kapkomet

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 02:01 PM) ON another note, Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell put this article out last night, arguing that coming up with a case to invade Iraq was a key motivation for the torture in the first place. You're making my point for me.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:59 PM) What has currently been admitted to publicly is enough to charge the former vice president and likely several of the OLC memo authors with conspiring to break the law, and the vice President in particular is proud of that. Ok, induldge me on this. If the law is so "unclear", why don't they clear it up and pass a very black and white law outlawing some of these EIM's? Why is it so "unclear" in the first place? Why is it that "liberals" (and I'm not trying to paint you... I'm being serious with this line of questioning) are so quick on the trigger to say "WAR CRIMESSS"... and "they broke the law", when in fact there are several respected constitutional lawyers (who you may disagree with, yet they are well respected, so let's not go down that path) that say no laws were broken? Which then leads me back to my original question, why don't they clear the law up right here and now? (I have an answer, I just want to see what yours is).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:56 PM) Saving $5-$6 million by moving a contract or two might be worth it if we're really out of things. Define "really out of it". In this division, no one will be "really out of it" all year, I don't think. The AL West and AL Central are both pathetic.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:50 PM) Here's the question...it's not "How much of a difference is there between Brian Anderson and an average major leaguer", it's "How much of a difference is there between Brian Anderson and Brent Lillibridge"? It's like going from Ross Gload to Albert Pujols in your lineup. Wow. I hear you. And while I don't disagree, if Anderson makes that much of a difference, again, we're screwed anyway.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:53 PM) Then give me the independent prosecutor and let's get to the bottom of where the truth is. (A key point here is that the CIA briefing document summaries we have seen so far are damn vague in saying exactly what Pelosi was told, BTW. Just as a small defense of myself...she has room to say the CIA is lying and without having been there or actually seeing some documentation of what she was presented, all we know is the schedule of briefings right now). I don't have a problem with that, although I think it's a waste of time.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:48 PM) Huh? Ok, I'm generalizing. Republican (XYZ) has an issue. You post the issue as fact here, from left wing blogs, etc. Democrat (ABC) has an issue. You post the issue as "I really don't know what they knew, so we better check", which inherently means you give Democrats benefits that you don't Republicans. I'm not talking about what has come out as fact, I'm talking about what is rumored or is a point of contention. That really bothers me. I've said it time and time again, there's the left view, the right view, and the truth somewhere in the middle.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:46 PM) Following the same logic that the Republicans use to say that Tax Cuts pay for themselves, I conclude that increasing the size of government to infinity would result in infinite economic growth. Why don't the Republicans get it?! I think the sad part is you believe that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) Because I've read the memos that say what they knew and what they did already. Wrong. You know now. But back then, you didn't, and I'm sure you "knew".

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:40 PM) Track record? I could say the same thing for the current administration, and Nancy Pelosi, and others... but it would summarily be dismissed as GOP goggles. That's what I'm getting at. People make judgements all the time about GOP and when they're wrong, of course, guilty as charged! When a Democrat has it happen, it's "well, I don't really know what they really knew, so we have to give them the benefit of the doubt". Newsflash from Mr. Obvious - they are all scumsucking liars. They all knew what was happening. Now, they just want to play politics with it, which is wrong all the way around.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:16 PM) Before we start trading away the team, lets wait til Brian Anderson comes off the DL. Put that bat back in the lineup and that glove out in the field......I think we'll be fine. Granted, its been a tough stetch with him gone from the club but BA is a difference maker and he'll be back very soon. No offense, but if Brian Anderson is our "savior", we're ready to be in fourth place all year. And I like Anderson.

QUOTE (Disco72 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:16 PM) Kap, I know you aren't a Bush supporter, but that's exactly what Bush did as well. I think it was especially true with his placating the religious right. I agree, it was/is one of the biggest problems I have with Bush as president for sure.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:29 PM) See, this is why we need a full independent investigation. I don't have a clue if Pelosi is covering up something or not. I don't know what she was told, when she was told it, and what she was legally allowed to do after being told whatever she was told. A fully independent investigation would be able to answer those questions. If she broke the law to defend the torture program, she deserves to go to jail just as much as the rest of them. I like the "how about we actually talk about it?" idea you have. Somehow though, I wonder if the Republicans and the media would be willing to go along with that... Why so quick to "not be sure" what Pelosi knew, but yet, anyone from tbe Bush administration has to be wrong? With that said, I agree with your premise that they should get to the bottom of Pelosi, but they won't, it will just die off in the waning days.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 14, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) Normally I check out blogs and such but I haven't done it yet as far as the pictures go. But usually the reaction is 100% predictable. Completely disregarding the fact that in all likelihood he did something they agree with, or any other circumstances involved, they focus instead on him being a hypocrite or something else he may have said (or was perceived to have said), most likely in a completely different context. The couple of posts I saw in the Republican thread on this are kind of what I expect to see if I browsed some generic political sites. Bottom line: people are more concerned with being right about something and/or finding fault than they are with reality itself. The problem I have with Obama here and the whole "torture" issue (among others), is he says one thing - which gets all the far left people jizzing in their pants excited (YES! GET THAT EVIL BASTARD BUSH!!! or YES! EVIL ASSHOLE AIG f***ERS AND THEIR BONUSES or YES! GET THOSE RICH ASSHOLES MAKING TOO MUCH MONEY or you get the pattern) and then after two or three weeks, they quietly let the issue just sort of die off and they say they won't bring charges, or they won't tax 90% of AIG bonuses, or they won't be as pressing on compensation levels... they create this persona of placating the far left and let them get all excited only to quietly turn on that original word. Get some balls and stand for something up front instead of having the appearance of giving in to the left and then "giving in" to what is "right". It's like they want to see what the real reaction is and then they just sort of let these issues go.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 13, 2009 -> 07:37 PM) 20% of the GDP being related to the government: wonderful capitalism, like the Reagan years. 22% of the GDP being the government: National Socialism! And the government is MUCH bigger then in the 1980's. Numbers can mean anything you want them to mean, Balta. I like how you cherry pick numbers to what you want to comment on. And yes, that goes both ways.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 14, 2009 -> 08:44 AM) I have noticed on multiple occasions that even when Obama does something the right agrees with, he still gets flamed for it. Hysterical. I was wondering the reaction to the pictures thing. I haven't seen or heard a thing.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 13, 2009 -> 09:48 AM) no everything is = kap: proper analogy: democrats labeling the Republicans the "Party of No" athomeboy: one would hope the Republicans would proof read your ad. Yea, I agree with your premise here. I mean, everyone pretty much knows that a party built on the "redistribution of wealth" is socialistic in nature, but to surround themselves in jingoistic vocabulary isn't going to win them elections. I do, however, think that the Republicans need to do a 180 on Obama's views, because frankly, in the long term, that will win them elections. Maybe not right away, but over time, it certainly will... because you all can label Obama a "centrist" all you want, but there's no way in hell.

QUOTE (SoxComms @ May 13, 2009 -> 10:00 AM) If on Twitter...be sure to follow @InsideTheSox Or www.twitter.com/InsideTheSox Cool. Thanks for the link!

QUOTE (G&T @ May 12, 2009 -> 09:32 PM) So I just found out that if you look at the users online section of the front page of Soxtalk and click on sort by "last click" it will give a list of everything people are looking at. 3 of the guests were looking at an old Kim Smith v. Kiera Knightley thread. I assume the pics came up on a google search. I hope they guests enjoyed their stay. I think that post has more hits then any other one on soxtalk, and I'm serious.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 12, 2009 -> 06:33 PM) When the Hawks win in 6 and then Caps in 5, I'll give you all the props you want. I don't put much value on predictions, anyone can make them (and certainly anyone does), and whether you are right or wrong, doesn't prove or disprove how much you know about hockey, yes? And you clearly don't know s***.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 12, 2009 -> 03:23 PM) Records Indicate Kapkomet Voted for Obama I did.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 12, 2009 -> 05:02 PM) Its dropoff is actually steeper in recent years, probably because of all the work the statisticians have done to exclude people from the labor pool. data through here, done by the BLS originally. I would agree - and the labor pool is different then it was in 1950. IMO, unions have just as much influence as they used to (by numbers)... I think it's pretty inaccurate to say that unions have been "dismantled".

Percentages don't mean anything. What are the counts?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 12, 2009 -> 03:38 PM) Actually that isn't true. He did it in the first two games of this series. No, 7 goals per game, not per two games.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 12, 2009 -> 03:46 PM) And we used to think he ran a bad PP back in the K's days. Wow. Actually Sonier was the one running special teams, that was one of the ongoing jokes from some of the players at that time... he never played the game yet was the one running special teams. Torchetti is a really good tactics guy.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 12, 2009 -> 04:31 PM) The dismantling of unions over the past 30 years or so has done wonders for the expansion of the middle class. Because they are so dismantled and everything.