Texsox

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 12:19 PM) Two more things. One, one of these guys' name is Brian Hall. I'd have to find my book, but if I recall, and if its the same one, I think he was on Everest in '96 during the killing season (see Krakauer's book Into Thin Air, or Boukreev's follow up book, I forget the name). If that's him, and he survived that, he's probably pretty tough. Wasn't it Rob Hall on Everest? That stove and fuel will be their lifelines. I wonder if they brought two, remember the group split up. Into Thin Air is excellent. DId you also read his book Into the Wild? It's the idiot that went to Alaska with almost nothing and died of exposure? A simple map would have saved him.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 02:15 AM) Falsely accusing someone of rape should carry the punishment that rape itself does. Of course, this would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt along with proving intent. Linking the punishment to the severity of the accusation seems like a nice balance. I'd go for changes in the laws along those lines. I wonder if judges already do this on an informal basis when sentencing. QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 13, 2006 -> 09:29 PM) I know this is off topic, but I make reference to the Duke case during this particular argument. People who are against abortion say they only favor in the cases of rape and incest. If the government takes away a woman's choice to choose, how many innocent men would be victims of false rape charges? Great point, and one I've never heard made before. There usually isn't time for a trial to determine if it was rape or not. Plus would the abortion law only stand if the person was found and convicted.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 11:38 AM) I agree "secular progressive" an apt description. Certainly it describes me, and I kind of like it better than "secular humanist." The issue, of course, is where people on the right or left of the term manage to steer the connotations of the term. As a proud liberal it's interesting to hear people on the right try to use that word as a smear word, and this is the same way. Ditto when people try to paint "atheists" or "evolutionists" or "Darwinists" in a negative light by definition. As identifying categories without any meaning being loaded by a speaker, those are all apt descriptions of groups of people proud to wear those titles. And the same can certainly be said about the way many on the left use the term "Christian conservative" negatively though there are plenty of good people who wear that identifier proudly. Excellent points. I wonder if the current need to categorize everyone is a recent development as we try and work with so much information. It seems like we try and lump everything into a category and then dismiss or defend based on that. There is no doubt that we are bombarded with way more information today than a generation ago.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 09:06 PM) total side note... I've read about people who know how to "move off the grid" and live, work, and start new lives. It's an interesting thing to look into, purely scholastic reasons, of course. The government will do it for you and provide all the documentation and even pay for everything. First off, infiltrate the mob and become a trusted member . . .

BTW, I was just thinking if he loses some of his brain function, he may be a Republican anyway. Alternate punchline for conservatives: He's a Democrat, if he loses some of his brain function, how will we know? His heart is still beating. I kid because I care™

From the inflatable decoration thread . . . QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 10:35 AM) I have an inflatable Christmas decoration. She looks like an angel. Her mouth is shaped in an "O" shape like she's starting to sing 'Oh Holy Night!' or 'Oh Come All Ye Faithful'. I put a Santa hat on her. Neighbors got upset for some reason.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 10:35 AM) I have an inflatable Christmas decoration. She looks like an angel. Her mouth is shaped in an "O" shape like she's starting to sing 'Oh Holy Night!' or 'Oh Come All Ye Faithful'. I put a Santa hat on her. Neighbors got upset for some reason.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 10:01 AM) I agree with your points, Tex. But to be clear, we have done this before. WWII internments of Japanese comes to mind. Actually that was Americans, which makes it even worse. I understand the complexities involved here. They aren't a standing military in the classic sense, and they are committing their crimes on foreign soil. We have allowed courts in those countries to try their citizens for crimes committed in those countries. I don't like that solution. I don't like some international tribunal either. We have two court systems set up in America. I believe both can offer a fair and speedy trial. Some here don't trust our civilian courts to do the right thing, I hope then you don't trust them to kill anyone via capital punishment. I believe the least wrong, or best correct venue, is a military court. But they should also be given the same protections any other enemy is given and the same I would demand of a foreign country holding Americans.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 09:35 AM) Yes, if said American kept company with folks who pledged his allegiance to killing innocents. How about the civilian who was working for a company in Russia setting up a radar system. He was using a GPS unit to lay out the tower, was arrested on suspicion if being a CIA spy. Should he have been locked up without any process? How about reporters covering these wars? They get picked up in the field and just locked up without Geneva protections or civilian trials? Bottom line, the US is now saying we can lock someone up forever, without any trials, without Geneva protections. Never in our history have we done this. Is this the America way of life we are promoting around the world? Doesn't this sound like something a third world dictator would be doing? We talk about justice and fairness. Of freedoms. If we are going to hold ourselves up as the bastions of freedoms and rights, we need to try these people in some court of law. Currently we have two classifications. Civilian and military, Pick one for them and lets go. Or seriously get busy and declare a third classification. Some here want to think the same military that shot Pat Tillman is perfect and only picked up terrorists and couldn't possibly have made a mistake. That by being picked up they must be guilty. I don't trust our government that much. Let's get these people to trial, convict all that are guilty, and show the world that the American process works. Right now, by locking people up in black holes, condoning torture, we look like the people we are fighting against.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 11:16 PM) These people are foreginers and terrorist suspects to boot and they were captured on foregin soil. They have no business in a U.S. civilian courtroom. PERIOD! If the left would stop holding up the process with their lawsuits these people could get their trial and we could be done with them one way or the other. I'm fine with that, then give them Geneva convention rights, allow the Red Cross in, etc. and have military trials. Have civilians ever been tried in a military court? If Americans were being held in a foreign country, and told they would not receive trials of any kind, that they could be locked up forever without contact with anyone, you would be ok with that?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 15, 2006 -> 01:38 AM) Insulting personal attack lines? WTF are you talking about? It's well known that left is for more federal government and the right is more for states rights. There is nothing personal or insulting or attack mode about it. It's a fact. However, if you consider someone pointing out the left point of view to you to be an insulting personal attack, then maybe you ought reexamine your points of view. The right never did care about the United States federal government. GMAB It is a balancing act, was from the beginning, and will be forever. It is not about caring 100% for one over the other. But then by acknowledging that your snarky comments can't be made. You always find a way to make little snarky comments about the left.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 07:27 PM) Did the White Sox have the best record in the AL from wire to wire? (remember, the Yankees didn't have to deal with divisions) I think what Balta is asking, is at some point in the season did a West or East coast team have a better record. We know they won the division wire to wire, but did they always have the highest win percentage in the AL every day of the season?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 11:42 AM) I just heard a weather forcast for Mt. Hood. Brutal conditions coming tonight. Winds up to 130 mph with plummeting temperatures. This doesn't look good at all. The two guys who went for help are probably in a lot of trouble unless they found a snow cave also. At this point, they have almost zero chance of survival if they didn't have stoves, fuel, and great sleeping bags with. Linda Young - All Headline News Staff Writer Cooper Spur, OR (AHN) - There was renewed hope on Thursday of finding three climbers alive who have been stranded on Oregon's Mount Hood by snow, ice and gale force winds since Sunday. Kelly James' cell phone carrier reported it had picked up a signal from his phone on Tuesday night. James' phone had been turned off earlier and officials said that picking up the signal indicated the phone was turned back on. Officials speculate that James, 48, was turning the cell phone off to conserve the battery. In addition, T-Mobile reported that a call was initiated from James' cell phone on Monday morning. "My heart was in my throat when I heard that, because if it's true it means Kelly is alive, and he has his wits about him," the AP reported that his brother, Frank James of Orlando, Fla., said at a news conference. The Hood River County Sheriff's Office said T-Mobile continued to signal, or "ping," the cell phone Wednesday, but the last signal received was Tuesday night, according to AP reports. Rescuers have brought equipment and helicopters to the site, but 100-mile per hour winds and ice, along with snow have hampered their efforts to search the 11,239 foot high mountain.

Around here we have hundreds of thousands of retirees. Store bought decorations?! Too expensive. They collect their garbage all year and figure out how to light it up. My favorite was the 8oz clear drink glasses, glued together and lights stuck inside like a giant lighted ornament. I've seen beer can santas, soda bottle elves, and more coffee filter snowflakes than I can count.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 09:23 AM) I brought the Feds into it based on your remark that it should be a person from the same party. The only way to implement that across the board is for there to be a federal statute. I countered by saying the people of the state should decide how and who their representatives are selected, and in this case, that is exactly how it is done. The fact that legislature, which passed the law, and the governor, which makes the decision based on that law, are all elected by the people of the state ... that blows your 'will of the people' argument right out of the water. It's all about the states governing themselves. But, then, the left never did care for that point of view. State laws can be changed, and are, when people decide there is a better way. I agree in this case you have to follow the existing law. Nice bait with that last line. Show me anywhere where liberals cared any less about states governing themselves? It's insulting personal attack lines like that which start stupid arguments around here and show ignorance of what people actually believe. Evil, that's what I am saying. I don't like it when it goes either way. I believe if it happened more often states would change their laws. But as it is, it doesn't happen that often and from a party standpoint, it will even out over time. Dems will replace Reps and Reps will replace Dems. But the evening will happen collectively on a state by state basis, voters will not have a guarantee that the replacement will be even close to the views of the person they elected.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 10:45 AM) Sorry, I don't care about the human rights of terrorists. They want to kill us. That's all I need to know. I don't care about terrorists either, I do care that we figure out who is a terrorist and who isn't. I don't care if due process occurs in the military courtroom or civilian US courts. But there needs to be a process that determines their fate. The right doesn't want them in civilian courts, but doesn't want to call them military either. So they won't give them a trial in a civilian courtroom. The right wants to try civilians in a military court. Gee that makes sense. The left agrees they aren't military and wants to try them in civilian courts. They didn't break laws in the US but the left wants to try them in a US civilian court. Gee, that makes sense. Both sides are preventing trials from happening. IMHO call them enemy combatants, follow the Geneva conventions.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 08:38 AM) Agreed. As you stated, this is a representative of the state and the people, and should not involve the federal government. Glad to hear it. I wonder what that means. How would requiring selecting someone with different views honor the voter's intent? I don't see anyone here mentioning anything about Federal. My point is honor the intent of the voters and select someone similar in views. So far no one has tackled this from the voter's perspective.

she fought a great fight and changed a very large organization forever, and may I editorialize, for the better. for her family and friends.

QUOTE(knightni @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 03:14 AM) Bill Veeck, Carlton Fisk, Bill Melton, Joe Crede, Frank Thomas... right? So close. That's Willllbur Wood not Bill Melton. He is one of the best pitchers I ever saw in a White Sox uniform. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Wood Interesting factoid, he's the only pitcher in baseball to have started both games of a double header. He lost both

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 08:19 AM) The people didn't elect a party they elected a person. They also elected the state legislature and the governor. Johnson had 'successful' brain surgery last night. And shouldn't there be some effort or protection that the same type of person be selected as the replacement? If they elected a Pro-Life, war hawk why should the replacement be a Pro-Choice dove? How are the voters better served?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 07:12 AM) That's a pretty good summary. Yes it is, but allow me to toss a log on The reason to not give them a trial is the government does not trust our legal system. Pure and simple. The same system we use to put US citizens to death, can not be used to try these people. Isn't that interesting. The same people here who cheer when some US citizen is given a fair trial and sentenced to death, somehow don't trust the same system in this case. And I don't buy the "they don't have rights" argument, we offer those rights to anyone who commits a crime on American soil. If the system is robust and sound enough to use it to kill US Citizens, then why isn't it good enough for these people?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 02:24 AM) Regardless of what the law is for that state ... election, appointment, bound by party, whatever ... The state law is the important thing ... The law passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor. There is no way the feds should have a say so in who represents the people of a state. So to say that it should be bound by party ... just because it might change the balance of power in the senate ... is bunk. Unless, the state law deems it be that way. I am not saying the feds should. I am saying that the voters in a state have elected someone. The obviously want someone like that to represent them in that position and at that time. I think we can also agree that there are fundamental differences between the parties. The best chance that the voter's choice would continue is to have a member of that same party representing them. And this goes both ways, and I am speaking in a general sense. But if the voters elected a conservative Senator, how are they better served when the Governor appoints a liberal to fill his shoes, or vice versa? And of course I am not advocating a change in this situation, the law is the law. But I'd like to read a counter explaining how the voters, who elected someone with a given ideology and from a certain party, benefit when someone from the other party, and presumably a different ideology, is selected?

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 07:04 AM) it's hard to hold back my internet love for you.... but when I found out YOU were playing for the other team....LOOK OUT! plus, it'll help my chances for next years election. I am working on my Reaganesque hard of hearing routine. The conservatives love that.

Follow up article Linked So Swift is busy cleaning house, the government (ICE program) tells them to stop, then a month later conducts a raid? The laws and the government agencies are really f***ed up in all this.