kapkomet

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) And if a conservative was appointed, there would be conservative "policy from the courts." The only difference is that somebody actually said it out loud. It's pretty mind-numbing that conservatives manage to get away with pretending they don't do the exact same thing liberals do. If it wasn't intended to be that way the president wouldn't get to appoint judges/justices. No, that's not true. But I don't have time to debate this now, so liberals are always right, seeing as how they have total control of the government, they have to be always right.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:05 PM) Please explain to me how an appellate judge or a Supreme Court justice does not make policy. Plain and simple, yes, they do. Whether they are liberal or conservative. When an appellate court makes a ruling it sets a precedent for the lower courts to follow, likewise for the Supreme Court. The case wouldn't go up if it was clearly and easily defined (because of $$$). To pretend otherwise is pretty much trying to bulls*** yourself because it's simply not true. No they don't - at least they are not supposed to. They are supposed to INTERPRET the law, and if the law is f***ed up, they (legislative branch) go back and re-write it to pass Constitutional muster. PERIOD. What is all this relativism for? Why do libs love to hang themselves on everything being relative?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:05 PM) Here's the question though. Do you believe the Senate should require a majority vote or a 60% supermajority for all votes? This to me, is like the independent counsel law. It was GREAT! for Iran-Contra when they were trying to get Reagan (when the law was written). Not so great when the tables were turned and it was used to impeach Clinton. It was then allowed to die, thankfully. A 60 vote (cloture vote) for judicial nominees is pretty black and white unconstitutional but the only way it goes away is to have it used against them. The THREAT of it shot down one latino supreme court nominee...

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:02 PM) That's pretty much all anyone should ask. A conservative won't like a liberal nominee and vice versa, unless the person is just absurdly unqualified, then the Senate should just vote yes or no and let that be that. All the rest is for show though. Everyone knows she is getting in. But the opportunity here is to educate about the policies of this president - people need to understand that he believes in "policy from the courts". Of course, libs think he's messianic wonderful, so to libs, nothing to see, move along.

and She's perfect! Living and breathing, you know.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 27, 2009 -> 12:43 PM) There is no real implications that Kim Il-Jong will NOT actually use a nuclear weapon. Yea, this too.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 27, 2009 -> 07:56 AM) The impatience is pretty hilarious here. A few weeks ago, Fields started to fall apart, as pitchers found the weak point to manipulate (up and/or in heat). He looked bad a couple weeks, then started trying to adjust, and temporarily looked even worse. I said in here, that was actually an encouraging sign, and that he'd likely start coming around. Others echoed the same. But many of you just kept up on the FIELDS IS s*** s***, wanting to make a change NOW, like this is a video game or something. Don't look now, but he's had hits in his last 4 games, and is 6-for-16 (.375) in that stretch. No big power yet, though he's starting to hit the ball harder. He's coming back, just as one should expect he would. The question really is, how far "back" will he get? I don't think anyone is saying he'll be a .300 hitter, at all. But he won't be a .200 hitter either. Joe Crede, anyone? There was a LOT of hate for that guy until late 2005 around these parts.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 27, 2009 -> 08:12 AM) Whenever people bring up demographics and the SCOTUS (i.e., Sotomayor is Hispanic), and they say things like "the most qualified person needs to be selected, not someone based on their gender/ethnicity" why is it assumed there is only one? There's dozens of possibilities in reality, and if the president wants to, say, choose a woman, he's not at all excluding potentially "better qualified" candidates. The whole thing is subjective anyway. I just find that annoying. It makes it sound that choosing a justice who is a minority or a woman automatically means that's why they were chosen, before looking at their qualifications. Candidly, I have a hard time with your comment, because you know damn well this pick was for exactly the reasons you're questioning. This was a wedge pick by Obama, he knows it, the GOP knows it, and she'll get through it without much of a fight - and it has VERY LITTLE to do with "qualifications".

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ May 27, 2009 -> 12:31 AM) He had a major stroke last year. He's not running as much of the show as you think, and he's trying to name his heirs (63 year old brother in law, 20-something third son). Got it. Now I understand what you're getting at.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ May 27, 2009 -> 12:08 AM) It's problematic on either side because any kind of actual warfare could result in some serious civilian casualties on either side of the DMZ. Seoul is very close to that line. The reactions from South Korea, Japan, China have been somewhat reassuring though. They don't seem to think that this is more than sabre rattling - even though the propaganda coming from the North is at a fever pitch at the moment. The question seems to be, is North Korea finally backed into that corner that might make them lash out in one desperate attempt at survival? Or is it just more brinkmanship from them to get some more aid - or maybe just an effort by Kim Jong Il to consolidate power within North Korea? I've seen you say that three (at least two) times now. What is there to consolidate? I mean, he's running the show. Everyone knows it. What's the point?

My opinion of this thread is: I thought I just heard the dumbest thing ever, and then they keep on talking! Just sayin'.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 26, 2009 -> 05:37 PM) I think Hawk's right on. It's going to take the right kind of pitcher but Pods is going to run up on the wrong guy and take one in the ear. What he's doing has been considered bush for a very long time. What did I miss? What's he doing to deserve a ball in the earhole?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 26, 2009 -> 06:04 PM) Are we saying Japan has nuclear weapons? Because I didn't think that was the case. If they do, they're at our military bases in the area.

It's even more of a mess then just this. The City of Irving poo poo'd this. The Cowboys poo poo'd this. The company that put this up poo poo'd this... there's plenty of blame going around.

And North Korea has test fired some short range ballistic missiles today. They're really making some noise.

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 26, 2009 -> 08:44 AM) No they won't, I'm thinking the conformation process. What I have said before, with Bush, was he could nominate the most conservative, far right, person he wants, and that should not be a factor. Same with Obama. This is exactly what I was trying to say in another argument, I mean thread. The pick's political idealogy should have NOTHING to do with it. But of course, it does.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 08:25 AM) So in other words, they never did fully shut down their program when they said they did because they just managed to put together a nuclear bomb in six weeks or so. I wonder who they have sold technology/parts/knowledge to during this time.

Happy Birthday!

Eh, you know this fits in Buttman's Finals - s***sburgh takes a dump on Detoilet for revenge.

QUOTE (Drew @ May 24, 2009 -> 08:33 PM) I wanted to see a competitive series and by that I mean I didn't expect the Hawks to beat Detroit 4 games out of 7. But the Hawks seemed to have taken everything they learned in the first three games and threw it out the window today. They're young and making stupid mistakes. Versteeg with two consecutive penalties? Come on. Detroit is too smart to play those games. They've built a very good franchise in the past 15 years but it doesn't mean I hate them any less. In game 3, Kronwall had a legal hit on Havlat and I don't think it warranted a major or a game misconduct—I would have been happier if the referees would call it both ways for the duration. Yes, the Hawks have been getting outplayed, but the referees are making no bones about tipping it in Detroit's favor with the exception of Kronwall's hit. How many tripping and hooking calls have they let Detroit get away with, and then they come down on Eager? GMAFB. By that measure, they should have broken Holmstrom's legs by second intermission. I have not seen the entire series like I did the Vancouver one - but I will say this - the Hawks are pretty undisciplined. I don't even necessarily mean that from a penalty standpoint, although that certainly factors into it. The Blackhawks are way too loosey goosey, especially in transition and the neutral zone. That is where Detroit has lived for the last 15 years... they eat up everyone in the neutral zone which allows them to control the play on both ends of the ice - honestly, I don't understand why more teams don't get this. They are disciplined and stay within their game. The Hawks haven't learned that yet. Skill and flashy stick handling are good, but not being disciplined will kill you in this game... and that is what we are witnessing in this series. They'll get there, I think, but it might be a good couple of years.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 24, 2009 -> 06:43 PM) Can we do it with Huet, too? It sure would be nice to have $12 million dollars to play with this off-season and still have our youngsters. Re-sign Nik for one or two years at a reasonable rate and re-sign Marty for what Nik made last year (basically those two switch salaries). The Hawks could have been even more badass next year. They could have made a run at the Sedin twins or Hossa or Gaborik. Probably one of the latter two since we will need money to resign the big boys in a couple years. But the money from Huet and Campbell would have been very nice. Keep in mind the cap will go down for the first time since the lockout this year.

I don't know about that (Huet being that bad). I do know that Detoilet is a much better team. When Chicago starts running around to get their hits in instead of playing the right position, you will lose 6-1.

I saw the score after 8, I was happy. Now I see the final, WTF happened? Did Jenks poo himself?

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ May 24, 2009 -> 01:30 AM) And he changes speeds. Plus he fields his position, has a great move to first, he works quick, attacks hitters, has the perfect mentality, and he knows hitters' tendencies. There's a whole lot that makes him special. From a pure "pitch" standpoint, he's only got one "plus" pitch. It's all the other things that you mention that makes him "good", most of which is intangible stuff.

QUOTE (Cali @ May 23, 2009 -> 06:24 PM) I really despise Clayton's "No Stuff-Stuff", cause it might look good, sometimes even dominant in the early innings than the hitters realize he's just throwing the same 2 pitches and start whacking away.... Do you say the same thing about Mark Buehrle? Just wondering. And no, not comparing them, yet - just saying that MB only has a couple of pitches, yet he's pretty effective.