southsider2k5

Funny thing is I call Sydney Australia probably 20 times a day.

God did the IRS write that? :banghead

Agreed. I post in between phone calls.

I wasn't specifically referring to any rumors, more towards posters who suggested that we should trade PK for anything we could get, no matter how bad it was.

Excellent year Mark

Paul Konerko is a huge positive. Can you imagine if KW had traded him for the bag of balls that many, many people were advocating?

Wow, Joey is hot. He did a great job here this year, and definately would be missed.

Hey Kaps boss, if you are reading this.... :fyou (unless you are registered here, because that would be a direct violation of the personal attacks policy)

Of course DBAH0 did it, he is winning

Stupid question. How can someone not accept your resignation? I have never understood that.

I never bid early, unless I buy it now. Bidding wars happen way too easily.

That is exactly what I am asking. Why is GWB responsible for Saddam using WMDs because Reagan sold them to him? I have seen the analogy that it is our fault because we gave it to him. So why doesn't the same analogy apply here? He didn't say that last night. Go back and read the transcript. He mentioned that WE needed two more divisions as recommended by one of the generals (I forget which one now). There was no mention of the UN or another country supplying those troops. Heck Germany and France are already on record as saying they won't send troops even if Kerry is Pres, so it isn't them that would help us. We know Russia won't send troops, as they have their own problems. Italy has already sent troops, Japan can't send troops. Basically the only country that could send any amount of troops would be Germany as far as I can figure. Do they have two spare divisions laying around? I doubt it. He could have only been referring to our troops going over at this point. And I still want to know how he can criticize Bush for $200 billion spent there, but only offer more troops and more equiptment (ergo more money) to remedy the situation, and that not be inconsistant?

When you start talking about 5-6 tolls it adds up. They are wanting to make the truck tolls $4 each.

Steelers Jaguars Texans Patriots Eagles Browns Packers Panthers Saints Jets Titans Broncos Rams Ravens What do you expect Jason to do everything?

I didn't like the lights either. I found myself paying attention to them too. You are right, the little things are annoying.

They are going to redirect truck traffic through the city if they go through with the original toll increase proposals. No doubt about it.

The tax cuts helped revive the economy, just ask Alan Greenspan. In his own words, the economy would not have recovered as quickly without them. What does it matter what I would do? I am not running for President, John Kerry is. And I am curious how all of these seemingly contradictary items all fit together.

The camera work sucked. They need to get GWB a booster seat or something, because that split screen with the uneven podiums was annoying and distracting.

But John Kerry is telling us how bad the economy is, so he must be planning on doing it different right? He wouldn't continue the same failed policies, would he? So with his self-professed promise to cut spending somewhere else for every addition of spending he does, how is he going to add all of these troops and equiptment to the tune of at very least $50 billion, probably much more? What is he going to cut?

Bingo

Flasoxjim in response to a post in the thread on a surfer being picked up by a whale. I read that part and thought for a second it was a quote from Star Jones' new husband talking about their wedding night...

Actually I was thinking about the affects on the everglades. I remember hearing about how dangerously low the water levels were from the cities using the water. Could this be a good thing for southern Florida, in a horrible sort of way?

Pardon my post here, but that is completely assinine and immature. What gives you the right to destroy someone else's property and the expression of their opinion? Don't answer, because you don't have that right. Grow up. Seriously.

This is a great statement Murc. Bush looked and sounded awful, and lost the sound bite war, which in 2004 determines who wins a debate. But you could have drove a truck through some of the holes in John Kerry's words. Here is my analysis of the debate. It is a cut and paste job from an email I sent someone, so if it doesn't fit right, that's why. But there was no way I was going to try to type all of that crap again. Enjoy, and I look forward to hearing rebuttals. There were some huge holes in Kerry's positions, IMO. First of all, Kerry said he accepted the intellegence that the President had. Which means he accepted the whole WMD thing and threat to the world thing. Now keeping that in mind he chastised Bush for not accepting the recommendation to have two additional divisions deployed over there, but on the other had said he would not have committed 90% of troops and resources to Iraq. So either he is saying that he would have sent a whole bunch more troops over to Afganistan, or that the troops levels in Iraq are too high. Which is it? He criticized Bush for spending $200 billion in Iraq, (which could have gone to health care, school, prescription drugs etc according to Kerry) but then went into detail about what materials that our troops didn't have in Iraq. So tell me how does he plan to send two extra divisions into Iraq, more equiptment into Iraq, but do it for cheaper than Bush is doing it? Plus he wants to make sure that more resources are committed to the real terror threat in OBL. Where is that money going to come from? Just on a pure mathematical basis, talking about adding 25% more troops should add at least 25% more costs right? Plus an add on for all of the extra stuff that our troops don't have now, which means even without the new equiptment for the exsisting troops we would have spent an extra $50 billion, above the $200 billion Bush has spent, in Iraq. But $200 billion is too much? The other part that really got to me was the NK nuclear references. Who built the nuclear facilities in NK? Hint it wasn't a Republican President. I have heard many leftists suggest that since Reagan is the one who sold WMDs to Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war that somehow the republicans were responsible for essentially giving a monkey a gun. So if Bill Clinton essentially gave NK nuclear capabilities, aren't the democrats responsible for arming the monkey in this case? Seems to me that would be the logical conclusion. I definately think Kerry won the sound bite battle. He did an excellent job of getting his little snippets out there, which in the 21st century, is about the attention span he is catering too. But damn, if anyone actually puts together what he said, it can be destroyed. In his effort to be all things to all people, he really said some stupid stuff. I don't get it.

And much more impressive, Mark Prior 6 IP 2h 0R 13K 0BB , the really bad news for Sox fans is only 80 pitches.