dwar0123

Don't think you will ever find out about the spade situation, given the opponents will probably keep preempting, regardless of your methods.

Well, north certainly didn't. South maybe can go to game knowing the values will be well placed with rho, but that flat I can't really blame him for not going.

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq2hk7dq75ck863&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1h]133|200[/hv] Is this an obvious takeout double or a 1nt bid?

Lets cut them all the way to 0 than. Hell, lets make them negative, revenue will rise to infinity! Look, I understand why revenue might go up after cutting taxes, but you treat it like it is a mathematical certainty when in reality it is a fringe case depending on a very unique set of circumstances.

Good lord, hope this is true, cause reading this thread I was beginning to think the laws were nuts and no one was noticing.

South = Expert - Ducking the first spade and managing to ruff a spade with only 2 rounds of trump pulled North = Intermediate - Not inviting by bidding 3♦ West = Advanced - Did nothing stupid nor smart East = World Class - Trying to unblock clubs so west could get in with the jack of clubs to take spade

They shut down a profitable game that was wholly run by an outside subsidiary that did nothing else but run that game under the premise that it didn't fit their vision going forward? That really sounds like a top guy in paragon studios got pissed and said this happens or else and a top guy in NCSoft got even more pissed and said or else indeed. This really smacks of a personal feud that got way out of hand and that will likely destroy this community and will definitely badly damage NCSoft vital reputation with their consumers, forever, perhaps fatally. My condolences for your community.

I believe the major takeaway from this is that you need to decide before bidding 2♣ where you want to play. If you want to play in 4♠ bid stayman and raise a spade response to game, bidding 3nt otherwise. If you want to play in 3nt regardless, just bid it. What you can not do is bid stayman hear a spade response and then decide to play 3nt, as this will mislead partner into thinking you have 4♥.

I doubt this was the plan and would be annoyed if it was, but it is certainty a path forward that I am sure they will seize upon.

I lean quite heavily left and don't watch fox(I refuse to believe there is equivalence in the bias between fox and cnn) and thought Romney clearly won that debate. Romney lacked substance in that debate, but he never lacked for something to say and he said it all rather confidently. Obama occasionally looked a little lost.

Clearly I don't, thats why I am asking. I wish you would explain intead of hiding between a faux claim of a lack of context. How would you give a portion of the billions to basic research without the government picking winners and losers. Its a question, not a claim, what is so hard about answering it.

Going well for romney so far imo

I was aware of the full quote when I asked the question, you should try answering it rather than pretend I took you out of context. You want government to not be in the business of picking winners and losers, how does the government avoid doing that when giving money to basic research.

When you say give billions to basic research, how do you envision that working without them picking winners and losers?

Some people play nt systems on in this situation. It appears he wanted to pull the penalty double and transfer his partner into hearts. If this had been their agreement, no reason north couldn't have alerted it as such and still ignore the transfer, so seems likely there was no discussion. As south shouldn't pull a penalty double with any values, north may still have a logical reason to pass this, perhaps thinking south is a bust 3343 hand?

It proves that governments do not have a 100% success rate. If you actually needed proof of that....well, there you go.

Ignoring for a moment that this issue is so tiny that it has had no impact on any election. There is no evidence that would suggest this issue benefits Democrats more than Republicans, hence your premise that Democrats are against this, for this reason, for political gain is absurd and insulting.

That will vary with each individual carbon producing source depending on the market forces in play. For an ancient coal fired plant near a large natural source of geothermal energy, it may be quick. For a modern coal fired plant right next to a large source of coal in a very cloudy state in the middle of nowhere, it might not be for 30 years. The idea is to incentivize alternatives by making them relatively cheaper. After that, we will let the markets do its magic. This will spur development of alternative energy sources, which will in turn drive research, cutting their relative costs even further. As for natural gas, it is relatively clean so it will be one of the last carbon sources to be driven out by market forces, honestly don't see it going anywhere for decades.

Must resist urge to yell at you for expecting measurable effects on climate so quickly after implementation of legislation aimed at incentivizing non carbon based energy development, a process that could take decades to begin to see a significant number of non carbon energy plants come online and start to alter the carbon output. After all, neither us wants to just shut down all the carbon plants all at once.

Your confidence is misplaced. I am sure the politicians are pro-gun because the people are. I am also sure that when a rural person claims to be pro-gun, assault weapons are not the guns they are generally concerned with losing access too. The nebulous slippery slope argument of the NRA may have convinced some that they are concerned about them in some abstract sense, but I doubt a significant percentage of rural folk actually own an assault weapon. Regardless, I don't consider blocking legislation as doing something. What has the Republican party enacted for the rural folk? For the sake of this argument, enacting legislation to repeal something else counts. Such as http://ictsd.org/i/news/bridgesweekly/103535/

Partner is going to be pitching plenty of clubs and can easily give count after initially giving attitude. I believe, un-discussed, giving the count on the remaining cards is normal. So after giving the attitude(assuming you always show attitude, which isn't normal when opponents start the suit) of liking clubs by playing a high one when you take the ace, he should(with std) give an odd(remaining) count by playing up the line when following/discarding on spades. Of course, it is more important to agree than what specifically you are agreeing too.

To be clear, I don't call them "rednecks", I used the term Andrei used while playing into the stereotype that Andrei created for the democratic side. Oh but what the heck, what legislation have they enacted for them? They have managed to the convince the rural folks that their right to side arms and hunting rifles is so sacrosanct that they won't let the city folk ban assault weapons.

Just to immortalize that post, so gwnn can feel free to post again :) http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8034/8050894762_55c5674cfa_c.jpg Oh and cause I am using flickr to host this, apparently I have to link back to them when I embed an image. http://www.flickr.com/

Republican's are defenders of business. Democrat's are defenders of opportunity. Hence the Democrat's base tends to be the poor and disenfranchised and the Republican's base tends to be stupid, red-necks(and religious) easily fooled into thinking the Republican party has their back. Even though the Republicans hardly ever do anything for them. Hope that helps with the confusion :) Would hate to disabuse you of your cynical views of this forum.

Edit: double post