bullets13

you can find the numbers in a lot of places. this seems like a site that you might like, though. Look under the "food stamps" section. it requires a little math, though. "FOOD STAMPS – In January 2005 roughly 25 million people participated in SNAP. About 17 million participated in the program in 2001. Under Obama, individuals on food stamps grew from 32 million to 47 million. Read more at [Hidden Content]" So if it was 17 Million in 2001, and 32 million when Obama took over(the righty website notes the 8M increase of those receiving benefits in Bush' first term, but fails to mention the 7M increase in his second term), that's an approximately 15 million increase under bush. It has then gone to approximately 47 million under Obama, ALSO a 15 million increase. Of course, the site I provided, they try to downplay what happened under Bush and highlight the problem with Obama. But you can do the same math using "Factcheck.org", where they show the same numbers, while trying to make Bush look bad and Obama look good.

nah. they just want to prove a point to Obama. and both sides are stupid when it comes to continuing down the same road.

Republicans haven't even settled into their majority yet and are already trying to pass bills that will decrease their chances of regaining the presidency next election. Maybe one day they'll learn.

The number of food stamp beneficiaries increased by 14.7 million during Bush’s two terms in office, which is slightly higher (at this point) than the number of new beneficiaries since Obama has been in office. As of right now, Obama's numbers are up aabout 14.5 M from where he started, depending on the month, and will likely continue to trend upward throughout the remainder of his tenure. If Obama leaves office with the numbers up 16M, some republicans will try to use this as evidence that Bush did a better job in that regard, at only 14.7M. I'd say it's evidence that both failed.

Horsehockey. Maybe 122... but definitely 127.

I'm pretty happy about this matchup.  I used to hate NE, but I've gotten to where I respect Brady more and more.  But Luck is probably my favorite non-cowboy.  I picked NE, but i'll be pulling for the Colts.  Whoever comes out of this game is who i'll be rooting for to win the super bowl.

the seahawks are the easy pick.  still, it won't be surprising to me either way.

Big Ten > Pac 10 > SEC

I would say both. After the first drive, OSU dang near shut Oregon down, while the only thing keeping OSU under 60 was their turnovers. But they definitely got outcoached as well

Why no kneel?

That was part of it, but Oregon was badly outplayed, turnovers and all.

I honestly thought Wisconsin tanked against OSU to get them into the playoff. And they may have, but OSU was going to beat them by a lot anyway

Oregon deserves to lose. OSU has outplayed them badly. Without the turnovers, this game would be as bad as what Oregon did to Florida st

OSU may or may not have deserved to make it in, but there's now no question as to whether or not they were good enough to get in

And now it's a ballgame!

Without 3 bad turnovers OSU might be up 42-10 by now

One of the best 1-yard runs you'll ever see

OSU has shredded Oregon's defense all night

Not too many people would've bet on this result at this point in the game

Maybe it is OSU's night.

As good as he's looked, that's a mistake born of inexperience.

Ducks better figure out a way to stop the qb scramble or they're in big trouble.

Another awesome run!

Awful drop!!!!

What a run!