </p>


We disempowered them in Afghanistan. All we have to do is maintain a token presence to keep them in check.</p>


Nation building goes against every conservative principle. I'm a true conservative, not a "neo-con". I believe that military action should only be taken when our security is at risk.</p>the jihadists. theyre not a bunch of simpletons, theyre an bunch of fanatics hell bent on fighting and destroying america. just because we took out a few head members doesnt mean theyre going to quit or find someone else that will replace them. theyre smart and they got us by the balls. they know we are a media driven country, they know if they can wait us out theyll win.....thats what theyre doing right now. just set up a few ieds and let the american left media handle the rest. **** it almost worked in iraq.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:14 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</P>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy. Public opinion can move politicians.</P>


And we get to vote here.</P>


</P>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:15 PM
I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</p>
and STILL had a higher percentage [;)]

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:16 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</p>

You all goat him into it...Dezz started the whole bull****
[6][:D]

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:17 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</p>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</p>

actually it was davens lol

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:17 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</p>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy. Public opinion can move politicians.</p>


And we get to vote here.</p>


</p>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</p>
I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:18 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>

its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:18 PM
I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</P>



and STILL had a higher percentage [;)]
</P>


Larry was much more of an outside shooter. I'm actually surprised its that close. As you know the guys with the highest FG% are the guys who take the shorter shots.</P>


I believe Kendrick Perkins is tops in the NBA right now. Does that make him better than Jordon, Mr. Angry?</P>

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:18 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>


</P>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</P>


WTF!</P>


</P>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</P>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</P>


</P>


I don't know what stat you are quoting.I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</P>


</P>


FG%

Michael had to take more game winning attempt shots, more shots to TRY to win.
The Celtics always won because they had a better team across the board in the 80s.
The same can't really said for the bulls until about 11-12 years into MJ's career.</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:19 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>




its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on
</P>


I'm with you on that.</P>

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 02:21 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>




its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on
</p>


I'm with you on that.</p>

Me three.

BUT there has been an increase in "care" recently....so at least there is that.

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:22 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>

its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on

Because it doesn't matter bro. If I care or if I don't care Landon Irwin doesn't have the power to change anything. Neither does Mike &amp; Mike, Steve, Chris, Justin or Matt.

We can't do **** about what is happening...It is what it is.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:23 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</P>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy. Public opinion can move politicians.</P>


And we get to vote here.</P>


</P>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</P>



I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...
</P>


I get your point. The question is whether or not this is the proper place for it.</P>


But have I told you that you're beautiful when your mad?</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:23 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</P>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy. Public opinion can move politicians.</P>


And we get to vote here.</P>


</P>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</P>



I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...
</P>


I get your point. The question is whether or not this is the proper place for it.</P>


But have I told you that you're beautiful when your mad?</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:23 PM
so 15 years later after a war, we are going to up and decide its an issue...

what was found there was not enough to warrant the war. We KNEW he was selling Yellowcake to the Canadians and thats all we found = mission failed.

And i've YET to see any of you mention the fact he lied about Osama and Saddam having legit ties to 9/11.

This is what I get from what you are saying Matt.

you seem to think Bush "ALONE" wanted this war, and went out to convince everyone by lying or whatever means necessary that it's what we needed to do.

That is why I'm calling you naive, first off, I don't think Bush is even smart enough to accomplish that goal, but secondly, do you think "Bush" was really the guy making the decisions and everyone else just followed suit?

the entire congress, the entirety of the governing body wanted to go to Iraq, The Dem's the Republicans EVERYONE....before Bush even opened his mouth on the subject....**** the UN wanted to go there.

so your "Bush Lied" "Bush caused the war" crap is really naive, EVERYONE wanted the war.

you can look at that issue and compare it to say Health Care, were the polling shows that the American Public, Te Republican's and a growing amount of Democrates DON'T want it, and yet Obama is "forcing" it through.

you blame a war on Bush when you probably wanted the war at the time and at the very least, the majority of the public and the governing body and the "world" as a whole, wanted...they WANTED it.

but you refuse to look at something nobody wants, as a negative thing when it's Obama's.

you are exactly the type of guy you suggested should have their balls cut off, you BLINDLY follow one guy.


anytime we say "Bush" we mean Bush's camp.

Bush did have everybodies support... until it came out that there were many untruths about waht he said was out there. And MOST of his supporters flip flopped

And don't keep starting this debate if ur not gonna remember what i said. I cleary stated multiple times with what was presented to us, EVERYBODY was for the war... especially in an emotional time like that. But the reasoning for it wasn't true...

lol i don't blindly follow one guy, based on the fact from our Goldman Sachs talk before. I just don't believe in DESTROYING a guy who was handed this mess and has had it for a year and half. Hes done things for the car industry and says we will be pulling back out of iraq by august. To me hes on the right track.

Its the ignorance of guys LIKE YOU who think its an overnight thing.... except when its their guy in office. We all had to sit thru 8 year of ****in hell because of YOUR guy and there was NEVER a backlash on him, no matter how much money he lost, lives he lost, or anything. The republicans are not even giving this guy a ****in chance

Also another example of me not being a goat boy that blindly follows, i am FOR NAtional Healthcare, but i agree that the plan on the table isn't what we need....

you can try and pin me with whatever you want, but don't ****in lie cuz that will agitate me

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:24 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>


</P>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</P>


WTF!</P>


</P>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</P>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</P>


</P>


I don't know what stat you are quoting.I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</P>


</P>


FG%

Michael had to take more game winning attempt shots, more shots to TRY to win.
The Celtics always won because they had a better team across the board in the 80s.
The same can't really said for the bulls until about 11-12 years into MJ's career.</P>


</P>


I think we can all agree that Reggie Miller is one of the greatest pure shooters of all time.</P>


His FG% is .471.</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:25 PM
I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</p>



and STILL had a higher percentage [;)]
</p>


Larry was much more of an outside shooter. I'm actually surprised its that close. As you know the guys with the highest FG% are the guys who take the shorter shots.</p>


I believe Kendrick Perkins is tops in the NBA right now. Does that make him better than Jordon, Mr. Angry?</p>
Of course not Mr. Homer. Every shot counts for 2 or 3 points no matter where it's shot from. You always have a rebuttal no matter how ridiculous it is. But he was a better FT shooter...[:)]

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:25 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</p>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</p>


</p>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</p>


</p>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</p>


WTF!</p>


</p>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</p>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</p>


</p>


I don't know what stat you are quoting.I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</p>

and 6 more points, so its a push...

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:25 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>




its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on
</P>


I'm with you on that.</P>


</P>


I'm sure we all care to varying degrees.
I dont talk politics because politics make everyone sound stupid. Sure thats an opinion, but it gives everyone sour faces.
I can't control whats going on in the world outside of voting. Unfort. voting doesnt effect much of anything outside elections, so thats puts me(and all of you) in the same boat. You can't change any of it, so there's no use talking about it.
If there was a way to vote to take troops out of the ME/put them in the ME...sure I'd vote....but alas, there is not. Hence my silence on your subjects</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:26 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</P>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</P>


</P>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</P>


</P>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</P>


WTF!</P>


</P>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</P>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</P>


</P>


I don't know what stat you are quoting.I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</P>




and 6 more points, so its a push...
</P>


Check rebounds and assists. Its no wash there.</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:26 PM
I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</p>



and STILL had a higher percentage [;)]
</p>


Larry was much more of an outside shooter. I'm actually surprised its that close. As you know the guys with the highest FG% are the guys who take the shorter shots.</p>


I believe Kendrick Perkins is tops in the NBA right now. Does that make him better than Jordon, Mr. Angry?</p>

sorry that Mike could drive and didn't have to rely on outside shooting ALL the time

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 02:27 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****.* And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</P>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy.* Public opinion can move politicians.</P>


And we get to vote here.</P>


*</P>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</P>



I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...
</P>


I get your point.* The question is whether or not this is the proper place for it.</P>


But have I told you that you're beautiful when your mad?</P>
can we be done.. for real now.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:27 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>




its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on
</p>


I'm with you on that.</p>

Me three.

BUT there has been an increase in "care" recently....so at least there is that.


houses being lost, no jobs... .people will start to care again

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:28 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</P>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</P>


</P>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</P>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</P>




its hard to figure out why everybody doesn't care... regardless of what side of the ball ur on
</P>


I'm with you on that.</P>


</P>


I'm sure we all care to varying degrees.
I dont talk politics because politics make everyone sound stupid. Sure thats an opinion, but it gives everyone sour faces.
I can't control whats going on in the world outside of voting. Unfort. voting doesnt effect much of anything outside elections, so thats puts me(and all of you) in the same boat. You can't change any of it, so there's no use talking about it.
If there was a way to vote to take troops out of the ME/put them in the ME...sure I'd vote....but alas, there is not. Hence my silence on your subjects</P>


</P>


I would never suggest that you or anyone else here didn't care. This is a football MB. Not everyone is comfortable talking politics here.</P>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:28 PM
anything BUT basketball, PLEASE!

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:29 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


ITS ALL MATT'S FAULT.</p>


I was fine with the Larry vs. The Chucker debate.</p>


</p>


wtf is a chucker? that sounds like some racist ****....dont know how you didnt pick up on that...</p>


</p>


You've never seen the Sienfeld episode where Kieth Hernandez calls George a "chucker". because he shoots to much?</p>


WTF!</p>


</p>


.497% vs. .496%

Clearly some white dude was doin' a little bit more chuckin.</p>


i know i know! stats dont count for anything</p>


</p>


I don't know what stat you are quoting.I do know that MJ averaged 4 more shots per game than Larry.</p>




and 6 more points, so its a push...
</p>


Check rebounds and assists. Its no wash there.</p>

ur talking about a 2 spot vs a 3 spot...

how bout defense? no debat eon it

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:29 PM
anything BUT basketball, PLEASE!
</P>


I rather enjoyed the golf convo.</P>

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:29 PM
I think we can all agree that Reggie Miller is one of the greatest pure shooters of all time.


His FG% is .471.</P>


</P>


siiiiirrrrr he wasss good! damn that reggie....damn him

oh who am I kidding, i hated the knicks!! GO REGGIE!!!</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:30 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</p>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy. Public opinion can move politicians.</p>


And we get to vote here.</p>


</p>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</p>



I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...
</p>


I get your point. The question is whether or not this is the proper place for it.</p>


But have I told you that you're beautiful when your mad?</p>
Where is the proper place? Is there one?

Thanks...

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:30 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****. And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</p>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy. Public opinion can move politicians.</p>


And we get to vote here.</p>


</p>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</p>



I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...
</p>


I get your point. The question is whether or not this is the proper place for it.</p>


But have I told you that you're beautiful when your mad?</p>
can we be done.. for real now.

okay... how bout dem phillies...

and was the only time u won when Doc was on the mound?

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:32 PM
can we be done.. for real now.</P>


i &lt;3 you....and more so if you tell me MJ was the best =P</P>


lol totally kidding =]</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:36 PM
can we be done.. for real now.</P>


i <FONT size=6>&lt;3</FONT> you....and more so if you tell me MJ was the best =P</P>


lol totally kidding =]</P>


</P>


I've seen this many times. What the hell does it mean?</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:36 PM
anything BUT basketball, PLEASE!


too bad *****, i told u no politics today...

LET THE NBA TALKS BEGIN

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:37 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart?

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:37 PM
can we be done.. for real now.</P>


i <FONT size=6>&lt;3</FONT> you....and more so if you tell me MJ was the best =P</P>


lol totally kidding =]</P>


</P>


I've seen this many times. What the hell does it mean?</P>


</P>


I less than 3 you too MH! haha...</P>


it's a heart(or at least its supposed to be?) and yes, that IS very gay, thank you for pointing that out ;)</P>

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:37 PM
<h3 class="GenericStory_Message" data-ft="{&quot;type&quot;:&quot;msg&quot;}"> NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</h3>

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:37 PM
anything BUT basketball, PLEASE!


too bad *****, i told u no politics today...

LET THE NBA TALKS BEGIN
youu never said **** to me....daven said lets talk politics. i thought everyone was on board haha
by the way, have you been accepting my challenge. of course not. matt learn something? BAAa! no but seriously, yesterday was a good episode.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:38 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart?

i can't tell if ur joking or not

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:38 PM
OMG</P>


quoted for maximum lulz</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:39 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart?

i can't tell if ur joking or not
</P>


Really, I just figured it out when I blew it up.</P>


I assume I'm right.</P>


I'm thinking to myself...What the heck is this "less than 3" thing mean.</P>

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:39 PM
anything BUT basketball, PLEASE!


too bad *****, i told u no politics today...

LET THE NBA TALKS BEGIN
youu never said **** to me....daven said lets talk politics. i thought everyone was on board haha
by the way, have you been accepting my challenge. of course not. matt learn something? BAAa! no but seriously, yesterday was a good episode.
</P>


wtf, since when do we listen to Daven!!?</P>


hehe</P>

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:40 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart?

i can't tell if ur joking or not
</p>


Really, I just figured it out when I blew it up.</p>


I assume I'm right.</p>


I'm thinking to myself...What the heck is this "less than 3" thing mean.</p>

lol, EEUREEKAAAAAA

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:41 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart?

i can't tell if ur joking or not
</p>


Really, I just figured it out when I blew it up.</p>


I assume I'm right.</p>


I'm thinking to myself...What the heck is this "less than 3" thing mean.</p>

lol, EEUREEKAAAAAA

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:41 PM
<h3 class="GenericStory_Message" data-ft="{&quot;type&quot;:&quot;msg&quot;}"> NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</h3>so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:43 PM
<H3 class=GenericStory_Message data-ft='{"type":"msg"}'>NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</H3>


so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.
</P>


signed with the niners a few days ago.</P>


i cant tell if either of you are being serious. DAMMIT i hate the internet</P>


http://www.hisstank.com/forum/members/1337w422102-albums-messed-up-joe-pictures-picture3367-breaker-finds-out-internet-indeed-quite-some-serious-business.jpg</P>

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 02:44 PM
How many hours can you guys debate over the same ****ing bull**** that none of you have any control over? You have all made the same points 20 times over...
</p>


I told these peons that last week, but everyone wants to think they are political/military strategists.
What I cant fathom is how they constantly block quote each other...like.....15 quotes at a time. thats nuts. How can you read like that?!??</p>


</p>


I like the fact that Matt gives a ****.</p>


He's wrong...But he gives a ****.* And that goes a long way with Moorehead.</p>



Well I don't give a **** and we both have the same effect on the situation
</p>


Actually in America we do have an effect on policy.* Public opinion can move politicians.</p>


And we get to vote here.</p>


*</p>


Sounds like Lando has swallowed an angry pill today.</p>



I just don't see the point. Nothing is going to change. I guess it is entertaining to you guys so that is great. Have fun an knock yourself out.

I am not angry at all. I just don't see the ****ing point. Channel this energy to those politicians...
</p>


I get your point.* The question is whether or not this is the proper place for it.</p>


But have I told you that you're beautiful when your mad?</p>
can we be done.. for real now.

okay... how bout dem phillies...

and was the only time u won when Doc was on the mound?

relaxxxxx its ONLY spring training...

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 02:45 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart?
pappy your starting to worry me..... lol

bigblue4417
03-09-2010, 02:45 PM
<h3 class="GenericStory_Message" data-ft="{&quot;type&quot;:&quot;msg&quot;}"> NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</h3>so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.

He signed with the 49ers days ago.

MattMeyerBud
03-09-2010, 02:45 PM
oh i'm well aware blondie.. just giving u a lil taste of what u were trying to hand out last week

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:46 PM
<h3 class="GenericStory_Message" data-ft="{&quot;type&quot;:&quot;msg&quot;}">NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</h3>


so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.
</p>


signed with the niners a few days ago.</p>


i cant tell if either of you are being serious. DAMMIT i hate the internet</p>


http://www.hisstank.com/forum/members/1337w422102-albums-messed-up-joe-pictures-picture3367-breaker-finds-out-internet-indeed-quite-some-serious-business.jpg</p>lol im serious. i found out threw you two. **** MAN!! good luck to carr. i had a lot of confidence in him God forbid anything happened to E.

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 02:46 PM
<h3 class="GenericStory_Message" data-ft="{"type":"msg"}"> NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</h3>so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.

he signed with SF 2 days ago... some giants fan you are.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:47 PM
OMG, is that supposed to be a sideway heart? pappy your starting to worry me..... lol</P>


You should have always been worried by me.</P>

DavenIII
03-09-2010, 02:48 PM
anytime we say "Bush" we mean Bush's camp.

Bush did have everybodies support... until it came out that there were many untruths about waht he said was out there. And MOST of his supporters flip flopped

And don't keep starting this debate if ur not gonna remember what i said. I cleary stated multiple times with what was presented to us, EVERYBODY was for the war... especially in an emotional time like that. But the reasoning for it wasn't true...

WTF does that mean the "reasoning for it wasn't true" you honestly think he came or his staff came up with "lies" to get us to go to war? are you crazy? it was the best information they had at the time, they "did" find parts, eventually we would have had to go there one way or another anyhow, after finding out they didn't have "weapons of mass destruction" was I disappointed with the decision? YES, so was the BUSH CAMP, everyone including bush, believed they actually were a threat, and all the information pointed to that, just because it didn't end up being what we (and by that I mean EVERYONE) thought it was doesn't mean it was all a big lie.......did the Government actually take out the Twin Towers too?! do you honestly believe that conspiracy crap? loose change and the like, come on Matt.

Bush did what he (and the rest of the world) thought was right at the time, and now he's being killed for doing...what everyone wanted him to do....it's really quite sad, and no, I don't think was a great president, but his 8 years was less destructive to America then the last ONE year of Obama has been, and if Obama gets Health Care through....they'll never be able to repeal it, it'll be one of the biggest mistakes in the HISTORY of America...it's "that" bad.




lol i don't blindly follow one guy, based on the fact from our Goldman Sachs talk before. I just don't believe in DESTROYING a guy who was handed this mess and has had it for a year and half. Hes done things for the car industry and says we will be pulling back out of iraq by august. To me hes on the right track.

I don't see how you can say he's on the right track though, not when he says things like.

"The stimulus will prevent the unemployment from going over 8%" then it goes up to 10
he promises he won't use reconciliation to pass Health Care, then goes on to ask for reconciliation to pass health care.
He says "jobs" are his #1 concern then goes on to make speech after speech about Health Care, which will COST jobs.

Obama only cares about ONE thing, and he's willing to wreck the Democratic party in the process of passing it, he just want's health care, and he doesn't even care how good it is, he just wants to pass something to say he did something.

Mark my words, by the end of Obama's presidency the Republican's will be a Majority, and it will be because of Obama's failures that it occurs, that is unless the trend that's slowly taking place speeds up, and the Democrats bail on him and his widely unpopular ideas.


Its the ignorance of guys LIKE YOU who think its an overnight thing.... except when its their guy in office. We all had to sit thru 8 year of ****in hell because of YOUR guy and there was NEVER a backlash on him, no matter how much money he lost, lives he lost, or anything. The republicans are not even giving this guy a ****in chance

Are you ****ing kidding, Bush took more heat then any president since I've been alive, that's for sure, the president there has been no Backlash on is Obama, the media's darling, no matter how many times he blatantly lies or fails it's painted as "Bush's" fault, I'm sorry Matt, the dude's had a year, and everything he ran on is in WORSE shape now and trending to be Worse in the future, he's cause more debt in ONE year then EIGHT years of Bush....and ... his PLAN requires even MORE spending.


Also another example of me not being a goat boy that blindly follows, i am FOR NAtional Healthcare, but i agree that the plan on the table isn't what we need....

except you don't realize, that ONLY Obama wants national health care, Obama and maybe Pelosi, even the Democrats themselves don't want to push that issue right now, but they are literally being bride by Obama's administration....by pushing this issue he is costing the Democrats seats, he is willing to go down in a blaze of "glory" for his ideals which is great except for the fact that his ideals run opposite to the will of this nation.

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:48 PM
<H3 class=GenericStory_Message type?:?msg?}? data-ft="{">NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</H3>


so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.
he signed with SF 2 days ago... some giants fan you are.</P>


And I'm hearing that we signed Jim Sorgi, crappy shoulder and all.</P>

ibleedblue85
03-09-2010, 02:48 PM
oh i'm well aware blondie.. just giving u a lil taste of what u were trying to hand out last week

[;)] touche.....

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:49 PM
<H3 class=GenericStory_Message data-ft="{" type?:?msg?}?>NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</H3>


so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.
he signed with SF 2 days ago... some giants fan you are.</P>


lol. i really like Carr...i feel like he got a bad rap in Houston through no fault of his own. He usually played very well when we used him, and i hope he has an awesome career(the rest of it). I think SF is a good start. he might be the most starter-ready QB theyve seen there in years.</P>

Morehead State
03-09-2010, 02:49 PM
anytime we say "Bush" we mean Bush's camp.

Bush did have everybodies support... until it came out that there were many untruths about waht he said was out there. And MOST of his supporters flip flopped

And don't keep starting this debate if ur not gonna remember what i said. I cleary stated multiple times with what was presented to us, EVERYBODY was for the war... especially in an emotional time like that. But the reasoning for it wasn't true...

WTF does that mean the "reasoning for it wasn't true" you honestly think he came or his staff came up with "lies" to get us to go to war? are you crazy? it was the best information they had at the time, they "did" find parts, eventually we would have had to go there one way or another anyhow, after finding out they didn't have "weapons of mass destruction" was I disappointed with the decision? YES, so was the BUSH CAMP, everyone including bush, believed they actually were a threat, and all the information pointed to that, just because it didn't end up being what we (and by that I mean EVERYONE) thought it was doesn't mean it was all a big lie.......did the Government actually take out the Twin Towers too?! do you honestly believe that conspiracy crap? loose change and the like, come on Matt.

Bush did what he (and the rest of the world) thought was right at the time, and now he's being killed for doing...what everyone wanted him to do....it's really quite sad, and no, I don't think was a great president, but his 8 years was less destructive to America then the last ONE year of Obama has been, and if Obama gets Health Care through....they'll never be able to repeal it, it'll be one of the biggest mistakes in the HISTORY of America...it's "that" bad.




lol i don't blindly follow one guy, based on the fact from our Goldman Sachs talk before. I just don't believe in DESTROYING a guy who was handed this mess and has had it for a year and half. Hes done things for the car industry and says we will be pulling back out of iraq by august. To me hes on the right track.

I don't see how you can say he's on the right track though, not when he says things like.

"The stimulus will prevent the unemployment from going over 8%" then it goes up to 10
he promises he won't use reconciliation to pass Health Care, then goes on to ask for reconciliation to pass health care.
He says "jobs" are his #1 concern then goes on to make speech after speech about Health Care, which will COST jobs.

Obama only cares about ONE thing, and he's willing to wreck the Democratic party in the process of passing it, he just want's health care, and he doesn't even care how good it is, he just wants to pass something to say he did something.

Mark my words, by the end of Obama's presidency the Republican's will be a Majority, and it will be because of Obama's failures that it occurs, that is unless the trend that's slowly taking place speeds up, and the Democrats him.


Its the ignorance of guys LIKE YOU who think its an overnight thing.... except when its their guy in office. We all had to sit thru 8 year of ****in hell because of YOUR guy and there was NEVER a backlash on him, no matter how much money he lost, lives he lost, or anything. The republicans are not even giving this guy a ****in chance

Are you ****ing kidding, Bush took more heat then any president since I've been alive, that's for sure, the president there has been no Backlash on is Obama, the media's darling, no matter how many times he blatantly lies or fails it's painted as "Bush's" fault, I'm sorry Matt, the dude's had a year, and everything he ran on is in WORSE shape now and trending to be Worse in the future, he's cause more debt in ONE year then EIGHT years of Bush....and ... his PLAN requires even MORE spending.


Also another example of me not being a goat boy that blindly follows, i am FOR NAtional Healthcare, but i agree that the plan on the table isn't what we need....

except you don't realize, that ONLY Obama wants national health care, Obama and maybe Pelosi, even the Democrats themselves don't want to push that issue right now, but they are literally being bride by Obama's administration....by pushing this issue he is costing the Democrats seats, he is willing to go down in a blaze of "glory" for his ideals which is great except for the fact that his ideals run opposite to the will of this nation.


</P>


Yes but you have to admit that Larry was better than MJ.</P>

bandwgn86
03-09-2010, 02:49 PM
anything BUT basketball, PLEASE!
</P>


I rather enjoyed the golf convo.</P>crap i missed the golf talk.. did you watchlastweekend, CV looks in fine form

JPizzack
03-09-2010, 02:49 PM
ok, call me crazy, but....i have no idea who Jim Sorgi is.
The name i know...but who the **** is Jim Sorgi??

dezzzR
03-09-2010, 02:50 PM
<h3 class="GenericStory_Message" data-ft="{" type="" :="" msg="" }=""> NY Giants come to terms on a 1 year deal wit backup QB Jim Sorgi</h3>so did we get rid of carr yet? i havnt seen anything. havnt really been looking but....damn i liked carr as a back up.

he signed with SF 2 days ago... some giants fan you are. sundays are my off days from the mbs. sometimes mondays too. thank god i wasnt here most of yesterday.
wheres my giff woman!?!?!?!?! [:D]