Texsox

No one has mentioned this, and perhaps it is the one thing that could make us slightly optimistic, but probably not up to Steve's level. Maybe, just maybe, the team will play better for him. Stranger things have happened. But he's not the second coming of Montana, hell he's not even the punky QB.

The Cubs only win today to make losing tomorrow more painful. That is my mantra, and it has held true for almost 100 years. They will fail, amd it will be spectacular.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:49 PM) She just needs to come out of the closet and say that she is 100% for the redistrubution of wealth from "rich" to poor and that she is a socialist commie. That's about where she is, without saying it. Whatcha trying to catch with that bait?

Boy Scout memorabilia, mostly patches. I just sold one on eBay for $355 I picked up for $15. My collection would probably fetch a few thousand dollars. I also have some odds and ends, postcards, pins, statues, prints, books, but my main collecting interest are those patches. BTW, at any one moment on eBay there will be close to 10,000 Boy Scout items for sale.

Let him have fun and realize he raises the baseball IQ of Cub fans by cheering . . .

May the God of your choice bless you.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 11:49 AM) It won't happen. Stealing this from some pathetic hippy filled liberal blog, which I think is absolutely correct. I can dream, can't I?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 11:24 AM) I think the media is getting the script down for how to embarrass Fred Thompson. The instructions are: "1. Ask him a question. 2. Let him answer." He is running for President, how is he going to keep up with current events? More liberal media crushing the man.

How many people have had their pictures taken in the "Craig Stall"? It may be the state's top tourist draw.

The Dems have Rock Stars running, that's for certain. It would be the most incredible politcal event of our lifetime if the "Big Three" arrrived at the convention with a floor fight for the nomination. I get goose bumps thinking about it.

Of course when Hammer Time '08 is announced, I'm all over that one

I'll take McCain unless some of the Goperheads doesn't think I'm GOP enough

When you wrote career like Jon, would that mean trade him during what should be his best seasons? I've been so down on even thinking about the next generation of players based on the last couple decades. With the reality of needing to trade future for immediate needs at times, a prospect hanging around to have his career year with the team that drafted him is so rare. Then a guy signing his third contract with the same team seems equally rare.

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 09:06 AM) He went off to school today in a blue shirt that had a baseball flying across it. If only our world leaders could learn from us... a tip of the parenting cap to you

I was thinking it may be interesting and informative to have posters follow a campaign and adopt a candidate. The main guys are easy enough to follow, but some of the small candidates always seem to have some great agenda items that get incorporated into party platforms. I'm not certain if we would have individual threads for each candidate, I know we are trying to avoid that, but maybe under this format, or even lock them like Nuke's diary.

I assumed that one of the campaigns alerted the AP, etc. to the quote, but I didn't consider the quote may have been planted. But you state a great case for how it could have been planted. And political dirty tricks have been going on forever.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:36 AM) Like any other veto, it can be overriden by 2/3 of the houses. And my suggestion is less broad in power than a plain old line item veto that some have suggested. That is the first time I've heard that suggested and IMHO an excellent proposal. I'd like to hear the debate against, and how it differs from the usual things brought up in a straight line item veto debate. Gridlock would be my first thought. Then would it eliminate half the pork? And if one party would be facing having their pork vetoed, what would that do to budget negotiations?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:31 AM) Another way to control this that people have suggested is line item veto power for the President. I think maybe a restricted version of that - budget item veto power. In other words, the President has line item veto power over any given spending item, and can say for those items he/she chooses, no money allowed. I'm uneasy with the Executive Branch having that much power. I see the benefits, but like any changes, there isn't a free lunch.

I don't think anyone is proposing that health care plan. I keep hearing choice has to be a part of it. The only ones who are talking about choice getting taken away are the ones opposed to any form of national health care.

And here's the trillion dollar question, place a group squarely in the middle of all this. Would they stand up and say, you have our votes if you cut this crap out? Or would they say, we need $150,000,000 for this road, a new community center, a research grant for our local college, and so on and so on?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:20 AM) You're absolutely right. But I also don't hear Re-pube-licans running around telling me that they have to raise taxes to fund 85 billion pet projects either, during this next election cycle. Both parties disgust me, the Democrats much more so. Of course not, the Re-pube-licans will jiust borrow the money and fund their pet project. And convince you someone else will be paying for it down the road. Both sides suck. Pick your poison.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:13 AM) From what I understand, some parts of the body hurt a lot more than others. I was with a friend who had her ankle done, it was her third tat as I recall, she said she will never get another, it was 100X worse than her lower back and *****.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:08 AM) I Soxy. Don't we all . . . I have one on my butt that says Exit Only, in case I was ever passed out drunk . . .

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:12 AM) What you are getting at with voting GOP because you want less government in your life, is why I have voted Republican more often than Democrat (for both Prez and US Congress seats) over the years. But here is the thing - if you pay close attention, I think you will find that the GOP no longer can say that with a straight face. They have been far too busy this decade telling people what they can and can't do in their bedrooms, who they can and cannot associate with, running up huge deficits and spending far more than they take in, intruding in their lives without the fuss of a warrant, getting all up in arms about the occasional nipple on TV (while ignoring violence on it), and stealing money from what 70% of the country wants to spend it on in favor of a war supported by only 30%. That's not less government - its more government. Frankly, neither party can say they are the smaller government party anymore. I hope one of them tries to regain that ground, but right now, I just don't see it. Amen And let me add, I miss tax and spend Democrats. Now we have spend and spend in both parties. Give me the golden years when Dems had to get past a skeptical GOP party who would shut down these spending bills unless they were funded. No one is guarding the treasury. Not only do we not demand they only spend what we send them, we demand they borrow a trillion more and give it to us.

Any proposal that increases revenue, no matter the manner in which it is being done, comes back to balancing the budget and the fairest way of doing it. I dislike the inherent dishonesty in a system where we pay dozens of different taxes. Too many are hidden here and there and we never see the amount. I'm thinking the dozen different property taxes, sales taxes, capital gains, inheritance, gift tax, and could go on and on. This also comes down to balancing our own checkbooks and the cost of living in the US. I agree that choice should be the part of any health plan. What is being left out are the millions of working Americans who have no choice. If we can put together a national health plan that is more cost effective than my current plan, I'd go for it. If we could put together a national health plant that helps small business keep their employees, that is a great thing. I have know through the years small business owners who lost some great employees because they needed benefits that could not be provided. I don't think rhetoric defines any group, you have to look at what gets put into action. I appreciate both parties for having a far ranging debate with many points of view expressed. I think in end, a better product comes out. I disagree with a small amount of actual laws and policies that have come out the past 10 years. I've disagreed with a lot of people's opinions during that debate. Focus on the end result, not the debate leading up. We're all about compromise in this country.