jackie hayes

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 03:25 PM) The more I think about it, arent a lot of our "family recipes" really stuff we got off boxes 2 generations ago? Yes, but at some point Teresa Heinz-Kerry reduced the salt from 1 teaspoon to 1/2. She totally made it her own.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 03:23 PM) Obama's wife cooks better. Cindy McCain says so. That's it! I know who I'm voting for now! What a joke this whole presidential race is. It's not just this race, it's every damn time. God forbid anyone looks mean in the eyes of Parent f***ing magazine. And if they get one, all HELL will break loose if you don't deign to give something else to Good Housekeeping. Laura Bush's Texas Brownies with Barbecue Pickins (cocaine optional). Hillary's chopped weenie sandwich. It's such a farce.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 02:59 PM) Cindy McCain caught plagiarizing AGAIN! They try to make her seem "down home", but forget she is worth over $100 million and probably never really cooks. Recipes are quite possibly the very stupidest part of presidential campaigns. A few things -- We don't know that Cindy McCain even picked this (wasn't it just some staffer/intern the time before?), so I wouldn't say she plagiarized without knowing more. Two, I don't think putting out recipes is an attempt to make someone look "down home". It's just an accepted (though nonetheless totally idiotic) part of any prez campaign. They basically have to do it, so I wouldn't read any intent into it. And honestly, this may well have been her recipe as far as she knew. I don't know where half of my recipes came from, but if I ever published them, I'm sure 90% would be unchanged from whatever source I took them from. And finally...I still can't believe anyone cares a whit about all this cookie recipe crap.

QUOTE (TCQ @ Jun 16, 2008 -> 01:05 PM) I was watchin Baseball Tonight the other day and they were doing their best of so far awards. THey gave the sox bullpen the best in the AL, and rightfully so, but he gave the cubs the best starting pitching in the NL? Also no recognition of the sox starters, dont they lead the league in quality starts and are the sole reason this teams in first. The Cubs thing is laughable because Z, whens hes not crying or beating something like an ape, is legitimate and then thats about. I dont see dempster throwing 200 innings a year after closing and after him lilly and marquis have been inconsistant. Neither do I. I don't even see him pitching well for whatever innings he does pitch. But he has been amazing so far, so why does that matter for a "best of so far" award? The Cubs starters have been at least close to the best in the NL, even though that doesn't mean they'll keep it up.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ May 24, 2008 -> 06:34 AM) Drop him for Daniel Cabrera. This is the year. Or not.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Jun 15, 2008 -> 03:17 PM) Uribe in the lineup is confusing. Is Ozzie shaving points here? The guy has no business being on a major league roster at this point. A lot of guys are banged up, probably. Either that or it's the return of the dreaded Sunday lineup.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jun 15, 2008 -> 01:43 PM) Has Alexei played corner OF before? That's gotta be the reason. But it's such an easy transition, I hope they'll think about having him learn left if this is a lineup we might see again.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 14, 2008 -> 11:37 PM) Katrina- Bush watches from a plane McCain votes AGAINST investigations. Iowa Floods - McCain "prays" from a distance Obama rolls up the sleeves and helps QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 15, 2008 -> 02:21 PM) well no, but considering the incredible organization and coordinating ability with volunteers that Obama's campaign has, I think it's great they are using that to help the people of Illinois and Iowa. This whole thing is a mess, I pray for those people. Aha! I knew it! McCain's prayer: Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy low tax on capital gains, thy Kingdom come, Social Security undone (or not -- I'll get back to you), on earth, as we know there are no hand-outs in Heaven. Give us this day our midday nap, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. Even Mexicans, a little. (Except for Cornyn, that f***ing chicken s***.) And lead us not into deliberations that go on and on and zzzzzzzzzzzzz...but deliver us from evil. I mean, you already did us a solid on that one with Hillary, and I appreciate it. Amen.

So Anderson is in left in favor of Ramirez? Really?

Okay, now, calling Bill Clinton our first black president was a cute, witty little remark. But why does everyone beat these things to death? This is ridiculous: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/opinion/15faludi.html

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jun 15, 2008 -> 12:32 AM) Bug s*** into oil? Well, it is happening, albeit on a small scale, for now. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/envi...icle4133668.ece That is one of the coolest things I've read this year.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 01:30 PM) I think the appropriate response to this is that the U.S. government must follow the constitution, whether or not it is acting against citizens. If the constitution specifies that some power granted to the government only is allowed for citizens, then it is limited to that group. The constitution says that it is applicable to the government, and that judicial power/judicial review is applicable to the cases of anyone, including citizens of other countries. The Habeas Corpus clause says; There is nothing in the constitution that limits this clause specifically to citizens, and I'd say the constitution, by applying judicial power to citizens of other countries, probably does imply that HC implies to anyone who is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. government, unless the writ is officially suspended. This is key, and I think it keeps getting missed. The citizenship thing is not an issue, at all. The Constitution does not merely declare that citizens have rights X, Y, and Z. It also says Congress/Prez/Courts can do X, but not Y. The habeas corpus clause is not at all limited to citizens, nor has it ever been. An illegal immigrant in the court system has full hc rights. The main issue here is about what particular branches of the government can or cannot do. The administration's basic claim is that the US does not have sovereignty over Guantanamo Bay (they argue Cuba does), and so the Constitution's hc guarantee does not apply there. It is, of course, Cuban territory. But the argument that the Legislative and Executive Branches can therefore do whatever they feel like there, where the US is completely in control, is pretty feeble. As in the judgment: "The Constitution grants Congress and the President the power to acquire, dispose of, and govern territory, not the power to decide when and where its terms apply." The Constitution says, Congress can't suspend habeas corpus. Not, can't for certain people. Not, can't in the states and Puerto Rico. Just can't. The possibilities opened up by any other ruling seem to me absolutely brutal -- Congress would be allowed to advocate just about any monstrous behavior, as long as it happens someplace the US rents.

QUOTE (bighurt4life @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 05:21 PM) no wonder he doesn't get any dates dropping pearls like that on the ladies I didn't mean it quite that way -- more that I just have a skewed sense of humor, and usually find the wrong things funny. But hey, maybe, if things aren't going well this weekend...

And again. And again. Tsvangirai arrested twice in one day, along with other top officials in his party. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/af...13zimbabwe.html

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 02:47 PM) unfortunately, there has been so much politicizing of the justice department by this administration that NOTHING is out of the realm of possibility. Fitzgerald has hardly been a Bush puppet.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 02:38 PM) They were doing it to Jason Grimsley trying to nail Barry Bonds too. Yeah, but they were already investigating Bonds's testimony at that point. It wasn't as much a 'fishing trip' as asking about Obama. (Unless it was a different investigation than the BALCO case.)

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 03:29 PM) Why would you hope he was 1337? I get the feeling I'm missing some kind of blogosphere inside joke here. 1337 = leet = elite

I would guess that prosecutors do this sort of thing whenever anyone is connected to a major political figure. It doesn't mean they're out to get Obama, it's just that bringing down any crooked politician has got to be one hell of a colorful feather in a prosecutor's cap.

QUOTE (Shadows @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 03:23 PM) His draft number was 1377, not 1337 Buzzkill...

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 02:56 PM) You can bold out 1377 Lee Fischer. He's been assigned to Kannapolis. I'm reading this, thinking, I sure hope he's 1337, but that's a pretty bold prediction for such a low pick. Then I realize that's his actual draft position. If I were him, I'd brag to everyone about my draft number. And, yes, that may be why I'm no good at picking up women...

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 08:29 AM) You're going to have to have some of that, I think. No one is forcing anyone to do anything (assuming you use a pollution-pegged fee on new cars only as I suggested). There is no "right" to drive, or to own a car, or to buy some gas-guzzling SUV. Its a privilege. Cars take a serious toll on roads, the air, etc. And those tolls cost money for everyone. Its just reality. You could structure the tax in a way that didn't charge said tax on cars that were ELEV qualified. That way, some cars would not be taxed at all. I agree with you in general that taxation is not the way to fix the problem. But I think that it will end up being part of the larger solution, in concert with tax incentives, research and production grants, loan guarantees for patent holders going to production, etc. Just make sure that any taxation is non-regressive, non-retroactive, and avoidable by behavior changes. I like progressive income taxes very much, but I don't agree that regressive taxes should be avoided in every case. In terms of a car/pollution/congestion tax, the idea behind it is that you want to make the price right, so that it's utilized correctly. The better solution is to still implement the right tax while reducing the income tax burden of the poor (make the income tax more progressive).

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 12, 2008 -> 08:09 AM) Exactly. The lifespan of a typical car might be 10 years, not 30-50 like a power plant. And now you're forcing people who would be buying cheap, used cars because its what they can afford to buy new cars or pay more in taxes. Awesome. You're not going to fix this problem through taxation. That will just lead to backlash against any green movement. I think the idea (NSS's, anyway) would be to levy the tax only once, for new car purchases. Of course, that would raise the price of used cars as well (since the substitute -- new cars -- would be more expensive), but only by some part of the original tax, so it's unlikely that people who would otherwise buy used would switch to new cars. The problem is that we really want to tax according to the amount of pollution produced, and a tax like this does not distinguish between those who drive 5k miles a year and those who drive 20k miles a year, so it's a poor proxy for the 'right' tax. And, of course, it's political suicide.

QUOTE (DBAH0 @ Jun 10, 2008 -> 03:58 PM) I'd take Buffalo ahead of the Bears for sure (although losing Marshawn Lynch would really hurt). Edwards - Evans - Hardy is a nice combo though. KC would be close, but they still have Larry Johnson, and their O-Line "should" be better. Who knows how Croyle will do. Miami has a better RB in Ronnie Brown, and their O-Line is fairly good, and they have Ginn Jr at WR. I'd take their offense. Atlanta could be pretty bad also, but Michael Turner could rush for 1500 yards this season, and they have Roddy White. Depends on the QB situation. Baltimore has some decent WR's and McGahee. SF has Frank Gore, and I would expect Smith to be better under Mike Martz (but who knows how that'll go). Right now I'd say KC, SF and CHI have the 3 worst offenses. Really, you wouldn't put Baltimore in that group? They lost Ogden, Clayton was a big disappointment last year, Mason's up and down, and their qb group is even more questionable than the Bears'. And you forgot Dallas...

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jun 10, 2008 -> 03:10 PM) The numbers i'm getting have come from different places. Mostly from different articles and things written on the subject. I know the AFL-CIO did a report on it and other such unions. I've also come across about 5 or so different articles on personal stories of people being attacked or killed. I think it would be irresponsible to just blow these killings off a random acts of murder in a country that has had a history of labor right issues. These are not left wing FARC guerillas. These are just hard working people trying to make a living wage. I think if America went ahead with the Free Trade agreement it would say that these things just happen and oh well. American should demand that it's trading partners have the same labor rights as we do. The problem is that, without consistent data, it's impossible to verify your claims. You cite anecdotal AFL-CIO accounts, others can cite Heritage Foundation reports. But without some base-level information, it's all just hot air. Which leaves me with what I know -- violence is down dramatically, violence against unionists is down dramatically, Uribe has significantly curtailed the activities of both FARC and the right-wing paramilitary groups, and whatever you say about what he's doing to his people, his approval ratings show that Colombians LOVE him. I see no reason to block a trade agreement over union protection issues if union members/leaders are as well protected as anyone else in the country.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 10, 2008 -> 03:24 PM) SF raises its hand. AHAHAHAHA I just noticed you tossed Dallas in there Just for DBAHO. SF isn't very good, but you can at least make a case that, well, Trent Dilfer. So I didn't include them, but they could well belong in that group, too.