Texsox

QUOTE(mreye @ Oct 31, 2007 -> 10:38 AM) Where is "Hook him up with a coed"?? Right after, be the coed.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Oct 31, 2007 -> 11:14 AM) It amazing how stupid the democrats are on their taxation plans. Goofs like Rangle can't wait to shove his hand in my pockets to steal more money. A Sur tax, kiss my ass. Why even tax us? Borrow the damn money, someone else will pay.

"This conversation is making me uncomfortable. My manner of dress is similar to the other women in the company and at my clients. Thank you for your concern, but until today, none of my clients have ever made mention of my dress" It could be that someone at a client said something about her and he is feeling paternal. For example, he's talking to the President of a client's company and he says. that Mary, wow! You really know how to hire 'em. etc.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 10:07 PM) This has pretty much been proven to be bulls***. Jerry Buss more than anybody wanted Shaq out of LA, he was sick of O'Neal's bulls***. Kobe is not responsible for Shaq's departure. Public relations.

Entertainment, a choice we make to accept and allow versus war. Following your logic, and tapping into my love of hyperbole and sarcasm Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the House of Representatives: Yesterday, December 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific . . . . . . I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire. Of course by making this declaration of war, and by following this path, we must now allow any forms of entertainment to be produced and shown, no matter how violent or perverse. Franklin D. Roosevelt - December 8, 1941

In analyzing any deal for Kobe, you also have to factor in a year from now which players he will demand to be traded. Please stay away from him.

http://www.wikihow.com/Befriend-a-Professor

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) What do you mean by "Jumps the shark"? I have not seen it used in this context before. Ratings are slipping, you need a big show to get back on track. This will be marked where his campaign stopped being relevant. Thanks for playing the game, it was fun. Enjoy a vacation with your hot wife.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 03:00 PM) actually, in this case, it is... Since male and female, gay and straight, have all been infected, I think it is not specific.

No harm, no foul?

Didn't the Dems try this the past cycle? I guess it must have been successful. He seems like a good candidate and anything that brings better candidates into the mix is a good thing.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 11:52 AM) where a team is lucky to have two good starters and hacks like Erstad, Uribe, and all those rag bullpen arms out there on a daily basis. Expansion has diluted the starting talent more than salaries. I actually think salaries would have the opposite effect, with the higher salaries attracting athletes to the sport that may have concentrated on basketball or football. I agree with everything else you wrote.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 01:34 PM) There's quite a bit that the government doesn't share with the press both good and bad. Just wondering if and how they share it with y'all.

Doing stupid things "in the moment" has been going on for millenniums. It isn't specific to males or females, gay or straight, Roman or Greek.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 08:18 PM) The firefighters union is supporting a Dem over Giuliani? shocking mr_genius agreeing with the liberal media over the brave men and women of the NYPD, shocking.

I always struggle to articulate this. I believe Bush should be allowed to nominate a hard core conservative whose ideology closely matches his. That is why out Constitution calls for the President to nominate. I also believe that same ideology should not be a reason to not confirm someone. Their qualifications, character, morals, and ethics should come into play, but not their ideology. I disagree with these "litmus" tests for positions. If Congress is that upset about this particular crime, and I do believe it is a crime, then write a new law which is very specific, do not use a confirmation as the opportunity to legislate. And before someone labels me a hypocrite, I'd say the same thing if a Dem was President.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/30/...in3428882.shtml Interesting story on leaving products on "stand by"

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 10:39 AM) They should be asking him 'If we make waterboarding illegal, will you prosecute people who do it', not 'do you think it is illegal'? It isn't his job to make the laws, but to enforce them. Congress is supposed to be making the laws. grow some stones, write a specific law, and be done with it. I thought there are already laws on the books against torture, asking if this fits the definition of the law seems like a valid question. Now I wish they were more interested in his thought process and how he arrived at his decision, than the actual decision. Ultimately that is more important.

Yet it didn't put hookers and intravenous drug use out of business. It also gave the wacko Christian groups a new target to attack and use to raise money, after the decline of communism.

The government says it is real, other people disagree. I guess I have to ask why would the government lie? Would this not be considered a success and make President Bush look better?

I just realized we've been living with this for over twenty years. Many people here have known AIDS all their lives.

And we believe Williams? Probably true, we believe him, but that doesn't mean another GM will believe it. And would we want Williams believing everything he reads in the newspaper?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 09:34 AM) So the technology doesn't work in reverse? They can't forward the local information to Washington, where they actually work? I'd much rather see the Reps and Senators in committees and meetings working together to come up with ideas to actually fix the problems, then seeing them at home at $1000 a plate hot dog luncheons. To me the negotiations that need to take place to fix the countries problems are more critical in being in a face to face setting, then anything that is going to be done in their district. Being in their district isn't going to solve the compromises and negotiations that need to take place in order to actually fix the problems. They have not come up with a technology yet that sovles the intracacies of those types of mass human interactions. If you want to utilize staffs and such, it is much easier for them to send relevant information on to their one rep/sen than it is for all of those reps and sens to negotiation the finer points of immigration reform or social security reform with each other. Going home early is just a cop out so that they can ignore the problems and fund raise for their re-election. I agree with almost everything you mention. It's the solution where we differ. Sometimes working longer and harder doing the exact same thing the exact same way is the solution. Sometimes it is stepping back and changing what you are doing. I'd like to see what stepping back and doing something different accomplishes. If they use the day to play golf with lobbyists, it's a waste. If they use it productively, it's a plus. Yet one more way we can evaluate our elected officials. Perhaps emailing our Congressman and asking what their Friday schedule is would be interesting. I hope an enterprising journalist does just that. But remember, we vote. They cannot ignore the problems if we do not allow them to. They have to rely on staffs, there are too many bills, over too wide a range of topics, for them to personally review and understand each one. Like any CEO, they have various levels of staffers with increasing levels of responsibility and earned trust. And just like a CEO, if he is out of the building the work still goes on, and it is that end result that matters. So having staffers that can reduce a 250 page bill into a 25 page summary are invaluable. The Senator can read that anywhere. I assume we can separate the hundreds of mundane bills from the few critical like Social Security, Iraq, etc. I agree having them out fund raising and campaigning is a waste of our time and detracts from the important stuff. It is also the most compelling reason in my mind for term limits. I also agree that there is a time and a place for face to face meetings. I believe they should also spend time in their district offices. It is a balance of time and priorities. I think it is a cop out and an easy excuse to require them to stay nice and cozy in Washington instead of getting off their asses and visit their districts. Not 100% of the time, but 20% feels ok to me. And I guess an argument could be made that campaigning puts them in front of their constituents, which accomplishes partially that goal. I doubt the effectiveness, but a little is better than none, and far better than another lunch with a lobbyist. As for the technology in reverse, you already answered that. There are great reasons for face to face and great reasons for email, phones, etc. Both need to be employed. 80% face to face in Washington and 20% face to face in their district.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 09:20 AM) How exactly do you work on the details of a bill when no one is in Washington? Their staffs play a huge role. They email, call, send memos. You don't think they are roaming the halls taking meetings? They are spread out in various office buildings around Washington. They convine to vote. Same thing if they are travelling. It's 2007, we have the technology that replaces face to face meetings. I assume their district offices have the technology to work effectively.

Exactly what I've been saying. Results, not hours is the key. If you think they have failed because they are not spending enough time together, in Washington, then OK, this is a bad idea. I think they fail when they lose touch with the American public. When they believe the average Americans are the people they see everyday in Washington, they have a warped sense of who we are. They get cozy and comfortable. I'm not advocating working less hours, I believe if they replace the Washington hours with district hours, we will benefit. No more theoretical citizens this bill is going to help, have them meet actual people with real problems. I've always worked jobs where the hardest working people are doing extra work away from the office. The sales reps who travel the streets after working hours canvasing new customers, who are searching the internet for leads, who are out in the community making contacts. Chaining them to a desk for an extra ten hours is not productive. Much like out elected officials should be doing.