Texsox

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 03:45 AM) I don't. You're drunk

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 7, 2008 -> 03:45 AM) It's 3:45 am and I'm the only one logged on. Weird. Finally everyone here agrees with me. I don't.

It's 3:45 am and I'm the only one logged on. Weird. Finally everyone here agrees with me.

I find it interesting that this has slowly fizzled as we lost interest. It may be a microcosm of our societies interest in the war. We still like Nuke, hell most voters want him for a drinking buddy. (I'm running too, and I have sand just like Nuke) But we're not talking much about the war. Which probably means no candidate wants to really talk about the war. I wonder if this means Bush's policy of limiting some aspects of media coverage is working? Or Not. Anyway, How have you been Nuke?

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 11:20 PM) As far as updates, I think everybody updating on their own more or less weekly would be fine. Like I said earlier, tend to be really good on keeping to a diet Sunday night through Friday afternoon, but then I'll usually cheat and eat something more satisfying on the weekends. It's not the best, but the Sunday morning guilt usually straightens me out and I am good again through the next week. To accommodate my scheduled weekend lapses I do my weigh-ins on Friday morning. But I think everybody should do their own thing as far as reporting. In the beginning of the year, I was also putting in 50+ miles on the stationary bike every week, but work has gotten more hectic and it's been harder to find the time. Next week I'll try to eas back into that routine but only try for maybe half of that so I can fit it in. Perhaps the Monday weigh in my stop the weekend backslide. Ever think that Sunday morning guilt is something else? perhaps PA and I thinking of you I too kid because I care . . .

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 11:06 PM) There are some people on this board who could lose that just by eliminating their egos. First off, wrong board for teal Second, I was just about to post that about myself

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 10:36 PM) Ok, if you want to talk semantics, even though you know exactly what my point is, fine. I'll be extremely careful in every word I type just to prevent you from taking my words out of context or distorting the obvious meaning of my post. I believe- just me- I'm not saying you should, or you do, or that anyone else should or does, but I believe that the two of them are working as a team to further their political careers. NOT their marriage. But their political careers. I believe their marriage is a sham- something put forth to appease the conservative voters who would struggle to vote for a divorced or separated woman (whose ex-husband happened to be an ex-President). I think they have basically agreed to stay together formally for each other's best interests, not for love or because they believe they can work it out, or anything else. Not even for Chelsea. I could be wrong. I could be entirely off base and nothing could be farther from the truth. But this thread was started as a question asking us to explain why we dislike Hillary Clinton, and those are my reasons. Your point is, and it gets to the heart of why some people hate Hillary. You *know* why they are married. Name other candidates that you *know* that well? There are many reasons that couples stay together after affairs, and not all of them are running for President. You also have added the quality of the marriage as a reason to vote for or possibly not for someone. At least in the Clinton's case. Within a healthy marriage the partners should be working to help each others career. So at least in this case, they have a very good marriage, even using your theory. Yet, you find fault in that. Perhaps they do have a crappy marriage in some aspects, but even the area that they do well, you're comfortable labeling a negative. And you are not alone in that. As you mentioned other people share that opinion. And repeated enough, it becomes another "fact" about the Clintons that "everybody knows". It's as if she is the only woman in America that has stayed with a husband who cheats. We accept other reasons in ordinary people's lives but in this case it's because she's a lesbian who wants to be President. It's amazing in this race the Family Values GOP had a many times divorced candidate in Rudy G and the Dems have a candidate that kept her marriage together. The candidate that received the most negative about it is the one that chose marriage over divorce. Now it seems the preferred value is divorce. This may signal a major turning point in our attitudes.

What you are promised in this country is a chance. You are promised a college education. You are promised as close to an equal chance as everyone else. You are even promised food and shelter if you can not provide it for yourself. Sorry if the accommodations are not to your liking. I believe it was mixed income. Improve the income (I know it takes work) and move back. I am one of the biggest supporters of these programs anywhere. But when I see someone who thinks of these programs as the end and not the beginning or even the middle, I am disappointed for the system. I would be applauding your efforts to get out, not your efforts to stay there.

A marriage as a team helping each other out. Wow, that is terrible. Marriage should be about hurting each other's careers. Dumping him would have appealed to more voters. To believe your theory, you have to believe that the majority of voters think she did the right thing staying together. I don't think that was the case.

QUOTE(Reddy @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 06:13 PM) a book he only put out because Edwards did so first. (i'm allowed to be a little bitter every once and a while right? lol) Everyone puts out books now.

A gift store down here has a plaque with a picture of Nolan pounding on Ventura's head. LOL I met Ryan at his restaurant and begged him to tell me the story from his point of view. Hilarious. He half expected to get his butt kicked, then he saw trhe look in Ventura's eyes and almost laughed. Ventura knew he shouldn't have rushed the mound, that it was a no win situation.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 08:29 PM) OK, I liked my Fat Elvis/Thin Elvis sig, but conformist sheep that I am I'm adopting the group sig. Good luck, fellow flabbies! No, I love the fat elvis / thin elvis. We should not all be in lock step.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 6, 2008 -> 06:29 PM) Well, this is part of what really bothers me...but it isn't that I believe she stayed with him because she had no spine, but rather, that she stayed with him because she knew it was in the best interests of her eventual political career. Which I find extremely repugnant. I don't believe in their marriage- I think it's a sham and strictly a career arrangement for both of them. It's not that I believe they don't care for one another, but I think they each think of their political careers first and foremost (whether that is individually or collectively) their daughter second (I hope), and then whatever is left of their sham marriage. So fighting to save a marriage and keeping the family together is a bad thing? I wonder if you have analyzed the other candidates marriages, which ones are the best, which couples are the most in love?

Men crying is weak and knocks you out of the race. So if the Clinton campaign did decide that cryng would help, it was a damn big risk, and one I don't think she needed to make.

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.