FlaSoxxJim

So, I just got the most recent silly MLB "Fans at the Bat" survey, and it asked participants to describe the one thing they would like to change about MLB. As one of the many people getting screwed over the year with MLBs decision to offer the Extra innings package exclusively through DirectTV, this is what I wrote them:

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 03:39 PM) According to the CONSTITUTION, he's right. Some case law may be different, but if it's challenged, I think the White House would win this argument. The legislative branch is under no authority to oversee the executive branch. (That one word is important). But the fact that Congressional oversight derives from implied rather than implicit Constitutional powers is because oversight authority was seen by the framers as in inherent power of representative assemblies, NOT because they didn't believe representative assemblies should not wield such power. Also. the Constitution does expressly grant some oversight authority to Congress, including the right to impeach and remove from office the president. If that authority is explicitly granted, than certainly broader oversight was implied because Congress had to know what the Executive was doing if it was to be able to exercise these express powers responsibly.

I surprised myself and got an 8/10. http://www.malevole.com/mv/misc/killerquiz

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 01:25 PM) This doesn't surprise me. IIRC, a History Channel segment on UFO's stated France actually created an official government report several years ago which detailed the possibility of an alien encounter. It's obvious that people within high command in France country don't push away the topic as we do in America. Hey. . . weren't Beldar and Prymatt and their kids supposed to be from France?!? At last, it all comes clear!

I think Tony needs to take a Civics class. But, I take back what I said about Snow not having yet internalized the expansive, sweeping Unitary Executive mindset yet

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 01:20 PM) Family>politics no matter what.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 01:15 PM) I can't imagine they'd have continued the campaign "strongly" if they thought it was going to take away from her chances at treatment and so forth. Unless that's the only way she can get health coverage. I'd hope they'd not compromise treatment in any way. I'm just thinking more about time spent on the campaign trail being private time lost if it turns out they have a finite amount. I can see Mrs. Edwards looking past herself and thinking that carrying on with the campaign is to the greater good, but I hope it's not a decision they will regret.

Very sad. I think it's a lose-lose for Edwards and the decision to drop out or not. Mostly, good thoughts out to Mrs. Edwards and hopefully they can both keep enough perspective down the line to know whether it's more important to stay in the race or spend the time together.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 12:17 PM) Our congressman was on the Colbert Report last night for his "Better Know a District" series. Very cool, that definitely means you have made it when you're on Colbert! A close scientist friend of mine one one of the $ half-million MacArthur "Genius" grants this past year, which she thought was pretty cool and all, but her big thrill was when Colbert mentioned her by name the next night on a segment he called "So Who's Not Honoring Me Now"

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 11:48 AM) You lost me... Yeah, I'm familiar with the assorted marinated-meats-cooked-on-a-skewer wonder of speidies courtessy of a NY friend, but I missed the news item too.

DOJ under Gonzo is all about the obstruction, aren't they? What's the over/under on Abu G lasting the rest of the month of the week? Prosecutor: Bush appointees interfered in case. Front-page of Thursday's WaPo

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/21/o...n.ap/index.html Always got a kick out of Larry "Bud".

Well, I think that a deeper investigation into whether or not the firing of prosecutors working on cases targeting GOPers loyal to the president and/or cases that were beginning to focus on individuals within the White House might potentially lead to enough evidence that impeachment based on an obstruction of justice charge would be viable. [similarly, I think that the President halting the NSA wiretap investigation in its tracks simply by not granting investigators the security clearances they needed could possibly be elevated to obstruction if all the details could ever be known.] I don't think that's very likely, though. If it comes to light through emails or other testimony that Abu G knowingly gave false sworn testimony, that's clearly perjury and initiating Impeachment proceedings against him would be appropriate. As for the President, if the White House refuses to respond to the lawful and reasonable subpoenas that will likely be issued tomorrow, then it potentially leads to two things: 1) The constitutional showdown that the White House is spoiling for by failing to recognize the fundamental right of congress to act as a check on Executive power. When that ends up before the Supreme Court hopefully even the Conservative stacked Court will uphold the right of Congress to function the way it was intended in regard to oversight of the Executive. 2) Possible justification for pursuing impeachment of the President for obstructing justice, along the lines of Nixon's impeachment. The claim will, of course, be executive privilege. Then again Tony Snow Job sure didn't do George any favors on that score today. And note how Tony did not suggest a right to privileged communications among White House staff, only between the President and his staff. Clearly Tony hasn't internalized the Cheney view of the near-limitless claim of executive power and privilege or that statement would have been with and among the President and/or close staff members. Not that anything he says means anything anyway, I know. At least Scotty was sort of likable and you felt sorry for him sometimes when he had to bluff his way through the pressers. Snow is just a jagbag. Executive privilege over conversations that never existed? “That falls into the intriguing question category” The 18-day email gap?? "I’ve Been Led To Believe There’s A Good Response For It" Any sort of plan for Iraq whatsoever?!? "Zip It!" Real Smooth, Tony.

The per capita emissions are completely irrelevant? Not if you want to see how grossly oversized our consumption is here. But tell me - is Al Gore suggesting that China and India be exempted from the obligations of the Kyoto successor?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 01:16 PM) Fixed that for you. Wow, yes you did. I don't know how I omitted that since it was kind of the point of the post!

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 12:01 PM) Seeing as how India and China are now darn close to the world's biggest polluters, THEY need to do something about it before we do, or at least at the same time. Who's serving up the BS now, Kap? Even with more than 1 billion people each, China's total CO2 emissions are just over 1/2 what the US puts out, and India is at about 1/5 of our total. http://www.carbonplanet.com/home/country_emissions.php And on a per capita basis we blow them out of the water. In 2004 China put out about 3 tons of CO2 per person and India put out less than 1.5 tons. We on teh other hand, put out more than 24 tons per person. If you don't think that global solutions need to start with us on seeing those figures I don't know what else there is to say. But more to the point. I do not believe Gore is suggesting that China and India continue to get a free ride in the global agreement that is to be Kyoto's successor. Please correct me if I'm wrong. What I have seen is Gore and others urge the US, China and everybody to enter a new accord by 20010 rather than 2012.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 09:30 AM) The newest version is actually Harry Hotter and the Chamber of XXX Secrets Of course if it came out 20 years ago it would have been Harry Hotter and the Marilyn Chambers of XXX Secrets

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 12:02 AM) That is the smartest, and most accurate, quote I have seen in years. And I'm not kidding, either. Agreed. Right on the issues – Rabidly Far Right on some of them. Not correct on the issues, mind you, merely Right.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 04:46 PM) I guess my idea for the final Potter book wasn't followed. I wanted to see Harry coming back to Hogwartz, this time as a teacher and leading a rag tag group of students to glory, while the rest of the school, and the vice principal, makes fun of them. I called it Welcome Back Potter. The advance copy I took a peak at has him packing some mean magnum heat. That's right, it's time for Dirty Harry (Potter).

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 04:37 PM) Thank you. Fact of the matter some of that seed was dead when it's tossed on the ground, some will never germinate, and some will only germinate under ideal circumstances. And the majority will germinate just fine no matter how you abuse it. Only time will tell. There are a lot of people like that. And I'll bet Grandma FlaSoxxJim has a sayin' . . . That she did - but it involved penises, pundendae and pumpkins, but no grass. Your explanation sounds like something out of Matthew 13. Dirty rotten atheist that I am, I still used that parable and it's implicit recognition of the existence of habitat heterogeneity to introduce my dissertation seminar. You can take the heathen out of the church but you can't take teh church out of the heathen.

CNN

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 04:08 PM) Fantasy football is also a huge driver of the NFL, who has embraced it, unlike MLB who has fought it. Why the hell is MLB fighting Fantasy Football? See, that just makes zero sense.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 02:53 PM) Corned Beef and Cabbage is an Irish-American invention. And God love 'em for it!! Love them galumpkis though, and this from someone with no Polish in them. My Irish Grandma lived next door to a Polish woman and they shared recipes, so I got to enjoy lost of good Polish cooking as well growing up.

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 01:12 PM) Serving Bigfoot at the bar doesn't exactly make for responsible selling. Serve someone four pints of that and I should really call them a cab. The folks ordering Bigfoot tend to know what they are ordering though I'd guess. If a bar will serve single malt scotch and such, I think serving Bigfoot and other high octane beers responsibly is easy enough. You're right though, a few rounds of Bigfoot and you've had it.