burleytog

Thanks, you just saved me 30 hours of driving and $500 in gas money.

If I ever see him again, I'll give him a rap right on the Jack Johnson. Lemme tell you what that sorry piece of crap did to me this week. First, he helps me haul off a load of garbage, that no good $$&*$. Then, he goes with me to pick up a freezer. When we get to the store, they're closed and that sorry SOB loans me his trailer so I can pick it up the next day. As if all of that wasn't enough to warrant a bullet to the kneecap, that $&*#$(#)_#*$($($ helps me unload the freezer, get it in the house, run the wire for an outlet. And to top it all off, he loans me his Deere since my mower took a dump. With friends like that, who needs enemies? >

CORRECTION

Sounds like a knot rather than a line problem.

Thank Walt Disney for his anthropomorphism.

Engvall should have stuck with handing out signs.

It was what it was. A terribly executed Made-For-TV flick.

Congress Tries To Fix What It Broke By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Regulation: As the financial crisis spreads, denials on Capitol Hill grow more shrill. Blame an aloof President Bush, greedy Wall Street, risky capitalism, anybody but those in Congress who wrote the banking rules. Such denials won't hold against the angry facts banging on their doors. The only question is whether the guilty party can keep up the barricade until Election Day. A visibly annoyed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected suggestions that Democrats share blame for the meltdown. "No," she snapped at reporters who dared ask. Stick to our narrative, she scolded: The bursting of the housing bubble was another story of market failure and deregulation. "The American people are not protected from the risk-taking and the greed of these financial institutions," she said, while calling for investigations of the industry. Only, the risk-taking was her idea and the idea of all the other Democrats, along with a handful of Republicans, who over the past 30 years have demonized lenders as racist and passed regulation after regulation pressuring them to make more loans to unqualified borrowers in the name of diversity. They were the ones who screamed "REDLINING!" and sent banks scurrying for cover in low-income neighborhoods, where they have been forced to lower long-held industry standards for judging creditworthiness to make the subprime loans. If they don't comply, they are threatened with stiff penalties under the Community Reinvestment Act, or CRA, a law that forces banks to make home loans to people with poor credit risks. No fewer than four federal banking regulatory agencies are responsible for enforcing the law. They subject lenders to racial litmus tests and issue regular report cards, the industry's dreaded "CRA rating." The more branches that lenders put in poor neighborhoods, and the more loans they make there, the better their rating. Those lenders with low ratings can not only be fined, but also blocked from mergers and other business transactions needed to expand. The regulation grew to monstrous proportions during the Clinton administration, obsessed as it was with multiculturalism. Amendments to the CRA in the mid-1990s dramatically raised the amount of home loans to otherwise unqualified low-income borrowers. The revisions also allowed for the first time the securitization of CRA-regulated loans containing subprime mortgages. The changes came as radical "housing rights" groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans. ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama. HUD, in turn, pressured Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase more subprime mortgages, and Fannie and Freddie, in turn, donated to the campaigns of leading Democrats like Barney Frank and Pelosi who throttled investigations into fraud at the agencies. Soon, investment banks such as Bear Stearns were aggressively hawking the securities as "guaranteed." Wall Street's pitch was that MBSs were as safe as Treasuries, but with a higher yield. But they weren't safe. Everyone in the subprime business from brokers to lenders to banks to investment houses absolved themselves of responsibility for ensuring the high-risk loans were good. The mortgage lenders didn't care, because they were going to sell the loans to other banks. The banks didn't care, because they were going to repackage the loans as MBSs. The investors and traders didn't care, because the MBSs were backed by Fannie and Freddie and their implicit government guarantees. In other words, nobody up and down the line from the branch office on main street to the high-rise on Wall Street analyzed the risk of such ill-advised loans. But why should they Everybody was just doing what the regulators in Washington wanted them to do. So everybody won until everybody lost, including the minorities the government originally mandated the banks to serve. The original culprits in all this were the social engineers who compelled banks to make the bad loans. The private sector has no business conducting social experiments on behalf of government. Its business is making profit. Period. So it did what it naturally does and turned the subprime social mandate into a lucrative industry. Of course, it was a Ponzi scheme, because they weren't allowed to play by their rules. The government changed the rules for risk. In order to put low-income minorities into home loans, they were ordered to suspend lending standards that had served the banking industry well for centuries. No one wants to talk about it, so they just scapegoat Wall Street. Even John McCain has joined the Democrat chorus on this. The FBI is now investigating 24 large mortgage lenders for alleged abuses. But who will investigate the pols and the lobbyists and the community agitators who made the bad decisions that ultimately forced businesses to make their bad decisions?

Hippies, tree huggers, enviro-nuts...they all suck.

That can be a good thing or a bad thing. While my overall Sony experience has been good, I've still gotten more than one lemon. That said, when the time came for me to buy a large TV, I did go with Sony. They are a known quantity.

Or we can just head to Southern Exposure in Princeton.

Not to be a PITA or anything, but wouldn't this be considered a political post/thread? :-X

I never had any problems with it.

Bow season opens first Sat. in October. I don't bowhunt although I'm tempted every year to drag my old PSE out of the shop and sling a few. Season opens for me on the first Saturday of November. Head upstate for a week of fun, good food, nasty farts, and fellowship. Oh yeah, and tons of blood lust.

I've killed and seen a couple in November with spots. I've also seen several in early August with no spots.

Why?

Nope, my invoice would be much higher. You know how I love to rip people off.

We'll need video of you taking a Hudd to the pills for a final determination.

And to complete the trifecta and provide my answer. It would be a tie between Dan Marino, Don Strock and Tony Eason.

So did you.

You just invalidated any opinion you hold about any subject.

Oh my word!

MAGIC NUMBER IS 4!!!! Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago whattaya say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

The same size as the Curado 200E7/5. Lower profile than the 100D with the line capacity of the 200D. It's a small reel. http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1221278398

They are all 2009 model reels.