Texsox

I believe it's a legal matter. If the party knew that law enforcement was alerted, I would not hold them responsible.

moved out, moving on.

On the surface, I always have liked a plan like SS. Then the discussion turns to individual rights and things get confused for me. I belive disclosure of who is spending for whom, is a great tool, but not always an accurate predictor of the candidate's views.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 2, 2006 -> 08:20 AM) Here is the problem with that argument (sorry, I'm totally budging into this argument)... There are some dynamics in politics and government, and their relationships with private citizens and businesses, where goal alignment creates a permanent dissonance. For example... I don't think institutional health care (hospitals, EMS and accordant funding) should be allowed to be privatized. Why? Because the goal of private business (for-profit) is to make money. And that primary goal will never be aligned with providing good health care. (***Please don't start arguing about health care, which is a whole different animal - I was just making a parallel) Looking now at the election puzzle... spending gobs of private money on electing candidates is never going to allow for true political process to take place. So, for me, the compromise (private spending caps, evening out TV and radio time) allows for fundraising and ingenuity, but it prevents big brother from meddling in the outcome of elections. Its a balance between free speech and a good election process. But if I, as an individual, want to take an ad out telling everyone why I think Mike would be a great school board member, shouldn't I be allowed to do that? Who should be stopping me? The candidate? I won't tell him. The government? That would be censoring me. Should this site be barred from talking about his candidacy? Also, wouldn't we be crippling some industries that get a big boost every election cycle. What happens to the sign shops, printing shops, etc. Somebody is making all that red, white, and blue paint,

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 2, 2006 -> 07:01 AM) If you really want to protect against being fed the same crap during the election cycle, this bill doesn't matter. If you really want to change things, get rid of private funding for races. Set it up so the government gives a base amount for an election cycle of a particular race, and type of office. After you have spent that amount, you are done. That way the race becomes about message and debate, instead of who can raise and spend the most money. How do you respond to the people that say you are infringing on my right to free speech if I privately fund a commercial for my candidate? Think someone like the Swiftees?

QUOTE(Soxy @ Sep 28, 2006 -> 03:14 PM) Would it cross a line to ask the person you share a lab with to CHEW WITH HER DAMN MOUTH SHUT? If she's hot, I'd never say a word . . . in fact, I'd think it was cute.

I can't watch any single show on a regular basis and that one needs continuity or all is lost. I caught maybe three or four out of 7 or 8 episodes and was just lost.

I feel the need to point out that the two major political parties have tried to make this a Coke vs. Pepsi world. To blindly boo or cheer based on team uniforms is a grave disservice to America. The first party faithfulls to clean up their party will be in power a long time, but both are afraid. Dems have to clean up Dems and GOPs need to clean up GOPs.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Oct 1, 2006 -> 10:21 PM) I'm still trying to get my head around this statement. Wow. IMO no band has aged worse than Styx. When I was a kid I liked Styx. Later in life (5 years ago or so) I decided to buy Paradise Theater, as I was convinced it was a great album. Wow...so...dang...cheesy. I haven't gone back to it since. You Renegade, you were Fooling yourself to not realize it was a Grand Illusion? These are the Best of Times and before you say it, yes, I have Too Much Time on my Hands.

Did you hear Foley didn't use bookmarks? He prefered to bend over the pages . . . QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 1, 2006 -> 08:15 PM) Hey look - slime comes in both blue and red. I'm shocked. What you are saying is sometimes Dems and Reps get on the same page . . .

Term limits are wrong, for any office. The public should be allowed to vote for who they choose. If they really like someone, they should be allowed to elect them for ever and ever.

QUOTE(Tigers Fan @ Sep 26, 2006 -> 08:01 AM) They need to take care of the Twins in that final series so we can take the Division, beat the A's, let the Twins take care of the yanks, Santana gets tired from pitching twice in that series, we beat the Twins, and then Murder the Mets and then set fire to cars so the whole country can make fun of Detroit again... As if they ever took a break.. fixed your post for you. I know you are new. BTW, you may mention we should be pulling for Maggs. He's really loved around here.

Let the young guys play.

Too bad the payroll was so high or the team could have really made some money. We need a payroll dump in the worst way.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Sep 26, 2006 -> 12:22 PM) Because Clinton is a saint to the leftist mainstream media and Bush is not. Of course we know the only real Saints are Republicans . . . Shall we toss Reagan pause while the GOP faithful bow, remove their hats, and offer a moment of silnce> into the President as saint discussion? Clinton pales in comparision to the biggest spender and appeaser we've ever seen.

A's Tigers Twins Cards Philly/Dodger Padres Mets Yankees

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Sep 26, 2006 -> 06:56 AM) Yeah, I figured that, but mine was meant as "non green". I thought he chose a lot of material that worked with his limited vocal range and style. I was a bit of a fan during the late 70s early 80s.

They are all potentially bad and the degree of better or worse doesn't mean a lot. Plus Iraq is way down the threat list of countries, and I don't think it was ever really that high. Put another way. Rank all the countries of the world as potential problems, and regardless of leadership Iraq doesn't rise or fall very far. As long as terrorists operate outside the law, a nation's leadership will not affect them much. And again, it will be by degrees.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 10:54 PM) Now that is simply not true. Whether you're on the right or on the left, the fact is there are 2 dramatically different approaches to stopping Al Qaeda as a threat. The Right thinks staying in Iraq is the key part of a solution, I certainly don't. I think things like funding port security, airport security, first responders, etc., is more important than wiretapping everyone in America, and I think that torturing prisoners only makes things worse for the U.S. But whether you agree with me or not, there are very significant choices at stake based on who is in power in this country in the next few years, which will have major impacts on the security of this nation. Terrorists operate outside of the law. In a democrat Iraq, the good people of the country could elect the very people we want out. Our security will be affected by events and countries all over the globe. Iraq is small in many ways. On a global scale, I don't see how you can say major. Major to me will be Korea, China, Pakistan, India. Then we can list countries from Bolivia to Iran. One country? Not major. And I agree 100%, anti terrorist measures at home are more effective.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 05:17 PM) Live worms still wiggle in your throat. Just so you know. As do minnows . . . The Aquarium Bar in Fox Lake (anyone know if it's still around?) had a club. Biting the head off was the ultimate prize. No line jumping, you still had to wait for the bartender to bring you a beer.

I have to be fair to our elected leaders. There are bad decisions, like I shouldn't have had that sushi from a street vendor in Mexico, and there was this decision. I am glad I didn't have to make it. Almost everywhere in the country the citizens of this country felt we had to go to war. It seemed like the right thing to do. Perhaps it was a giant pr campaign, perhaps it was real. I could see myself leaning towards war. It was the "safe" decision. Having said that, with new information, we need to make a new decision. We need to stop bankrupting our country for theirs. We need to stop sending Americans to die for a freedom they do not want. No matter who is in power it will not change our security.

I always thought of Rush as more mainstream, vanilla, rockers. Figuring everybody liked them and they didn't have enough coolness to be in. I'm surprised that people would hate their music.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 08:07 PM) So do Tom Petty's. I should have put that in green.

QUOTE(ZoSo @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 03:52 PM) I could do that but I don't wanna. Seriously, that is amazing. I don't know how he gets full chord sounds with just his feet. Never underestimate human potential where there is a lot of time on one's hands. Ouch! But you ain't got no legs, Lieutenant Dan. QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) Here's a link to probably the same guy No Jim, there are two armless guitar players walking around. Let's count them all. Will all the armless guitar players please raise their . . . I mean, let's give a han . . . oops. His vocals suck