cooperstown

So then prove me wrong. Show me where I've stated any such thing . . . . And I've certainly laid out more than my fair share of compliments towards CCH baseball.

Not my wife. :thumb: (She reads these threads once in a while and that is sure to score me some points).

I'm a Shawshank freak. :thumb: Not a big Timothy Robbins fan, but he was awesome in it. Hanks could have pulled it off, but can't see Costner in the role.

I do, too, but he was absolutely fabulous in "Blood Diamond" and "The Departed."

Not sure where anyone has ever stated that - certainly not I - but I certainly like your way of thinking.

And what you eat in the morning or the afternoon . . . At the end of the day, it's all about calories.

He's been a terrible head coach that has taken the Bengals from the verge of mediocrity to a return of the Dave Shula era. He needs to go so Brown can bring in another "yes" man that will get us temporarily excited and then return us to the mind-numbing putridity that we have come to expect. I think Lewis is a very capable coach, just not a good head coach.

I recall hearing that John Travolta had orginally been offered the lead role in 'Forrest Gump.' While I like Travolta, I could not possibly imagine anyone other than Hanks in that role.

I think he has asking this because the Indiana Jones character (which Selleck was apparently offered) had nothing to do with Star Wars. :lol:

Kind of my point.

Can't wait to read the stories tomorrow about how Ole Miss lost due to the distraction of the AK arrest. Probably have half the storyline written already just to save time.

Oil drops to $36 a barrel today as traders conclude that slumping global demand will overwhelm a production cut by OPEC. $36 a barrel! Who'd have thunk?

I thought that the poinsettias thing was true, but that you'd have to eat several plants worth to become sick. In fact, I am almost positive I heard that on several occasions.

"I know, I know. I'm like ugly. Seriously ugly. But I'm really perky and I get points for that, right?"

This issue in this thread concerning the media really isn't about whether they are unreasonably conversative/liberal (clearly they are liberal), but whether they are accurately reporting on the current economic situation. I submit, for the most part, they are. Come on. These same corporate chieftains have shareholders to whom they answer and are equally (moreso) concerned about their own option/bonus awards. So they sit on their hands in their offices while their news organizations provide misinformation about the economy to the public that personally harms them and their company? All because they are stupid, liberal, or ignorant. Don't buy it. Didn't really answer my question. I'll assume your answer is "no", they do not get credit for the economic boon we experienced over the past few years. And I agree. They shouldn't. Just like they aren't responsible for causing or worsening the crunch we now find ourselves in. You have an obvious hatred of the media and that's certainly your right. But to paint them with such a broad brush of ignorance just doesn't make sense. The point has been made in this thread that the media has intentionally and/or unscrupulously portrayed the economy as being worse than it is - either for their own personal gain, out of ignorance, or because they are only interested in reporting "bad" news. I don't buy it. I see no evidence that they are overstating the severity of this recession nor have any legitimate motive to do so.

Talia Shire and Carl Weathers were the only ones who could have pulled off the Adrianne and Apollo roles? They both did a great job, just not certain there was something so unique about their performances that couldn't have been duplicated by other actors. Actually, Talia Shire began to grate on me as the series rolled on. Kind of glad they killed her off in the most recent movie, to be honest.

No one ranked, but Ryle is a pretty solid team that could make some noise in the 9th and Boone defeated them.

Not completely untrue, especially as it relates to politics and the presidential election, but an overexaggeration as a whole. So the media - corporations run by some very smart guys - is intentionally slanting stories to emphasize the negative parts of the economy knowing full well that it would drive down their own newspaper circulation, stock prices , and profits? And why would they do that? So this same media that has helped destroy the confidence of consumer over the past few months would conversely get credit for running it through the roof these past few years, right? Media absolutely slant stories. Media absolutely favor certain individuals/parties and bias their writing towards/against them. But it happens on both sides. Doesn't make it right, but it is reality and it's been going on for a long time. But I really just don't follow any explanation that the media has some hidden agenda for reporting and embellishing any negative economic news so as to keep us in this quagmire as long as possible.

But in the event that CC needs some solid rebounding between the 3rd and 4th inning of any of their games this year, they should be set.

I won't totally disagree with you on this one, but there is only so much that can be fit into a title of an article. Certainly when the article is written, a title is used that hopefully intrigues the reader into reading the full story. I don't find anything in the body of the story, however, that seems disingenuous or misleading. They were very clear that this was an extension of a normal layoff and that workers would still be paid a portion of their regular salaries, though some of it would come from unemployment benefits. I see nothing in the story that implies that Chrysler would never operate again or that this story in particular supports the position that the media is feeding the condition of the economic crisis.

For the record, I am saving this post. You will no doubt see it brought back up again.

Absolutely. Liam Neeson in "Schindler's List". Jimmy Stewart in "It's a Wonderful Life." Jack Nicholson in "The Shining."

Cutting taxes, while an important PART of the overall equation to fix the economy and help us recover from the recession, is not some economic cure-all that will, in and of itself, end this entire thing. The benefits of a tax cut take a while to work their way through the economy and be felt by businesses and private individuals. While we're awaiting this benefit (and, yes, it will happen), many more businesses will be shuttered and millions more jobs lost and we will be driven into a deeper and much more harsh recession (time to even use the "D" word). The country needs economic stimulus NOW. That will not be derived solely through slashing taxes. It would be wonderful if we did not have to add on to our country's national debt. Unfortunately now is not the time to be worrying about it.

And how would you accomplish this?

Specifically, what part of the recession is the media exaggerating? Should they be reporting on Chrysler shutting down or is that only feeding into the overblown hysteria?