westguy

We could just get rid of 290. Upgrade the segment and call it I-10N and re-sign the Katy Freeway as I-10S.

Sick: Dead bear cub covered in Barack Obama posters found at university

I never order because of names. If there's an ingredient I don't like, I skip it.

McCain was asking Russia for money. That's after taunting them last summer, so the Russians apparently told the media.

Now it's on-topic. Do you have any insider information?

Why not?

Do you crib all of your posts from pamphlets?

Lawsuit abuse. It's driving all US doctors into the poor house.

Yes, that would be best.

What the hell is going on here?

IOKIYAR

Should this thread title be edited? Like the Phil Gramm one?

D Magazine's editor endorses Obama: (Since I cannot post the whole thing, I will just choose an excerpt.)

So why do you believe Obama would be bad for the economy? Pretax income has been higher across the board under Democratic presidents. That leads to higher tax revenues, which helps local governments to sustain lower rates.

That would be two trillion dollars. Has it been that much already?

Interesting read here: (link) Arresting women for kissing on the beach are very small things compared to human rights abuses in the UAE. It's impossible to have this level of extravagance without an extremely hierarchical society.

Someone edited the title? Why?

Lincoln had one term in the US House of Representatives before he became the president. Buchanan was a Senator, Secretary of State, a diplomat, a member of the House, etc. There is no doubt which one was a better leader, though. You're speaking as if Bush's experience had anything to do with his awful presidency - that it wasn't his character which included absolute moral certainty. Obama is a pragmatist, which is quite the opposite. McCain's camp has a lot in common with the current president in this regard. Palin? Definitely. McCain? Seemingly.

Subprimes were smaller and manageable. Now bring them into a brand new unregulated market that has nothing to do with CRA... From Red's link: If you want us to blame the Bush administration for this, then I nominate Alphonso Jackson from HUD. They're the ones who decided that high-risk loans could count towards affordable lending goals. (link)

It was the same story under the Clintons. First, the predictions of doom, then the resentment when he ran circles around them, and it all ended with squabbling over petty things. The 90s was the decade of armed militia compounds, you know. The only domestic threat for Bush II has been a bag of pretzels.

This will be the first election to have voters who were born after the fall of the Berlin wall. That means all new voters are not going to respond to crotchety old rants against communism/socialism.

Let me add that, those conditions will only be used under Paulson's discretion. I don't have much confidence that he do much beyond helping his old firm out. Have you been paying attention during every Republican administration since at least Reagan?

We have a mixed capitalist-socialist economic system, and we have had it for decades. Re: bailout. The amount spent depends on which institutions take up the bailout offer. The restrictions on that money make it a tough pill for Wall Street to swallow. From what I've heard, the US taxpayer is a primary stockholder when it buys these distressed securities. That's a liability for these companies.

Well, we're all going to need our "credit cards"

Everyone went bankrupt trying to pay for those exorbitant prices. OPEC is beating a dead horse.