cwsox

Kap, I anxiously await the first thread from you and/or so many others in which the Republicans or Bush and Cheney are called to account for something. I think some protest way, way, way too much to the point of just being Pavlovian type bulls***. You should have been on the OJ defense team. Why stress these murders when there are other crimes out there! For the record, I did not beat this thing to death; I posted originally, once, and then explained why it is apples when others tried to make it oranges. When there are five or six threads started by me... until then, I did not "beat the snot" out of this.

typical: fact is stated, so: shift the subject, do not respond to the fact at hand. When you kill me, at your trial: "but other people kill people so its all ok, both sides do it!" getting away from the postings of the wild eyed, I might note that if Kerry is guilty of what you charge, under about 3 years of Nixon after Kerry's return from Nam, where we know Nixon discussed and wanted to get Kerry, through 2 years of Ford, 8 years of Reagan, 4 of Bush 1, and 3 of Bush 2, I would suppose if any actual crimes were commited, 20 years of Republican failure to act means either the Republicans cannot be trusted to act or there are no crimes to be prosecuted for. as for the you saying you didn't give creedence to your own stuff - or is it French stuff? you equate partisan moveon with churches under 501 C3 and when that equation is shown false, you attack my threads with the partisan s*** that is so spin that the bobbleheads in my room are getting dizzy from all that spin. I love you ss2k4 and I prefer to keep it that way. Good night and God bless!

I was going to join in saluting the Frank Thomas commerical - which I haven't seen but it sounds great and marketing Frank is long overdo - until i read this post and got distracted by it. I understand the pizza races, airplane races, frog races. guess the ball under which hat thing, hey my kid is 9 and in the 6-7-8 years and even now really enjoys them and is part of his game experience (along with dippin' dots, a pretzel, and nachos, and singing OEO and Jose! Jose! Jose! Jose!). But wtf are those flying shirt things? I can't figure that out. It is really lame. It is a minor league gimmick and all I see in the UD is shirts being given to rich folks in the lower deck boxes. When they give some shirts out in the UD I will change my opinion but it is stupid and just more freebies for those who least need it.

sure glad we got rid of Koch

1549, I don't think we are very far apart and conversing with you is always a pleasure I think there is one word here and there that I would differ on The work "workers." The trade unionists opposed him and he opposed them. Hitler had a definite appeal to the (what the Germans called) underclass, which made up the membership of the brown shirts for the most part, but not the workers. And he had money from the industrialists almost from the beginning because of his appeal to the military and anti semitic, which is NOT to say the military and and business class are per se anti semitic but in Germany they were in the 1920s. Check out "Hitler's Willing Executions" by Goldhagen. And I would differ on I so differ on that. The Barmen Declaration was adopted in 1934, in fact many in the German protestant churches were vehemently antiNazi all along. Violence began almost immediately under the SA until the Night of the Long Knives when Hitler had them all killed in the rise of the SS. Dachau was up and operating very early in the regime. Violence and emigration were very prominent in the early years of the Reich, emmigration especially of the intellectuals. That is how Einstein ended up in the US, for example. The so-called image of German pride was more the creation of Leni Riefenstahl movies (brilliantly done) than reality, which is not to discount those who went along because they exalted nation over other things - the substance of the Barmen Declaration's protest against the elevation of nation over God. I didn't mean to heavy up on you on the lifetime student thing and I have much, much to learn. I was struck by the story of Anne Frank when I was about 8 and had to know all about it and have ever since A major theologian of mine is Bonhoeffer, who was a part of the 20 July 1944 Canaris assassination conspiracy and was executed in 1945. I made a career in seminary (and since) on papers on the struggle of the Church against Hitler. I have much, much to learn because the subject is so incomprehensible. I always enjoy enchanges with you. Thank you for the pleasure.

I think the word is "bum" and how come can you can't stand Ben Davis? What has Ben Davis done that deserves the anger? What did he say about the sox-cubs rivalry that is new and has not been said 1,000 times (more or less) before by players on both sides?

great awesome avatar!

only if you dress like your avatar

I woluld vastly prefer scrap interleague except for rivalries (although I would scrap interleague altogether - there was no demand for a Tigers-Rockies series) and I vastly prefer the DH so I want it kept scrap the NL instead or play it as we do, each league rules in its own park we have swept there before, and we have been swept there before and we have split there before - the game gets down to how it is played, so what our pitcher bats in their park - their pitcher bats too

no, if the game were suspended, it would continue from that point what happened was legal under baseball rules in 1999 we won the Friday or Saturday game at Wrigley in a rain shortened game and damn cub fans were pissed off sometimes it goes your way, sometimes the other way this time it did not go our way like it did last time

yes it matters note the thread title: 501C3 in the IRS code I am talking about federal statutes why is that so hard to understand I as a pastor can on my own time make any partisan statement I want BUT IF the legally incorporporated organization that UNDER FEDERAL CODE gets nonprofit status which REQUIRES under federal code that said organization be non paritsan then to break that law is a crime, a criminal offense and that should not be too hard ever for some to figure out no matter how "what me partsan" you want to spin it if I, the resident agent of a non profit under 501 C3 which I am on my on time, under my own name, using my own resources which are privately mine, work for the candidates or party of my choice, that is legal -- hence the Rev Pat Rovertson and the Rev Jess Jackson also do the same if I send my church directory - the membership of the tax exempt 501 C 3 corporation - to a partisan political organization - then the law is broken if I invite a candidate to speak to my congregation because I have invited every candidate in that race and it is part of a general "we are citizens of this nation and get out and vote" campaign that is legal - if I host a party in the church or even the tax exempt parsonage or school or hospital or whatever for a candidate, that is illegal under federal code - the church cannot endorse a candidate this is not brain science, it is a matter of law and the way some here dismiss breaking the law with has long since ceased to be amusing - this type of thing has never been done before but your "both sides do it" is simply untrue because this has not been done before as I pointed out for the blindly partisan spin meisters that no candidate for any party in history has done this before - this is a new thing - now a G W Bush can go to Bob Jones University as he did in the SC 2000 primary and be endorsed by the folks there because last I knew, Bob Jones was not a 501 C 3 and thus was not violating federal law - an Al Gore and G W Bush can speak at Notre Dame and not be endorsed as part of 501 C 3 Notre Dame offering non partisan educational opportuntiies to their students, as they did in 2000 to do the things as asked for in this 2004 Bush-Cheney letter is to break the law under federal code, to break IRS regulations which churches voluntarily ask for preferential tax treatment under - and for those who substitue sarcasm for thinking go ahead but damn it is unimpressive and by the way moveon.org is NOT a federal 501 C 3 tax exempt orgainization because - get this - it is not a church, it is a partisan organization - ok - so moveon.org can say what it wants just as the political arm of the NRA or the AMA or the ABA or the NEA can, just as the Republican and Democratic parties can - they are not churches and they are not regulated under 501 C3 and they are not tax exempt and your contributions to their PACs are not tax deductable as your contributions to your church are so to say is pretty damn silly since moveon is not a 501 C3, moveon has not broken any law or asked anyone to break any law, moveon is not a church (moveon is NOT a church, is that incomprehensible?) and moveon has never done "this exact same thing" since they have never asked for membership lists of 501 C3s nor has it asked 501 C 3s to host partisan events, moveon has always required its events to be at public facilities, business establishments, not at 591 C3s - nor has the NRA or the AMA or the ABA nor the NEA nor the Republican and Democratic parties - that is why this letter from the Bush Cheney campaign is newsworthy because it a new form of violating federal statutue that has - again - never been done before so I will await an expert discussion on how under federal tax codes someone can equate a partisan organization that it not a church and is not under 501 C 3 status with a church that is and has sworn under oath, under penalties of perjury, that it will be non partisan to get the 501 C 3 status yes it is wrong when a church does it - if that church has 501 C 3 status - it is not only wrong, it is blatently illegal

so what did Nomar do? the news has not reached us in Michigan

that is unbelivable but rather than be angry over something I cannot control, I am glad I am hoping this will piss themnall off and they will prove on the field who belonged on the All Star team

I was postive Fisk retired a decade ago

so for someone from another galaxy as I must be, what did Nomar do that has everyone up in arms?

Dbacks were swept last weekend by Detroit.

I am sure the ones revealed will revel all night long! but as I think about it, with the right people, I might like to be reveled! Revel me baby all night long...

props to JR

Alvarez and Fletcher were great pick ups. The skinny kid with the arm was impressive until his attitude and jewelry and lack of performace and over all hot doggery made me happy when we traded him away and I have never regretted getting rid of that clown.

Loaiza? I am struck by the thought that Frank could indeed make it. We are in 1st place. MB is almost a given. Frank has great stats and got screwed last year and needs a make up invite and with all the heavy lumber on the NL side in the plus 500 HR club having some 400s home run hitters might be just what the AL wants and I can't see Uribe going for so sure. He has way cooled down.

My UM friend, I find much value in much of what you post, including politically but today I must differ on this post in great part but agree at the end. I dispute your characterization of what Democrats on this board say, I have never seen a post akin to what you state nor even get a sense of that. Please beware of setting up your straw arguments: let me stereoype others so that I can accuse them of stereotyping and then knock their presumed argument down. I also dispute that the Nazis were the party of the working class, the proletariat as you term it. Far from it. Totally opposite. Hitler hijacked the political party and used its name and turned it into something other. The proletariat of Wiemar Germany was indeed tending towards the socialist camp. The Nazi party had nothing to do with socialism or workers, despite the hijacked name. The Nazi's base included many of Germany's wealthiest industrialists (who were as a whoie antiSemitic) as well as tapping into a deep well of wounded nationalism, retired military, and antiSemitism. The indistrialists got their inital payback with the militarization of the Rhineland, the first of many ways that Hitler paid back the wealthiest industrialists for their long standing support from the mid 1920s on. Major corporations and industries fared very well under Hitler, which is why many supported him early on, and earned him admirers from the capitalist/ruling class such as Henry Ford and England's King Edward VIII (and history be praised he renounced the throne for Wallis Simpson; the man was a Nazi sympathizer and that is why Churchhill and George VI shipped Edward off to Bermuda during WW2 to get him far away from London and Europe where he had been known to pass along state secrets to the Nazis). So far from being a working class or proletatriat guy, Hitler (who never labored a day in his life and knew where the money was) was always the capitalists great friend and that is from where he drew support, succor, financial backing, and legitimatization. Never from the workers. Trade unionists, labor organizers, labor, working class leaders were among the first to go into Dachau from 1933 on. Hitler was a sworn enemy of the working class/labor/trade unionists - the prolartariat, who were the antepenultimate opponents of Hitler in the days before Hitler became chancellor and in the years following, the others being the Jewish community and that part of the German protestant chuch bodies who formed the Confessing Church in 1933-1934 with the Barmen Declaration (i.e. Barth, Niemoeller, Bonhoeffer, etc.) As for your last statement: I have been a student of that period for almost all of my life. The issue of Holocaust is central to my doing theology. In part, my concern has been to be aware if signs of incipient Nazisism arose again. There is much I profoundly disagree with, as you know, regarding the Bush brand of Republicanism and this administration, much that deeply disturbs me as an American on constitutional and its core root meaning politcal terms. I think a diasterous course has been set by those in office now that will lead to the destruction or dimunination of this country which I love. There are some real fascist streaks in the Patriot Act (and fascism does not equal Nazis). There are facile similarties that one can suggest between some things and other things with the current adminsitration. But, as you wisely say, In the end...neither party resembles the nazis.

none whatsoever

I had not been thinking of the 3rd possibility - thanks for mentioning it

I like the fact we get told it is "officially" over :puke

a lot of circumstances around that - is that the time we rushed the "retirement" of #3 - and who were the players in that package.............