DJ V Lawrence

Indeed, this is huge :-)

There were a lot of rumors before that it could be Perry vs. White for Governor. Well instead, something bigger may be brewing. Check this out from the Houston Chronicle: Now if she were to run, here's how things would be shaping up for her replacement...

This is by far the biggest trade in both Houston Dynamo and TFC's history. There's no question that TFC will be a threat next year. As for the Dynamo, they'll still be a threat, but they'll be faster on defense now. Looking forward to seeing what other acquisitions the Dynamo make especially with all that allocation money.

Hopefully, we'll know on December 9th. One thing I do know as well is the fact that a new light rail is in the plans for the area (stadium or not). Also, the Minute Maid parking lot on the Dynamo stadium side would be used for Dynamo parking.

I'm 100% for the idea of a playoff system. The BCS is ridiculous. It's all based on how difficult critics think teams had beating opponents they think are capable of beating them, which undermines the concept that anybody can beat anyone at anytime. Perfect example: Hawaii last year. They went undefeated. That deserves to be rewarded with a title shot. They still didn't earn that spot because the other two schools in the final game were deemed better than Hawaii because of the teams they beat. If there were at least an 8-team playoff though, Hawaii would have probably went in with a chance to prove people wrong (sure they got beat by Georgia handedly, but still). The college football championship should be based off of who's won, not who people THINK are the best. Playoffs are a must. And if they want, call all seven playoff games bowl games, and have them played on bowl sites if they need the money that badly.

Here's an article on the press conference from Dynamo Planet Also, here's some pics from the conference: And here's a few of the proposed stadium area:

That's what surprised me the most about the report. Fox News was HEAVILY Right-wing biased during the campaign. They actually sounded depressed when they announced Obama won Ohio Tuesday night. But now, they're reporting as if they're fair and balanced again. To be fair though, Bill O'Reilly did say at the beginning of his show that he regretted not scrutinizing the Bush administration enough leading into the economic crisis/bailout and he wasn't going to do that again under the Obama admin. With that, it looks like he's going to scrutinize both Republicans and Democrats alike as he did the Clinton admin when there was a Republican Congress. I think we'll see bi-partisanship until the inauguration. Then the day afterwards, you'll see the media heavily lean either to the left or right again.

I was watching that, and I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Here's that report:

"If you smell...what Barack...is cooking" To me, it's a historical night and one I'll be telling my kids and grandkids about if I ever have 'em.

If I read correctly on the Chronicle, Obama's just won Pennsylvania?

I disagree. I see MSNBC as highly liberal, and Fox News to be highly conservative, and I consider both to be mainstream. CNN is closer to bi-partisanship than the other two. Then there's ABC, NBC, and CBS evening news. They're not partisan like cable news; they're just more sugar-coated and condensed, thus more people are turning to cable anyway. And Face The Nation, This Week, and Meet The Press are pretty good at asking the tough questions to everyone that goes on their shows because their gimmick is just to try to raise hell with "gotcha" questions to whoever's in power because they want to be known as the show that made that moment possible. Then there's talk-radio. I see that as heavily conservative than liberal. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. get mad play there. Then when you turn to satelite radio, perhaps you may hear a liberal channel or two added to the mix. Long-story short, there's enough liberal and conservative media out there for anyone and everyone to flip the channel like I do and hear both sides of the story. To turn my television from a partisan to a bipartisan media outlet, I simply use my remote control.

That dude's partisan. He's not cool.

Well, we will never know "everything" about Obama, Palin, McCain, or Biden. With the exception of Palin, the other three have been known by mainstream America at the minimum since 2004. McCain/Biden have been in Washington for well over 20 years, and anyone who paid attention during the 2004 Kerry/Bush election has heard of Obama. The second part (what makes Obama qualified to be President) is a very reasonable question. The answer is the fact that he's capable of getting the electoral votes needed to become President. If he's not capable of getting the votes of the American people, then he wouldn't be qualified. The moment he won the Democratic spot (along with McCain for the Republican nod) was the moment both became "qualified". So now we know that both Obama and McCain are qualified to be President, the real questions now are who's got the better policies, who's going to be able to execute them, who's going to pick the stronger cabinet, who will handle the situation in Iraq better, etc.

What if Americans stopped worrying about Obama/McCain/Biden/Palin's possible past "associations" with Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Keating Five, etc. , and started worrying about their CURRENT associations with George W. Bush, the Clinton, Ted Stevens, Fannie/Freddie Mac, etc.? And why not worry about Obama's association with Joe Biden, and McCain's association with Sarah Palin more than anyone else? THOSE are the two possible VPs.

Values as in what religion you practice, or what your pastor says? Absolutely not. Any Christian, Muslim, Jewish faith, etc. has an equal opportunity at my vote. Now, values as in "here's where I would use my religious beliefs in the White House"? That's a different question because now you're talking about how the real issues that affect Americans would be altered. That's where I'd be paying attention. The problem there isn't if Obama were a Christian or Muslim. The problem there is the fact that people would actually not vote for him if he were an open-Muslim. I'm a Christian guy myself, but America's not a Christian nation; it's a nation of all religions, race, and creed. So if a Muslim could vote for a Christian all this time, I can vote for a Muslim. Why should someone have to be a certain religion to be President? Why not just be a better candidate issue and policy-wise?