Guard Dog

Where about are you staying? The Radisson off Dixon Rd. It's like 5 min from the airport. It's pretty cold and rainy here.

Leaving for the airport in an hour or so. I'm going to Toronto for work. I'll be there through Wed. The Leafs are playing Tampa Bay at home on Tuesday night. How cool is that? Come hell or high water I am getting tickets to that game. Anyone recommend any good restaurants/bars/pubs in Toronto?

Nope, not buying it or playing it. Oh well.

Al Gore will be glad to hear that... He had almost double the war chest of Bush in 2000. You are a wise man. I have said it here often enough, after four years of Obama only a trained eye would notice any real change in the US. Even after eight the changes would be infinitesimally small.

It sounded better when I tried it at the bar. It did well there but the crowd was a little less sophisticated. Just a little...

Much has been made about Obama's Marxist assertion of the need to redistribute wealth. In a rare (for him) moment of sparkling clear honesty he said it in so many words at a campaign event. I wish I could have asked one of the questions in last nights debate for Obama. If I could have it would have been this: Senator Obama. Suppose for a moment that on the night of Nov 4 the election results are 50% for you, 45% for Senator McCain and the remaining 5% spread out between Mr. Barr and Mr. Nader. Now according to your taxation philosophy it is inherently unfair that Mr. Nader and Mr. Barr should have so few votes. Nevermind the fact that their campaigns did not involve nearly the effort that yours did. So for the sake of fairness to those two candidates would you be in favor of "taxing" yours and Senator McCains vote totals and giving the proceeds to Mr. Barr and Mr. Nader. For example we could "tax" your total by 33% (not coincidently the top income rate). After all you have more than everyone else, you can afford it right? That leaves you with 33.5% of the vote. Mr. McCain did not campaign as well as you and ended up with fewer votes so we will tax him 25% (the median income tax rate before YOU get hold of it). That leaves him with a total of 33.75%. Since Mr. Nader and Mr. Barr are the victims of your success, we won't tax them and we will give them the proceeds of the tax against the middle and upper classes (You and McCain in this case). So that leaves the vote totals at 33.5% for Obama, 33.75% for McCain, and 16.375 for Mr. Nader and Mr. Barr. well, what do you know, that makes Mr. McCain the President. How about that Mr. Obama? I guess it IS possible to tax someone out of their success and hard work. It is not just, but according to you it is fair. So I'll ask you Mr. Obama, are you really in favor of spreading the wealth around when it punishes YOUR success? I didn't think so. Now you understand why I don't want someone like you taxing me out of MY hard work.

Just got home today. I was in Deming, New Mexico for work. All the dogs were so happy to be home (I board them when I'm gone). I had an Eddo moment. While I was out there I saw a rusted old pistol in a pawn shop window. I don't think the poor mexican guy that owned the shop realized what he had. It was a genuine Schofield Smith and Wesson .40. I asked the guy how much and he said $300. I tired to hide my shock and almost ran to the ATM to get the cash. It's probably worth 10 times that. I took the wood grips off tonight and started working on restoring them. I'll take the chassis to a gunsmith for rust removal and reblueing. Then I need to find a display case, this thing is going on the wall. I also have a genuine Colt Navy .32 is a display box.

I'm making a homemade pizza for dinner. I've got 2 big trays of deer jerky smoking in the grill. I've got a case of Sam Adams in the fridge. The dogs are playing in the back yard and looking longingly at the grill (they will probably get a fair bit of that jerky). The Rays vs Red sox game starts in about two hours. Life is good!

That's only because it's hard to drink and bang woman(s) at the same time, and thus you forgo the beer. What? Never heard of multitasking? Besides there is a position where it is not only possible but convenient.

I'll lay you guys 3 to 1 that Eddo is in prison by now. Anybody who buys guns by the crate, body armor, combat knives, and runs around fully armed in a ninja suits is going to get locked up at some point. Any takers?

Really? So you are telling me the government compelling banks to loan money to bad credit risks (CRA revised in 1995 by Bill Clinton) has nothing to do with the current crisis? That is a little absurd even for you. I'd also point out that bank deregulation begain with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 passed by an all Democrat congress and signed by a Democrat president. It hit fever pitch when the Glass-Stengal act of 1934 was finally repealed by the Gramm-Leach-Biley Act of 1999 signed into law by Bill Clinton. I know you did not blame Republicans in your post but knowing you, it was coming.

Actually a little of both. When I sold my last house I reinvested all of the money (minus what I had to pay for closing and my ex's half) into my new house, then refinanced and took cash out. I dropped in intrest rate 3/4 of a point too so it was a pretty good deal. So now I have a little cash to invest and in markets like these, cash is king. I've been looking at stocks I think might be underpriced, EBAY for example has dropped around 15% and is around $16.50. They are already a minority owner of Pay Pal and just bought it's main competitor Bill Me Later outright. Pawnshops prosper in hard times is Ebay is the worldwide pawnshop. P/E is not that great but it does have a low debt service. I like it at $16.00. If it hits $16 I'll buy in. Real Estate is another option I've been looking at. There a few houses in foreclosure near my office in Bartlett I think could be had fairly cheaply. Tech stocks make me nervous because at the end of the day these are companies that have no assets. The are essentially selling air (BW). Then again I might just take to whole roll to Las Vegas and play $100 hand Blackjack until I double up or go bust.

First of all I have stated often enough I do NOT like George W Bush, did not vote for him in 04, and I believe he has been a terrible President that has squandered a historic opportunity. That said he has at time acted in the best interests of the US despite objections from the global community. For example, the Chinese and Russians have both loudly objected to the development of a missile defense system. Bush has authorized and funded it anyway because it is in the best interests or OUR country. I think Obama would have dropped it the moment he was challenged. He has already promised to kill the project. Failing to do the best thing for you own people because of the objections of enemies and competitors. How is that anything but weak? As for your "laissez-faire approach to economy" there has been no such thing in the US since FDR was President. This current "crisis" is the result of GOVERNMENT meddling. the GOVERNMENT passed the CRA that insisted a certain number of loans be to low income. The GOVERNMENT lowered credit requirements for CRA loans. The GOVERNMENT guaranteed bad loans buy buying them. And finally the GOVERNMENT compelled the artificially low interest rates that drove the housing boom. Had the not deregulated the banks in the 1980s and 90s, and left well enough alone with the CRA in the 90s and 2000s, or for that matter not regulated at all in 1934 none of this would have happened. I get a good chuckle when I hear the Internet Intellectuals spouting their screed about how this is a failure of capitalism. That would only be true if we actually had it. And you're correct. McCain may give us another David Souter, he was appointed by a Republican (and what a dark day that was) or John Paul Stevens who was put up by Ford. But Obama will certainly give us more of Breyer and Bader-Ginsburg who have never failed to see the Constitution as a tool to empower the state over the rights of citizens rather than a limit government power as the founders intended.

They were just trying to make you feel better after checking you cholesterol.

Who are we kidding here? You said back over the summer you would only vote for McCain if Hillary was nominated. Besides, I fully realize the futility of trying to change anyones mind on a forum like this. There is little else we can do here but express an opinion and (if we are lucky) the logical reasoning you used to arrive at it. If I had photographic proof of Obama selling poison milk to school children everyone now in the tank for him will still vote for him because they will convince themselves the proof was wrong or faked. If someone will reject proof that he is the wrong guy for the job, how could words on an internet forum change their minds? Besides most of the posters here (not just this thread but the "Economic Meltdown" thread as well) have demonstrated a remarkable lack of understanding of the US, it's political system, what it's government can and cannot do, and politics in general. And thats OK because a little over half of the posters are not US citizens anyway so they get a pass. The rest of you thread pundits and internet intellectuals who actually DO reside in the US who seem to have no clue how your own country works.... well what can I say.

Let

Let's put all our cards on the table here. I do not like John McCain. He is the very thing he claims he is running against. A Washington insider. He favors big government meddling in the economy, he favors a bellicose and interventionist foreign policy. He is a Democrat circa 1980. I do not think he would make a very good President. I do not like Barack Obama. He is arrogant and small minded. He disdains traditional American values and thinks ill of the majority of his countrymen. He favors an economic plan that is a strange hybrid of planned and highly regulated demand side driven capitalism. He actually believes taxes are a tool to modify behavior and strongly favors the federal government having s dominant role in every aspect of American life. He has demonstrated no understanding of the affects of high tax burdens on the economy and has been outright hostile to the concerns of small business owners. I believe his foreign policy will be one dictated by a desire for international friendship and cooperation as Western thought understands it but it will be seen as weak in places like China, Russia and the Middle East. Because of that he will be challenged by one or all of them to see how much he will give without a fight. I think he will make a terrible President. So faced with two candidates I intensely dislike I'd normally vote Libertarian (I did in 2004) but with the possibility of two vacancies of the Supreme Court, I must vote vote McCain and encourage as many others as I can to do the same. I have stated here many times that insofar as government policy goes the US will not make any great changes in the next four years no matter who wins. Political direction takes decades to change in a country like the US. We have been in a slow drift to the right ever since 1980 and that will not change in four years. Or even eight. If Obama wins two terms and is succeeded by a like minded democrat and congress remains controlled by the left you will begin to see the difference 10-12 years out and it will be as lasting as the current trend has been. But here is the thing, modern US history tells us that is a very unlikely outcome. The real legacy of this, the next, or any US President that is real and lasting is their picks for the Supreme Court. On that point alone I must support McCain over Obama. If there were not a real likelihood of SCOTUS vacancies I'd be much less concerned about the outcome of this election. Obama once co-authored an article in the Harvard Law Review in which he argued constitutional jurisprudence should be updated in a similar way that Einstein's theory of relativity replaced Newtonian mechanics, a view that would release judges from the original intent of the Founders of America. Anyone who believes in the concepts of Federalism and limited powers of government should cringe at the thought of who Obama might nominate.

Yeah, that or he realized no one cared about his opinions. I think this is the correct answer. And what opinions they were too. The USA is the source of all evil in the world, George Bush masterminded 9-11, there is no such thing as radical islam, Americans are all evil and the world would be a much better place if we all just went out and shot ourselves. Actually I thought he as an alt for Nur Ab Sal who seemed to believe a lot of the same things.

Getting back on the horse eh? Good for you, I don't think I will do that again myself.

Ditto everything Enoch posted. To that I would add that right now banks that deal in mortgage securities may turn out to be a solid investment long term because I believe the real estate market has hit bottom and buyers with good credit and cash might be looking at real estate as a good opportunity. I know I'm looking at a few lots in Bartlett. Prices may drop more but I think we are getting close. I would avoid stocks of companies that specialize in consumer goods or retail outlets. Companies like that tend to take a real hit during economic downturns when people do not have a lot of extra money to spend.

I won a $500 gift card from a charity auction for the United Way at work. I think this will look good on my kitchen counter: http://www.amazon.com/BeerTender-Heineken-...002&sr=8-30

Is this your first trip down the aisle? I thought you were married?

I did not know you Aussies had to deal with that little piece of pre-industrial madness.

Jeez I hope the 1/4 box you threw in the dumpster did not have any of my personal info in it...

I suspect there are a lot more alts on this board than even I would believe.