Texsox

Nice.

I can't believe we could be comparing Dylan and Rush. Two very different acts.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 3, 2006 -> 12:13 PM) Wouldn't "Doing the right thing" have involved not letting it get to this point? Wasn't the FBI alerted? At that point you have to trust the American law and order system to work.

Hammerin' Hank >>>>>> Bonds Bonds + steroids = more home runs than Hank. And, he'll have the record for a very long time. A-Rod has a chance, but I don't see him playing enough years.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Oct 3, 2006 -> 12:12 PM) Some time this month - probably around mid-month, the number of Americans will surpass 300 million. And we can thank President Bush for this historic event by keeping us safe from terrorists and promoting marriage as a union of one man and one woman.

Depending on how the next 60 or 70 years treats you, maybe the flip side of bicycle race would work

That's exactly what should be happening. The rank and file need to demand changes when something like this happens. Let the Dems spew all they want, do the right thing and the American public will respond favorably.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Oct 3, 2006 -> 11:44 AM) Another One Bites The Dust I was just going to mention that in my first post. You are so predictible girl.

I was thinking about Kid Gleason's comment in the Rush thread about how influential Rush was to metal bands and got to thinking, how often are bands cited as being an influence, yet they do not have commercial success.Do musicians, painters, and other artists have a propensity to be influenced by non mainstream acts?

Linky I'd have to go with Feelin' Alright by Joe Cocker, which did not make the list. Perhaps My Generation.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 3, 2006 -> 09:03 AM) Here's the thing, if the Dems were in this situation, I'd tear up my nonexistent Democrat card. What it appears the leadership did - protect one of their own who is a sexual predator rather than even so much as investigate it when they knew something was up in 2001 - this is the whole party. And I wish it wasn't. I have to call a b.s. on you my friend. You wouldn't and here's why. Which is easier to give up? A. Your values B. Dem leadership IMHO, the leaders come and go, the values should stay somewhat consistent. So the GOP leadership may, and probably did, fall down on this one. I wouldn't expect a dyed in the wool conservative to suddenly abandon pro-life, pro-death(if the government decides the person should die), freedom to own and use guns, run up huge debts to "stimulate the economy", positions to embrace Democratic ideals. So you soldier on, perhaps right letters, or move to elect better candidates from your party. But you wouldn't suddenly stop thinking and start chanting ditto Rush and pushing for a ban on gay marriage.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Oct 3, 2006 -> 09:14 AM) 11 hours and counting of no power at home. I hope we do not lose all the food we have in the freezer... WalMart (at least here) sells dry ice. A couple dollars worth would keep things frozen

It's BUSHKU, poppie! Cyberpoetry as from the glib lips of the Global Village Idiot Click "New Bushku" below to create a Bushku. Bushku use a 3-5-3 syllable form, 'cause 5-7-5 is too darn complexicated, Laura. http://www.everypoet.com/bushku/default.htm

At some point in time, the parties instilled an us or them mentality which is great for them and bad for us. I do believe the GOP was much better at this. Any bad news is shrugged off as liberal media bias, write a bill that is unconstitutional, blame it on activist judges. We've become obsessed fans, not critical consumers of "leadership". We will see some improvements when Dems clean up their party and the GOP faithful clean up theirs. The Dems can't clean up the GOP and the GOP can't clean up the Dems.

For the record I received my $50 quickly, like within an hour and also my bonus $25 was deposited. I played the .15 limit game for a few hours and quickly reached 500 hands and just as quickly the bonus was paid. No fuss. I also decided that I was going to pull out the $150 or so I had. Looking at the various options, and getting drunk one night, I said f*** it and blew it all with a final all in with a A-K-10 bluffing into a full house doesn't work Now that I have that out of my system, back to the real use of the internet, porn and pirated music. A couple haikus4you late moist gentle rats defecate, passions sail, stones ponder redly, calm captive rings, songbird tugging lakes grieving, singing crying phantom peeps

They just added some responsibilities to my already busy schedule. I will be the new COPE Director. Looking forward to hanging from a rope 50 feet above ground.

Thanks.

The Top 7 Things That Tick Bill Clinton Off 7> What's eating Bill Clinton? I don't know, but the Republicans already have Kenneth Starr looking into it. 6> McDonald's refuses to bring back the McRib sandwich. 5> Rosie got the job he wanted on "The View." 4> Chubby teen girls who don't know who he is. 3> Failing to get the lead role in "Supersize Me." 2> He was rejected for "Dancing with the Stars." and the Number 1 Thing That Ticks Bill Clinton Off... 1> Monica recently gave up "smoking." [ Copyright 2006 by Chris White ] [ http://www.topfive.com ]

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 3, 2006 -> 01:29 AM) Newt's new excuse for the GOP to try. They didn't want to be seen as "gaybashers." http://mediamatters.org/items/200610010003 So, banning gay marriage isn't gaybashing but outing a sexual predator is. Note taken! The GOP should not have to be spinning this. There are bad people in both parties. It sickens me when the good people feel like they are shamed by someone like this. Some criminals are able to hide stuff better than others. Most people are always looking for the good in people and it is difficult to believe the worse. If someone in Montana is now going to vote for a Dem because of this, that is just stupid in my book.

Covers? I'd bet the Beatles >>> Dylan. I'd guess Yesterday alone would come close.

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?