KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
Search is my thing. Just as Otis.You gotta be kidding me.Google search site:forums.footballguys.com ilkI thought we can't search for smaller than four-letter words in here?
Search is my thing. Just as Otis.You gotta be kidding me.Google search site:forums.footballguys.com ilkI thought we can't search for smaller than four-letter words in here?
I think we can refer to this as a CUI now.
I was thinking of this thread when I saw that post today, but I couldn't find it. Good job.
I was thinking of this thread when I wrote it. Some temptations are just too great.I was thinking of this thread when I saw that post today, but I couldn't find it. Good job.
Ilk abuse hereHeavy B said:Words cannot sufficiently describe the level of loathing that I have for Obama and his ilk.
That said: Let's have some hard proof before we go besmirching people.
And isn't this shtick? A guy named "Larry" who looks like the very poor man's Larry the Cable Guy puts out a video like this? C'mon, men. Pull back on the stick and drag this thing out of the mud.
snitwitch said:This is interesting news, sounds like the most concrete news yet that there will be a reunion tour.
I will have to check it out, and bring my wife, who missed out in the early 90s. The problem now will not be finding shrooms or LSD or things of that ilk, but instead locating a babysitter.
SofaKings said:Well the GOP has to be wrong somehow in Sulla and its ilks eyes. Gotta start somewhere cuz you know it couldn't possibly be the Dems.adonis said:I'm not quite sure how the content of the bill was changed by Pelosi's remarks, which were what they were voting for or against. It's all silly.
I think we need an intervention.
I'll round up a few people.Seriously.I think we need an intervention.
Why won''t someone do something?I'll round up a few people.Seriously.I think we need an intervention.
OC Zed said:Ahhh yes, more regulation is all that we need. Regulators will know what is best. Just like all of that regulation we passed at the beginning of this decade (Sarbanes-Oxley and its ilk) have done wonders at eliminating any market downsides. Yup.Did it occur to you that much of this economic collapse was spurred on by government intervention? Hmmm, years of cheap money from the Fed, Fannie Mae and Freddie artificially keeping mortgage rates low, a tax policy which heavily favors home ownership, etc.sholditch said:Amazing that she is actually blaming the government for an economic depression created by a lack of government oversight of financial institutions. Hard to write a good editorial when your primary premise is that shaky. But if you ignore that I guess its ok.
Oh, and I don't think Rand is blaming anyone at this point... she's been dead for about 30 years now.
Another CUI
urbanhack said:Furley and his ilk finally convinced me.Mr. Pickles said:What turned the tide?I noticed legit guys like JZilla (sorry, Joe) use it regularly. Has me thinking I'm missing something.urbanhack said:I started using it about 18 days ago....I say go for it.
P Boy said:One of the beautiful things about our system of government. The people in her district choose to have her represent them. That's their right. The Dem's have chosen her as their House leader. That's also their right.But putting forth a person of her ilk as a leader may not threaten her seat locally, but it sure could affect national elections in 2010. In fact, it's part of something I'm counting on. Now if we could just get the Republicans to act like political conservatives again (and leave the social #### alone - those are battles no one is going to win and can only be used against them to distract from the issues at hand).General Malaise said:Okay, well if we all agree that she's not cut out for this job, why can't we just remove her? Who keeps putting in her charge of all the important things? Seems like if sentiment was so strong across the board, she'd be in charge of something trivial, like ways and means.*
ETA - and please, please, please let Repubs ditch this love affair with Palin. There's no winning with that, no matter how much she may warm your heart (which disturbs me no end).
glock said::headsplode: = Wrigley and his ilk as they approach retirement age and a Spanish speaking majority in the U.S.
Now THAT was fast. How do you do it?CUI
glock said::headsplode: = Wrigley and his ilk as they approach retirement age and a Spanish speaking majority in the U.S.
Bronco Billy said:If the Dems continue to put up thieves dedicated to their twisted form of "social justice" thinly disguised as do-gooders like Obama, Reid, Pelosi and their ilk, I really don't have much choice, do I?I'll sleep just fine at night, thanks.tommyGunZ said:And yet none of this matters, b/c Repubs can count on your vote in '10 and '12.
But if it helps you sleep at night, :thumbsup:
boom king said:THIS is whats gonna bring finless down? i assumed it would be for running an underground gambling ring or drug trafficking..... something of that ilk
keep up the good work videoguy
ffldrew said:So based on this bill is a teacher excluded from studying the writings and philosophies of Malcom X? No study of the Black Panthers?
It would be pretty tough to teach a history of an ethnic group without bringing up their oppressors ...because without those oppressors many of the leading writers and teachers of that ethnic class wouldn't have meaning. Should a class not understand Bull Conner and his ilk in Alabama as the backdrop against MLK teachings? or even Malcom X vs. MLK?
Darth Cheney said:Not only that...but really..what has Mickey Mouse and his ilk done in the last 30+ years?
Ilk abuse here.Honestly, I think a plan of this ilk will be adopted at some point in this country's future. It is inevitible.
I say this mostly because of the massive shift in work looming on the horizon: automation.
Within the next 20 to 30 years, I expect the vast majority of unskilled labor to be automated, as well as a fair ammount of mid-skilled labor. You can already see the beginings of this today, as automatic checkout machines are reducing cashier jobs, ATMs reducing teller jobs, etc. Within 10 years I doubt we'll have many truck driver or taxi driver jobs as self driving vehicles grow into a mature state. Even some higher end jobs, like doctors and lawyers, are going to have a drastically changing reality when hyper enabling tools like IBM's Watson get rolled in to medicine and law.
In the past, when technology makes a job obsolete, it also usually creates a new job as well. Maybe not a full replacement, but some jobs. Imagine an assembly line of workers replaced by robots. The line jobs are gone, but we can add in robot maintanence and programming jobs as a replacement. The thing is, the advance of technology is accelerating. Jobs are being eliminated more rapidly than new jobs can replace them at an increasing pace. Even with a full economic recovery in the US, I don't think we'll ever see 4% unemployment again. 6% is my estimate of the best we can do, and I expect that % will creep higher and higher in the next few decades.
Every one of us can pull a level. But only so many of use are capable of higher end jobs. So, what do we do about the folks who cannot find low skill work because it doesn't exist? The options are to institute something like a basic garunteed income, or to continue doing what we do now, which is very little combined with looking at them with disdain and calling them lazy. While today's option hasn't crumbled our society yet, I think moving forward this will become a greater and greater problem. At some point, we'll either find a way to support people who do not work (either by choice or because they're skills/intelligence is not enough to enable them to contribute) or we'll have a revolution. I prefer the former to the latter.
You and your ilk still will, despite the fact that any of your glorious right wingers would do the exact same thing and you'd defend them til you were blue in the face. Maybe pre-Iraqs we would have something to stand on, but the way we've conducted our military the last 25 years, we have absolutely ZERO standing to tell another country what not to do with respect to sovereign borders.