YASNY

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 08:35 AM) Congratulations, BushCo. You found a judge who agrees with your "strategery" of holding people in some sort of legal stasis, not to be regulated or governed by any U.S. Court, nor held to the Geneva Conventions on combatants. Another muddy footprint on the Constitution. Wonderful. It should be noted, by the way, that this ruling does NOT say that the detainees shouldn't be protected by conventions (Geneva, UN, our own military) as prisoners of war. That is the other sane alternative here, although BushCo may insist that doesn't apply either. Nuke, I know you don't like these guys, and neither do I. But do you not see the danger in allowing the executive branch to do a daylight end-around of protective processes, and hold people in the tank forever? I don't see where OUR constitution should apply to these people in any way, shape or form ... unless they are US citizens. The Geneva convention is for uniformed personal. If you are caught spying while blending into the populace, not in uniform ... you are S.O.L. as far as Geneva is concerned. These people, and I used the word loosely here, are not in the uniform of any nation's military. Geneva does not apply.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 08:41 AM) How would requiring selecting someone with different views honor the voter's intent? I don't see anyone here mentioning anything about Federal. My point is honor the intent of the voters and select someone similar in views. So far no one has tackled this from the voter's perspective. I brought the Feds into it based on your remark that it should be a person from the same party. The only way to implement that across the board is for there to be a federal statute. I countered by saying the people of the state should decide how and who their representatives are selected, and in this case, that is exactly how it is done. The fact that legislature, which passed the law, and the governor, which makes the decision based on that law, are all elected by the people of the state ... that blows your 'will of the people' argument right out of the water. It's all about the states governing themselves. But, then, the left never did care for that point of view.

QUOTE(Steff @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 09:03 AM) I saw the #1 Jerry/Kenny basher reading when I was on this morning so I took the opportunity to do a little b**** slapping. Oh boy... I see the wall in this threads future.... All in all, it's just another brick in the wall.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 08:14 AM) I am not saying the feds should. I am saying that the voters in a state have elected someone. The obviously want someone like that to represent them in that position and at that time. I think we can also agree that there are fundamental differences between the parties. The best chance that the voter's choice would continue is to have a member of that same party representing them. And this goes both ways, and I am speaking in a general sense. But if the voters elected a conservative Senator, how are they better served when the Governor appoints a liberal to fill his shoes, or vice versa? And of course I am not advocating a change in this situation, the law is the law. But I'd like to read a counter explaining how the voters, who elected someone with a given ideology and from a certain party, benefit when someone from the other party, and presumably a different ideology, is selected? The people didn't elect a party they elected a person. They also elected the state legislature and the governor. Johnson had 'successful' brain surgery last night.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 07:10 AM) I Just saw the reports this morning that he's in critical condition. Damn. Hopefully he comes out of it. I've heard that since I made my post, as well. He sounds like a good man. Hope he pulls through.

QUOTE(Steff @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 07:39 AM) Every year that they've made profits. 9 of the last 11 years. Also it's worth mentioning, again, that Jerry is NOT the majority holder and there are several in line BEFORE him that would get their pockets lined before he even saw a dime. Yea, I know. I wasn't literally looking for an answer. But every little bit of validation helps. As many times as it's been documented around here, it still amazes me when a Soxtalker starts down that path. It's even worse when a local columnist starts spewing that garbage, but it happens.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 07:51 AM) I don't put any credence in a scouting report from a columnist. Good point. If those Phillie fans had been around here last summer, they wouldn't be so happy about acquiring Garcia, either.

Philly Daily News' Bill Conlin on Gavin Floyd: And a bit on Gio:

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 06:05 AM) Thank you Kenny How many consecutive years have the Sox invested profits directly into payroll? How many times has it been discussed and proven around here? Yet, everytime something happens that can be twisted to look like there is an outside chance that they'll cut payroll, multitudes start screaming that JR is lining his pockets.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 04:25 AM) It sounds like Republicans are already 'salivating' - which is pure bunk if that's the case. They probably are, but it will more than likely come to nothing. Which I hope is the case. That means he has a reasonably full recovery.

This is about what I expected was happening, amidst all the teeth gnashing. Rozner column

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 02:07 AM) I'm going to give Dayton Moore some time before I write him and his Royals off entirely. He's done a nice job thus far in Kansas City and while a salary cap may be needed for there sake, it won't ever happen.. So to better baseball, I'm pulling for those pesky Royals. I'd rather pull for those pesky Devil Rays.

I hate Red Sox oriented threads. It's always the same thing.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 07:46 PM) Election - even better. But I still contend that a Governor's nomination should not be bound by party. I think that runs counter to the spirit of a representative body in a federalist nation like ours. Regardless of what the law is for that state ... election, appointment, bound by party, whatever ... The state law is the important thing ... The law passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor. There is no way the feds should have a say so in who represents the people of a state. So to say that it should be bound by party ... just because it might change the balance of power in the senate ... is bunk. Unless, the state law deems it be that way.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 09:29 PM) I know this is off topic, but I make reference to the Duke case during this particular argument. People who are against abortion say they only favor in the cases of rape and incest. If the government takes away a woman's choice to choose, how many innocent men would be victims of false rape charges? Falsely accusing someone of rape should carry the punishment that rape itself does. Of course, this would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt along with proving intent.

I'm really divided on this issue. We do need the means to protect the homeland and we should do what it takes to do so. However, putting unchecked power in anyone's hands is an invitation to disaster. The setting of precedence also concerns me. I don't give a rats ass about those guys pulled off the battlefields of Afghanistan or Iraq. They can rot for all I care. Yet, we have encountered a US citizen or two over there and they should never be denied their constitutional rights. This is like swimming across the everglades ... if we make it through without getting bit, we'll be damn lucky.

QUOTE(SoxFanForever @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 04:58 PM) I didn't know Montreal made an offer for him to play hockey. Check your atlas. Toronto is located north of the border. It must suck to be geographically challenged.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) Benson is a wonderful switch-up from Jones, and there's no reason not to make use of both of them every game unless one of them matches up particularly poorly (usually, that would be Jones against a speed team). Especially if it puts the ball on the ground more. Agreed. I thought it was noteworthy, though.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 01:08 PM) I am glad to hear they are going to do something about this. I have no issues with money going to local projects and causes, that is part of what makes representation so important. However, the system now is totally broken. "pork" for bird research should not be added onto a defense bill. The problem comes when someone says "hey, i dont like that little thing you added on there, but I cant vote against giving the soliers armor." If they just put all the "pork" aside into a single bill, I dont have a problem with that. These guys are smarter than i am, they'll figure it out. They already have figured it out. And ... it ain't gonna change.

Rotoworld:

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 12:54 PM) U.S. dollars, all big league contracts are expressed in American currency. Thank you.

Are we talking Canadien or U.S. dollars?

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 12:36 PM) she's paying for the wedding, yes I paid for the ring and the honeymoon and the rest of my life of indentured servitude. That's just the down payment.