StrangeSox

The Presidential office has grown far beyond what the founders intended. Since the early part of the 20th century, Presidents have given themselves more and more power. They were never meant to single-handidly run the country, as they seem to now. This is just another (large) step down the same path.

Heads, get outta here with them facts. We all know the ACLU only supports extremely left-wing child molesters and violent criminal because they hate America and everything good in the world. I don't think its been mentioned yet, but cheers to the Patriot Guard Riders for sheilding the families from the WBC clowns.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 11:26 AM) I love how my pointing out of Cheney's politicizing of this mess got 0 responses and the Kerry one got 3. I think we all know this administration likes to politicize anything and everything to keep their party in power

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 11:00 AM) More sour grapes from the person who lost. I am sure that with Kerry in power, he would of convinced Israel to sit there and let Hezbollah just pound them with rockets daily. If Kerry had been elected, he would have solved world hunger and brought peace to the mid-east by now. Terrorism, poverty, and drugs would be non-existant. We would live in utopia. Democrats need to shut their mouths (Dean, Kerry), or they're going to end up hurting their own cause this November

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 10:33 AM) John Kerry: what a tool.

QUOTE(minors @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 01:03 AM) Found 1 case good for you. He found the very case you posted. It wasn't very hard. They've defended Christian's rights plenty of times before. Look through some of their case histories.

ACLU wil defend anyone who they feel is having their civil rights violated. They have defended far-right nutjobs in the past. That's how our legal system is supposed to work. The most vile, disgusting criminal must be assured a good defense. Otherwise, the government can be lazy and inept in convicting criminals.

QUOTE(minors @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 07:10 PM) My whole argument is the founding fathers believed in execution it was around when they wrote the amendment and it stayed around after it was written. Execution in there eyes was not against the amendment. And besides how can a leftist claim the constitution must be honored in every way but yet when it goes against there stance it becomes "Societal value change" and can be discounted, you can't have it both ways either we respect what the founders stood for completely or not stand with it at all. If you follow that logic, however, don't we have to allow slavery, discrimination, etc.? Slavery was around when they wrote the Constitution, and remained around until they were all dead. Women couldn't vote for over 100 years, yet society came to believe that that was wrong and that all members of society should be treated equally. Since the beginning of this country, the interpretations of law have changed with the times. They will continue to do so.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 04:06 PM) I like how self-righteous and full of yourself you are. So typical of those left of center. Thanks for making my point by throwing out more ad hominem labels.

Good.

QUOTE(minors @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 01:11 PM) What really gets me about this argument is the fact when the constitution was written public beheadings was a common practice and hangings were also common, yet none of these founding fathers or any of the early courts had any problem with it. So I guess we understand the constitution better than the people who wrote it You usually die pretty quickly in both a hanging (snaps your neck) and a beheading. Different than inflicting a slow, painful, agonizing death. The Constitution also states that non-whites are only 3/5's of a person. Societal values change. I like how reactionary and knee-jerk you two are. One position on one issue makes me a bleeding-heart liberal. Ok. Try actually formulating arguments based on an issue instead of just labelling people and then going on a ad hominem circle-jerk.

HE GONE!

Well done, jon. Well done.

Pods!

4 runs, 3 hits. Nice change from the Sox' 1 run every 5 hits production lately.

screw retalitory pitches. Make 'em pay by having it help plate a run, like the Sox did.

another solid bunt. I'm finding it hard to complain about the "sunday line up" today.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 02:13 PM) A hit-and-run? Great call by Ozzie there. Another bunt for Gload is upcoming. Too bad they got to it that quickly. Still, nice to see the Sox string together some singles.

small ball

nice bunt.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 12:44 PM) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Who really gives a damn if someone suffers while they're being executed. That pesky constitution keeps getting in the way! If only we could trash that out-dated piece of garbage!

I'd rather face a well-trained firing squad aiming for my forehead.

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Jul 22, 2006 -> 02:12 AM) I was at the game too. Ozzie needs to learn a lesson from buck in that you dont have to let your pitcher throw over 100 pitches before you get his ass out of there. I like an agressive base coach, but that was probably the worst move Cora's made since he's been here. It was a spiffty throw and he was still out by a mile. By the way, I dont know if the people watching on TV could here it but Buehrle got booed bigtime after that big inning. I heard it. Fans are just sick and tired of this team's play over the last 4 series.

There's no need for a solid bullpen if your starters are going to go out and give up 5+ more often than not.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 21, 2006 -> 10:59 PM) Are you sure those last two are the deadlines for UIC and Depaul? D'you know what Loyola's is, too? I absolutely know that I could raise my GPA by quite a bit if given until January, which I would have with those two deadlines. Awesome! By the way, you're better about this than my HS counselors. More important than what school you're going to is what program you're going into; applying for general LAS vs. engineering at U of I makes a big difference. That said, with a near-3 GPA and a 29 on the ACT (which is pretty high), I don't think you should have a problem getting into UIC or DePaul. Might not get the scholarships a 4.0'er might get, but then again UIC is the second cheapest school in the state and still pretty good.