EvilMonkey

North Korea should have been stopped BEFORE they got the nukes, during the Clinton regime. Oh wait, that's right, he gave them the nukes!

Yes, the media loves a good scandel. And when it allcomes down to it, ratings rule. But for the so obvious ones you mentioned, they were almost forced to cover them due to Fox News and all the conservative radio. Those items got such play on there that the regular media COULDN'T ignore them. I think the big difference is what someone mentioned in this thread earlier. The conservative media knows they have a conservative bent. Except for Air America, the rest of them actually think they are somewhere in the middle, when they really are to the left. How come the author of the book that accuses Bush of doing coke at Camp David (Kitty Kelly?) is on all the daytime TV talk shows, when she really can't prove that, but yet the swift boat guys against Kerry are nowhere to be seen?

Cliff does seem to be a good pitcher as long as he is not closing or in a tie game in the 9th. In those situations, it seems like his balls get sucked up into his body and he forgets that he is a major league pitcher with some good heat.

Don't forget our usually potent offense can make an average pitcher look pretty good sometimes. Especially if he is a ground ball type pitcher. Who wouldn't enjoy several runs per game of support? PLus a good contract.

I am saying they reported stuff the Dems DID, not MAY HAVE DONE, as you originally put it.

Is ESPN could get their heads out of thier asses and see that there is more in the baseball world than the damn Yankmees and Red Sux, maybe people in the midwest would not think they suck as much. I turn to it for fantasy baseball info, and I get 15 minutes on 'who is better, Yankees or Red Sox'. I DON'T f***ING CARE about the Yankees and Red Sox that much, that I am interested in seeing them constantly. And outside of NY and Boston area, is there really that much Yankee love?

He is not the only owner to do this. Supposedly Nomar was offered a similar back-loaded deal for an extension. I KNOW i read it in a paper somewhere, if I can find it, I will post it.

And then sue them when you don't like their decisions.

Clinton DID have a problem with an intern. Rostenkowski DID abuse his franking priveleges. Teddy DID have a drunk driving problem. Jessie DID father a child out of wedlock. If all you did was HEAR that they MAY have done these things, you may need to read more. As for Kerry, whether he earned those medals or not, I don't care. What has he done since he has been an elected official? That will tell me more about how he will be President that whether or not he injured himself during combat, or shot 20 enemy soldiers during the course of duty. I don't care what he has done back then. In the words of another Jackson (Janet!), What have you done for me lately?

Not to hijack the thread, but what exactly did I twist? I wasn't trying to start a fight, just point out that this is only his second year in the bigs. LOTS of people have crap years during the second one. Did I try to invalidate YOUR opinion? No. You asked a (rhetorical?) question to start your post, I gave my version of an answer to it. regardless, I think one more year should be the answer. If he doesn't get it by then, he probably never will.

OK, so can we agree that the kids needs to be out, at least longer than one month? The school asked for an evaluation, and was denied, so for the moment, they don't have any other recourse. As for the three cases I mentioned, they won all three, but the resulting lawyer fees really hurt the budget. I have actually brought up at a meeting a year ago that they ought to just hire an attourny full time for just the district, or even a 'shared' arrangement between a few districts. Would probably be cheaper than hourly fees. As for zero tolerance rules, I believe my brother said they were working. I may have implied that, but in general, I don't like them either. One place where we still disagree is to WHY they have these to begin with. Your contention that they put them in place because "the elected officials decided they could not hire competent people who can make decision on a case by case basis" I feel is completely wrong. I feel they are in place as a direct result of our extremely over litigous society, not just here, but across the country.

2 years. This is only his second full year. 14 AB in 2000, 50 in 2001 and 200 AB in 2002 (when he batted .285). His first full year at .261 wasn't a total flop, but it was well below what we all wanted. I am sure it is below what Joe wanted as well. If you can get a sure-thing at third instead of Joe, and that is the 'missing piece', then go for it. Otherwise, I think Joe should get another year.

READ MY POSTS! I NEVER EVER ARGUED THAT 2 YEARS WAS SOME MAGICAL NUMBER THAT WOULD ALLOW THE IDIOT BACK INTO SCHOOL!!! I am arguing that some stupid judge decided that even one year isn't enough and wants to let him back in now. The school WANTED to have him evaluated, but the guardian refuses. I fully comprehend and understand your points on zero tolerance rules. Zero tolerance rules are not what this post is really about, bringing a weapon to school IS. If you read my last post, you will see that I somewhat agree with you on how stupid they can be. I NEVER ONCE argued he should be let back in at all! And after a suspension for weapons violations, an exam IS required before they can come back to the main school. By the school rules, they just don't want him back sooner than 2 years. If after that time, and after the evaluation, they feel he is still a threat, he won't be let back in. There is also an alternative school he can go to, but he has to be in 6th grade to be eligible for that (he would be in 5th grade this year). There is the 'check and balance' I think you may be looking for. As for, "Can't people in your town think? Can they not make decisions based on the unique circumstances? Nope they are idiots and need zero tolerance guidelines to tell them what to do" zero tolerance rules came about thanks to our lovely legal profession. The district had been sued three times in the past for 'racial discrimination' issues when a black student got what was deemed a more severe punishment for a similar problem than a white student got. On a side note, you seem to have little faith in the 'car salesman' or 'mechanic' who is on the school board. How about the mechanic or salesman on a jury? They surely are not 'professional' juroists, yet they could be deciding someone's life! Or have you just had bad auto experiences? On ANOTHER side note, please note that I had edited my initial post BEFORE I saw your reply. I had let my anger get to me, and I had changed that last line. You must have been replying whle I was changing.

This was in todays Sun-Times. I wonder if anyone reading it will think he is talking to them? Hmmm. http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/c...ws-stein08.html First step in benefitting from school is to actually go September 8, 2004 BY NEIL STEINBERG SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Opening shot School started Tuesday in Chicago. The suburbs -- as befitting their enormous educational lead over the city -- have already been back for a week or two, gilding the lily, so to speak. Does this bother you? Get your civic dander up? Tough beans. People put up with a lot of inconveniences living in the suburbs -- long, soul-sucking commutes; inferior Thai restaurants; menacing squirrels; and all that grass to mow -- so our kids can enjoy top-notch education, while Chicago is still in medieval times. Why shouldn't we brag? Yes, I know there is a magnet school or two in the city where a handful of kids get a half decent education. Big whoop. The stats for the other 600 or so schools range from alarming to unbelievable. Students don't even show up to school in Chicago, never mind excel -- last year, only 89 percent of CPS students came to the first day -- pretty pathetic, but still an all-time high. In 2000, it was 76 percent. This might seem harsh, but I think public condemnation is exactly what's missing. How can tens of thousands of Chicago parents allow their kids to miss school without someone running up to them and screaming in their face, "You IDIOT! It's hard enough to get ahead in life if you go to school, but if your kids don't even show up they're utterly screwed. Why not just slap a crack pipe or a revolver in their hands and save you both the intermediate steps? Do you like being poor? Are you happy condemning your children and their children to lives of poverty and ignorance? Because the choice is school or The Pit. Screw your head on right and get your kids to school before it's too late.'' But nobody says that

JUDDLING! Remember to log me out next time you want to rant! I have enough issues here with my own opinions! Later bro.

By harping on the zero tolerance crap you are still missing the point. This kid was kicked out for bringing a weapon to school with intent to harm other students. Argue about the length all you want, but I don't want that little bastard anywhere near my kid. In this particular case, the district WANTED to have him examined by a 'professional', but the grandmother refused. To be brutally honest, I don't give a f*** what this kid does, as long as it is not in the same school as my kid. Oh, and I don't want to have to pay for HIS f***up. Yeah, he made a mistake, a BIG one. What if he had succeeded in shooting one of the kids. Would it be OK then to keep him out of school for 2 years? If you want to argue zero tolerance, you won't get too much of a fight from me. Quick Takes in the Sun-Times posts things about zero tolerance stuff all the time. I agree, they can go overboard. Did they go overboard in this case? NO! However, in the litigeous (sp?) society, I understand why they were put into place. They completely remove the race card, or favoritism card, etc. But zero tolerance here isn't the issue. The GUN and the INTENT TO HARM are the issues. If you can't see that this kid needs to be removed from the mainstream school for a while, then maybe we need to end this now, because I don't think we are ever going to agree.

Noone is saying to lock the kid up until he's 18. all i think Evilmonkey and i were trying to say is that the school is following it's VERY CLEAR policy. the beauty of the no tolerance policy is that there is no grey area. you bring a weapon to school and you're gone. before this rule the district had a case by case policy.......and just take a wild guess what happened to that???? Everytime a child was punished....mommy or daddy or grandma would play the race card. (our district is about 70 % minority) saying they were punished too harshly because they were black. Guess what....the district took care of that problem by starting the no-tolerance policy. Notice that in the present case the grandma isn't arguing race....that's the beauty of the policy. The power or lack thereof in the gun is NOT the issue. The issue is that the kid broke a very clear policy should serve the punishment. In the courts the judge didn't declare the rule illegal..it wasn't struck down....the school board wasn't told to change the rule...the judge just overruled it. If the rule is legally ok....then i'm pissed as hell that the judge decided on his own to disregard it. as far as the teacher goes....in court the teacher says she was told by the student of the bullying one time and did what she is supposed to do. filed a form with the office and the two kids were held after and talked to. after that she heard nothing even after asking the kid if the situation had improved. If the kid didn't want to tell the teacher then he should have told the grandmother. if my kid comes home and tells me that she is getting picked on and after reported complaints nothing is done...i'm taking matters to the office. I truly believe that this kids Grandma didn't know her grandson had the gun or was taking it to school but you know what........IT DOESN'T MATTER. If the grandmother can't afford to home school or send the kid to private school...IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM!!! as a taxpayer into my school system.....i'm pissed that my school board which doesn't have enough money as is has to shell out an extra $400-$600 a week to tutor this "good" kid who "wants nothing more than to go to school". Juddling

Let me shoot you with the pellet gun my dad has at his house for my boys to use while visiting. That one will do a lot more than just 'sting temporarily'. You still don't seem to get the point, and keep trying to make smartass comments to deflect from the fact that a 10 year old kid, brought a weapon to a school with intention to harm other kids. Why do you not see that this is a BAD thing?

Stop them again, because I will agree with you too. I have owned a gun since I was 10 years old, and have hunted ever since then. I was taught to respect guns, and have been around them for quite some time. I have 2 shotguns, a rifle and a handgun, all which are locked up. I hunt and target shoot, and enjoy it. To get my hunting license as a kid, I had to pass a gun safety class, and have no problem with that. Most gun owners also wouldn't have a problem with waiting periods, licensing and even restrictions on certain types of guns, but they are afraid that if they let the government start taking away certain guns, that they won't stop until they are all done. here is a rather interesting story where a gun saved 5 people. http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/200...ee000014014.txt

Can't you guys ever argue anything without trying to tie it back to Iraq? This was about some publicity-whore crashing a convention that they weren't invited to, and getting thrown out, not whether you think Bush lied about WMD or if the Cato Institute is a credible source of info. The idiot getting kicked had nothing to do with WMD's, and everything to do with her looking for trouble, and getting it.

MrEye, I will concede that you have a point, most parents will try to protect their kids (or grandkids). However, I think character IS an issue here. What kind of kids is she raising if at 10 years old they are resorting to using guns to settle arguements? The older brother is already an admitted thief, and now the 10 year old COULD get an attempted assault charge for taking that gun with intent to harm. How is that NOT relevant here? Do you think that the environment that he is raised in should NOT be taken into consideration when trying to decide if he should be let back into school? How is he going to 'learn better' if he is surrounded by people who fail to give him the moral base to know right from wrong? All I know is that if that were my son that somehow happened to bring a gun to school, pellet or otherwise, I would be too damn embarrassed to want my name plastered all over the papers as a bad parent, because that's exactally what she looks like here.

OK. Steff, thanks for being a voice of reason here. You can tell you are a parent. FYI, the kid was expelled at the end of the school year last year, so he missed about a month at the end, and the first 2 weeks of this year, so he hasn't even been out for a year yet. The bottom line is like Steff said. he brought a GUN to school, to HARM OTHERS. He brought the gun because his older brother (who STOLE the gun) gave it to him. Would he have refused to take the gun if it was a regular 9mm, instead of a pellet gun? In the news story, he claims he told the teacher 3 times, and nothing happened. The FIRST time a teacher is told of ANY bullying account, they have to fill out a form and report it to the principal, which was done, and noted in the first court appearance. The kid reported the incident once. Not 3 times. After the first reporting, the kid never brought it up again, at least to the school. And if he brought it up at home, the grandmother sure didn't bring it up to the school, because they treat those things serious. Nobody put this kid in jail, they just decided to keep the other students safe from him, at least while on school property. That is their duty, not to coddle kids who ROYALLY f*** UP by bringing a gun to school. Sure, kids make mistakes, but this was a big one. Ever been shot with a pellet gun? I have, it hurt like hell! Thank god it hit me in my ass, where I have padding. It bled a little bit, and it hurt to sit for quite awhile. While my anger at the grandmother for being a f***up may be a bit misplaced, that is an arguement for another time. The real issue is that this kid doesn't belong where he can harm other students. Just because he didn't get a chance to use it shouldn't lessen the severity of his actions.

Dude, at the risk of violating the new posting rules, are you an idiot? MY kid goes to that school as well (Juddling is my brother), and in no way do I want that asshole let back in. The GRANDMOTHER had to sign a form saying that she READ the handbook, and understood what it says. In BIG LETTERS on the first page is the zero tolerance rule, where it expressly forbids firearms of ANY KIND. Can the grandmother read, or does she always just sign things without looking first. And why is this grandmother watching 5 grandkids? if she f***ed up her own kids bad enough that THEY can't be parents, what makes the courts think she will do better the second time around? Also, why isn't the older brother, who ADMITTED to stealing the pellet gun, in jail? In my day I carried a pocket knife all the time. But then again, people didn't get stabbed on a regular basis over stuppid crap either. With Columbine and assorted other school shootings, this is NOT funny. If you were trying to be humorous, I apologize for the level of my anger, but since my kid goes there, I don't find it funny at all.

I was lucky to get seats behind the plate for that game (Thatnk to my booze distributor buddy!), and the pitches just looked to 'easy'. Not easy for me, I couldn't hit little league pitching. But from where I was sitting, he looked very hittable. Don't freak, I didn't say he sucked or anything, just that from being there, it didn't look all that good to me.

I've only been playing this for a few days, and I can't tell you how many damn times I get a pair of 2's! I get a pair under, or a pair after the flop, and that's it. And forget about aces under, never match it up with anything else.