Texsox

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 05:37 PM) Nope. But the all time great teams win their championship no matter what. If New England was THAT good they would have won on Sunday. If you want to sit here and tell me that the 85 Bears or 89 Niners or one of the 70's Steelers teams were the greatest ever, I'd say that's debatable and you could at least make a case for them. This years Pats though? Nope. They lost when it mattered, they aren't one of the greatest teams ever, don't care what anyone says. So you are placing every Super Bowl winning team ahead of this Pats team on the All-Time list?

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:40 PM) you callin' me a liar? I'm 6'3" and have a football/baseball player frame. Like Colon, Kruk, Perry, etc. Honestly, my goal of 225 would mean I either lost my head or should be playing AA ball. We definitely need to include before and after pictures for proof. I believe you

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 05:32 PM) This is actually the one thing I tried to avoid with my whole post on policy issues earlier. I can't honestly say that deep down somewhere buried that doesn't play into my decision, because I'm a geologist and not a psychologist. But I'd like to think that this is not something that bothers me. I've voted for Boxer, I've voted for Feinstein, I don't on the surface feel like I have a problem with voting for a woman, I feel like I have a problem with this particular one, and their history of policy. And I believe that to be true for many people, but the same behavior that would pass for normal from a guy tags her as a b****. Name another candidate that comes close to a description like that. The types of adjectives that are used to describe her is very interesting. I also think there are some people that wish she had publicly humiliated William Jefferson and divorced him during the Lewinski affair. What could have passed, perhaps, as conservative, Tammy Wynett, stand by your man, became a conniving tool to become President. She is judged differently as a woman, but isn't that valid? Is not sex a big part of who we are? What our identity is? There are differences between men and women, and not just under the hood.

One other factor on why Perhaps we do not know what to expect from a legitimate female candidate for President.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 03:28 PM) Ok well I think you are wrong And no, its not like saying that at all.. Quarterback is the SINGLE most important position on the field at all times, and the Patriots would simply not be that good if they had Matt Cassel or Vinny Testaverde at QB for the majority of this season.. I agree, but 8 wins for Brady, that's huge. Forty plus guys go from Super Bowl and undefeated to 9-6 without one guy. That also means one guy can take a team from 9-6 to undefeated. I could see maybe 3 loses without Brady, possibly 4 and they make the playoffs with that record. Are you saying Brady is that great of a QB or his backup is that bad? Any other QB capable of making that same impact on a team?

Hillary may be the most enigmatic politician of our time. She has the fiercest supporters and the most rabid detractors. YAS and Kap get so wound up they just scream UGHHHH and run away, others defend her every move. I'm trying to think of anyone else that has drawn that sort of reactions. Great idea for a thread, but in the end, there may not be an answer to either question, why you love or hate her. Perhaps it is because we truly do not know who she is. The media and word of mouth have created an image that is both real and fake. Real in the sense it is what you and I believe her to be, and false because it is based on what we see and hear from media.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 03:20 PM) Yes, there was. But, as I said earlier, none of those speeches (victory dances) should be seen as being policy statements. For any candidate.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 04:32 PM) Mutant baracudas. . . very ill-tempered. Nicely played

For Balta That seemed much more raw and heartfelt than the carefully constructed, academic, logical arguments that many others, including myself, have posted. I have also spent much of this thread pointing out that Hillary is being judged by a double standard, how you jumped to me being a Obama supporter is not quite right. McCain '08 the best Dem in the field.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 04:18 PM) You know Tex, this post offends me somewhat. Through this thread, you've had people give a littany of reasons why they oppose Hillary Clinton. Some people have given personal reasons. Some people have given policy reasons. Some people have simply gone with their gut. Then, we get a person who turns around and says the same thing about Obama, for the same sort of reasons people are saying they don't like Clinton, and suddenly that post is one of the most heartfelt you've read here? I understand if you don't like Obama, grown adults can have plenty of policy disagreements. I understand if the person writing that post doesn't like him. But I really do not like the fact that for some reason you consider everyone else's posts in this thread less heartfelt than that one. I can't fathom that at all. I was thinking more about how Clinton's policies, especially helping the working poor, effected misplaced Sox's life. Seemed raw and real to me. Sorry if I offended you by pointing to that. I should have edited down to those specific points.

For a Dem to like Hillary they have to agree with the GOP pundits and radio talking heads who have been saying for years she is Dem's favorite candidate. No Dem wants to agree with Rush, Hannity, et. al. So Dems hate so not to agree.

^^^ That may be one of the most heartfelt and honest posts I've read here. Damn Balta for getting in the way. Above Balta's.

To increase attendance he is scheduling a cage match against Robin Ventura . . . Yes, I went there and in a hurry.

QUOTE(shipps @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 02:29 PM) Just got back from a stay in the ER.The ER that I just so happen to work in, if I didnt get the special treatment my 4 hour stay would have been atleast 8.By the way,GERD and Acid reflux can feel like a heart attack. And sometimes an annoying case of acid indigestion can be a fatal heart attack

Does anyone vote for a war and hope it will never end? I'm voting for this war and I never will want it to end? No matter what happens? I would hope that everyone who votes for a war also immediately works to end the war as quickly as possible. I can not believe anyone here thinks otherwise.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 03:26 PM) What about the big issues REALLY changes? How much have your convictions and beliefs really changed? Well, based on what we knew at the time, I reluctantly supported the war effort. But based on what is known now, and how rushed and unreliable the data actually was, I'm against it. I thought if we have people here doing jobs, they should be eligible to the same benefits, now I see that is too expensive and favor a guest worker program with limited benefits, but protections for employers, employees, and society at large. I use to think that Republicans were in favor of smaller government and less spending that was balanced with income. Now I see they want to keep spending more and more no matter what the income levels are. I'm not certain what being fiscally conservative means. I use to believe that anyone should be allowed to say whatever they wanted to over public airwaves. Then in twenty five years I've seen just how depraved that speech could be and understand restrictions. I use to believe that unions benefited the majority of workers, now I believe it is the minority of workers. Is this what you mean?

FlaSoxxJim has trained barracuda's . . .

I remembered it was Hammerhead as I was driving back from an appointment.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 02:00 PM) Then we don't need Presidential candidates. All we need is supercomputers who can poll every second of everyday, and decide what 50% +1 of the country wants to do. I want to know that the person I am voting to represent me, is indeed going to represent MY interests. The issues that people use as a litmus test are important to them, and they are the reason they vote for certian candidates. If you can't trust that, what is the point of voting at all? And I believe that is how most of America votes, representing their own personal interests, despite, at times, what is best for America. Yet the candidate should be about America's interests and possess none of their own. Something in there does not make sense to me. And with the world changing so rapidly, shouldn't we desire leaders who can change with it?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 02:53 PM) In response to Tex, about ruthlessness... There is a very important difference between being tough and being ruthless. Clinton is ruthless, meaning she is not only aggresive and hard to her enemies, she is that way towards ANYONE who gets in the way of what she wants. That is NOT something I applaud in any candidate, male or female. I want tough, but diplomatic and open-minded. Someone who has the country's best interests in mind - not their own. I think Clinton falls down in that regard. You are using a different meaning of that word than I am. Based on what you wrote, I would make my comments about that she is the toughest candidate out there. Again, I think we are applying two standards here, name a candidate that wasn't looking out for their desire to be President? Gee, I really don't want to be President, but if you really, really want me to. GMAB. You have to have an ego as big as Texas to go through the crap of getting elected.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 02:12 PM) There is ZERO chance the Patriots make the playoffs this year if Brady gets hurt.. I don't give a s*** who you think they would bring in, it wouldn't happen Vinny and Brad? Man get the f*** out of here, and I am the one who is drinking? Zero chance?! So Brady was good for eight wins?! Sorry, its the NFL and with 22 guys on the field, no one makes that big of a difference. Its like saying Brady makes any .500 team a threat to go undefeated.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:37 PM) I watch the man talk and listen to what he says. So far, I haven't heard much of substance. But which candidate can in 45 second sound bites? I have yet to hear in rallys anything of substance from any candidate. We just don't look if it's McCain or Clinton, but since we talk about Obama's articulation, it is more noticeable.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:42 PM) I hated when she handpicked New York as her new home when they first started mapping out a 2008 path to the White House. I hate that there are many woman in my life, woman I consider smart informed citizens, who (presumably) voted for Hillary yesterday not on policy but on sisterhood. Looking at what William Clinton has done after his term, do you really think at his age, settling in Arkansas was in the cards? He seems like a New York kind of guy. I could also see them in California, which would make even more sense for her run. And I think this is the kind of stuff that NSS was talking about in starting the thread. Chaney has lived all over and changed his address to Wyoming so he could run with Bush (two people from the same state can not be on the same ticket). It was not even an issue.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:41 PM) Hillary is a ruthless ... ah hell, I can't do this. I despise the woman too much. You guys have at it. Stick around. And who do you want going after terrorists, someone ruthless or not? Seriously, that is one thing that actually has me thinking about her. From the confidence and ruthless side, she's the closest to Reagan in this race. Picture any of the four candidates at the Berlin wall and she's the only one I see pulling off the "Tear down this wall" line.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 01:30 PM) I do not like people who do not have convictions. A person's convictions are what makes them who they are, and they tell you how they will handle themselves when they are in office. Its my biggest problem with Clinton, Edwards, and Romney, and its that they will say or do ANYTHING to get into office. The crying and the ruthless stuff are all apart of that game, just like the constantly changing positions over the years of her other opponents. I want to vote for people whom I KNOW what they will stand for, and how they will act in office. I don't get that from Hillary, amongst others. I'm really conflicted on that. If by anything to stay in power you mean doing what the majority of Americans wants, I'm not convinced that is a bad thing. If you mean sticking by a decision after you know it is wrong, that seems dangerous as well. Every movement by every serious candidate is scripted and weighed out. I'm not certain if Gary Hart was the beginning of that or just a notable example of what happens when you do not watch where and what you do. Interesting you mention the crying, Muskie cried and lost his chances, so Hillary crying was a gamble if it was scripted. So to me, it seems like she is being held to a different standard. Or, based on William Jefferson's conduct and Presidency, we are looking for similarities between the two, and that too seems wrong.