Texsox

Racism is in all corners of our society. Some corners are hidden better than some others. It is impossible to label one group as more or less racist.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2006 -> 12:13 PM) Aren't they actually the ESPN Thursday nite game of teh week? That could be why as well. Not according to my Glenn G. Windows Wallpaper Schedule

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ May 18, 2006 -> 11:59 AM) Well I don't think it'd be the best idea really either. I just felt like posted a thought that went through my mind. Yeah the Mexicans would complain about militarizing the border and I don't really think we should care about that complaint as much as we do. border patrol and customs both work the bridges. And it's the citizens down here that aren't too excited about living in a militarized zone.

I do look forward to the SI Cover 100 YEARS OF FUTILITY, perhaps a special collectors edition. So many years, their sucking worse was all we had.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2006 -> 11:41 AM) And that's the problem. Start fining companies $50,000 or so per illegal and the problem literally goes away. I agree 100% if you are meaning finding employees being paid off the books no matter if it's an illegal, grandpa trying to cheat social security, or someone hiring a babysitter. Throw the book at them, close the business, garnish their assetts. It will also encourage people to turn in coworkers who they fear may be illegals. If you knew your company could be put out of business for undocumented workers, you'd be in HR making certain everyone is legal and you wouldn't work for a company like that. I disagree if that would also include when an employer discovers that John Doe, who they have a social security card and driver's license on file, turns out to be John Smith, who does not have documentation. The company is a victim of fraud, and I don't see how to hold them responsible.

Now that the Sox have a World Series win, I can handle Cub success a little better. No way I wanted to have them win one before the Sox. I also always remember these are, in many cases, the same fans who sit between us at Bulls, Hawks, and Bears games and we high five them and have a good time. I've always guessed it was all those summer day games in the sun that cause them to be temporarily insane and rooting for the Tribune's

>If you ever testify in court, you might wish you could have been as sharp >as >this policeman. > > > >He was being cross-examined by a defense attorney during a felony trial. >The >lawyer was trying to undermine the policeman's credibility.... > > > >Q: "Officer -- did you see my client fleeing the scene?" > > > >A: "No sir. But I subsequently observed a person matching the description >of >the offender, running several blocks away." > > > >Q: "Officer -- who provided this description?" > > > >A: "The officer who responded to the scene." > > > >Q: "A fellow officer provided the description of this so-called offender. >Do >you trust your fellow officers?" > > > >A: "Yes, sir. With my life." > > > >Q: "With your life? Let me ask you this then officer. Do you have a room >where you change your clothes in preparation for your daily duties?" > > > >A: "Yes sir, we do!" > > > >Q: "And do you have a locker in the room?" > > > >A: "Yes sir, I do." > > > >Q: "And do you have a lock on your locker?" > > > >A: "Yes sir." > > > >Q: "Now why is it, officer, if you trust your fellow officers with your >life, you find it necessary to lock your locker in a room you share with >these same officers?" > > > >A: "You see, sir -- we share the building with the court complex, and >sometimes lawyers have been known to walk through that room." > > > >The courtroom erupted in laughter, and a prompt recess was called. > > > >The officer on the stand has been nominated for this year's "Best Comeback" >line -- and we think he'll win. >

I applaud Bush and Co. for their honesty in this nomination. He's a military guy and they aren't hiding it.

Nice Jay. He passed on an opportinuty to mention Disco Demolition, that's a nice improvement. My favorite line

I think baseball needs to be more like hockey. Let's have hockey style fights in baseball. Imagine the strategy of having only 7 defenders. Even better, imagine Anderson committing a penalty just to keep from batting the next inning. Hockey can't exist without fighting, baseball can't exist without hurling a baseball at 85 mph at someones head or body. Then again basketball cleaned itself up after Kermit Washington almost killed (literally) Rudy Tomjanovich in an on court fight.

redemption, one post away

BERLIN (Reuters) - A knife-wielding mugger was reduced to pleading with a pensioner for his bus fare home after she refused to hand over her purse, police in northern Germany said Tuesday. With his woolly hat pulled down and the neck of his sweater covering his nose and mouth, the youth pulled a 10-inch blade on the woman in the seaside town of Binz and threatened to stab her unless she handed over her bag, police said. She refused. "Then he tried to invoke her pity," a police spokeswoman said. "He said 'at least give me five euros ($6.40) for the bus ride home'. But she just walked off and left him standing." Police believed the youth, aged about 16, was probably a novice as his threats were delivered in the polite form of "you" in German -- "Sie."

Nice And here's the difference between the sexes, bored guys wouldn't be wasting time with this, they would be surfing for porn . . .

did you hear the one about the funny college professor? neither did I

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2006 -> 08:32 AM) Sure I wouldn't be happy about it, but it sure is within the homeowners rights. Yes it is within his rights and under some circumstances is the right thing to do.However, if that homeowner just happened to need his crops picked, wouldn't it benefit everyone to let the guy stay and work? We would think the homeowner that told the guy to leave was crazy. Likewise, if the homeowner was starving, we'd wonder why he took in yet another mouth to feed. But the focus should be on the homeowners needs, not some arbitrary decision made decades ago. The obstacle is knowing who and when to allow to stay and who should be sent home.

damn, now I am. :banghead damn curve ball is nasty. I look like Brian Anderson, eight misses and a home run.

He's alive and partying with Kennedy, Monroe, Elvis, and Morrison at a secret government camp.

nope

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ May 18, 2006 -> 05:51 AM) Good catch. Checking the only poker book I have here that lists odds, and it's a 40 year old book, doesn't exactly match. I was beginning to think I was wrong.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 18, 2006 -> 02:52 AM) But the discussion rarely does. But it has. Southsider, for example, proposed tying these jobs to humanitarian efforts, which is a pretty awesome goal. That seemed to be a big change. I finally linked jobs to immigraton in a way that actually made sense to y'all, I guess I was confusing people prior to that. There are still some areas that we will never agree on. I am surprised at some of the compromises that our leaders have come up with. I think a fence that covers exactly 25% of the area makes no sense at all. Sounds like a classic government f*** up. We fenced in one side of the prison, that should keep everyone in but compromise is happening, and that is good. I've always had faith in America solcing big problems and this is the process in which we accomplish that. It is done in the sunshine for everyone to see. Not tying jbs to immigration leaves a clear path to the problems we are trying to avoid. Allow 300,000 people to immigrate in 2008 and there are jobs for 500,000, and we exncourage illegal immigration, again. Have jobs for 200,000 and we encourage people to wind up on assistance, bankrupting states. The ability the support yourself should be the cornerstone of any immigration bill. Sadly, they are arguing about how to fence in people by building 1/4 a fence. Boondoggle.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ May 17, 2006 -> 05:59 PM) I assume the rules are draw poker and he's playing against himself? (up to 3 new cards) First one: Holds onto A,K,Q= 4/47 *4/46 (4 J's, and 4 10's left in the deck) Holds onto A, 3, 4=4/47 *4/46 (4 2's, and 4 5's left in the deck) 2nd one: Holds onto two 5's. (3/47*2/46*1/45)*10 (3 of Aces, 2, 3, 4, 9. 10, J, Q, K,) + 2/47 (two 5's left in the deck) Holds onto 6 and 7 = (3/47*2/46)*2 (catching 2 7's or 2 6's)+ (3/47*2/46*1/45)*10 (3 of Aces, 2, 3, 4, 9. 10, J, Q, K,) Same odds for holding only 7 and 8, or 6 and 8. Holds onto two 5's and one of the other cards: 2/47 (5 on the first new card draw) + 2/46 (5 on the second new card draw if the first card was not a 5) Holds on to two 5's (avoid full house): 2/47 (5 on the first new card draw) + 2/46 (5 on the second new card draw if the first card was not a 5) +2/45 (5 on the third card if niether the first or second card is a 5) [Texsox did this one] For the first one my TI-89 tells me it's .74% Second hand first method is 4.31% Second hand second mehtod is .62% Second hand third method is 8.60% Second hand fourth method is 13% Santo, on the straight, you don't have to catch it in order, so the first card drawn could be a J or a 10 so you are looking at 8/47 and the next card has to be the other or 4/46. Doesn't that make sense?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2006 -> 03:44 PM) So if I came over to your house, robbed it, hung out in your kitchen until you got home, then told you to make me a sandwich, you'd be cool with it? How is it fair that you have more than I do. Its not logical for some people to have $50 billion, while I try to figure out how to buy formula for my baby right? It would totally be feasible for me just to take from someone else, because it is right there, and I really need it. It is also much cheaper for you just give it to me, than for me to drive over to your house and rob you, so really I should just send you my paypal account and you can send the money directly to me. Sound good? So if you were starving and desperate and came to my house and asked me to let you work to buy some food for your family, you wouldd be ok if I told you to get your ass back where you came from? The answer lies somewhere between these examples.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2006 -> 03:33 PM) If this is about creating good will, wouldn't some war or famine victims play much better on the 6 o'clock news than some poor Mexicans and Canadians? We could create good will all over the world, and simultainious embark on the largest humanitarian mission in human history. We could create emerging markets all over the world for our products, and change opinions of us everywhere. Who said anything about goodwill? Where would you rather live? Next door to Stickney or next door to Lake Forest? I'm suggesting that having a robust, healthy neighbor is better than a desperate one. As you have mentioned, take away the incentive and illegal immigration becomes less of a problem. As Mexico developes and becomes healthier, the incentive to leave is lessened.

Well sir, we will disagree on whether or not we can pay someone enough to be a busboy who has been through our education system. We will disagree on spending the money and effort to hire and relocate minimum skill labor from Africa. Businesses don't pay to relocate minimum wage labor from Chicago to Colorado, I don't see them paying to relocate someone from Africa. Unless you are advocating a US taxpayer paid humanitarian air lift. Yes, it's the easiest way, but I don't think American business should be in the business of righting social injustices half way around the globe through their hiring. I don't think it is even the cost of deporting people that bothers me as much as the cost in rehiring people. I think America would be better off just allowing those people who have demonstrated they can support themselves here and not commit any crimes to stay before taking a chance on millions of new immigrants. Paying someone minimum wage is exploiting them? And yes we pick and chose every day. We let speeders zip by if they are only speeding a little bit. We allow drunks in some businesses, but not others. We scare a little kid for shoplifting and send them home, we give a pass to a drug user for ratting out a dealer. We allow time off for good behavior, we make allowances for a defendants criminal record, we give first time offenders a break and enforce a three strikes law. We make decisions on what is in the best interest of America all the time. This is no different.

That's great news, both sides seem to be working together for a compromise.