Texsox

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 17, 2006 -> 02:23 PM) OMG

Errors are an inexact science. Giving any team 4 outs in an inning is going to hurt. It also rattles some pitchers, causes some players to press at the plate, etc. What is probably another great conversation is how stout the Sox are at making other teams pay for their mistakes.

The courts today would have Joe in a uniform before spring training.

QUOTE(Cuck the Fubs @ May 17, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) How would being in Vegas have concerns over gambling?? You don't have to be in Vegas in-person to gamble. Access to the players and the players having access to gambling. IIRC you still can't wager on UNLV games. Dallas metroplex is bigger than SA. You have to toss Fort Worth into the discussion.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 15, 2006 -> 11:09 PM) I care what happens to them. Laughing at their misery is almost as much fun as watching our Sox inflict misery and force feed s*** to other teams. Exactly. Except I care more about them losing when the Sox are losing. The "yeah we suck, but your guys suck even worse" moments are sometimes all we had. Now it's a nice sideline while the Sox are winning. Also very close to the years when the Packers and Bears would both win 5 or 6 games. As long as they won the series fans acted like they did something that year.

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ May 17, 2006 -> 11:12 AM) It's pure comedy as far as I'm concerned. I'd pay top dollar for a highlight reel of Bonds getting plunked. Scumbags should be made to suffer, and Russ Springer is now a personal hero of mine. Come on fathom, you know that you were laughing out loud when you saw the pitch sequence.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ May 17, 2006 -> 01:49 PM) http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...0813.shtml?s=lh Where's the compassion??? Maybe the ACLU will take their case. Of course felons should be shipped back, and fast. I would even reduce the 3 misdemeanors to 2 or 1. I agree 100% with this quote Seems so simple. As soon as we get further and further away from this thought, we get in trouble.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:48 PM) And that's my point. It shouldn't be that way. If we are going to open up the US job market to foreign labor, why shouldn't the entire world be on equal footing, and not just one race who happend to hit the geography lotto? I honestly believe it is racist to open the US labor market to primarily one race. Then again our entire immigration system is racist as it considers certian countries immigrants by their country of orgin, instead of simply by something like their plight, or their skills. We should take care of our neighbors because it adds to our national securty. Having an ally next door is advantagous to having an enemy. Healthy Canada and Mexico helps out economy by creating easy to get to markets for our goods and services.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2006 -> 12:31 PM) Actually you couldn't be more backwards on what I have said. A guest worker program is an excellent ideal to strive for. QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 17, 2006 -> 08:43 AM) You're right, what was I thinking. We should just annex Mexico and get it over with, right? I mean they obviously need our tax money more than we do, not to mention we need busboys and fruitpickers as you have pointed out, and no American should have to do that when we have Mexicans who will... Stuff like the above and pointing out that at higher wages, American's would be willing to work these jobs, led me to believe that you didn't think we needed the workers. So we both agree immigrant labor is necessary. You would prefer to open up a worldwide lottery for those workers, placing a humanitarian premium on who gets in. I like the theory, but believe it is in America's best interest to have allys with strong economies and would prefer to see Canada and Mexico with an edge. Yes, it's geographical luck, but isn't the famines in Africa and the civil unrest also geographical luck? Help ourselves and our neighbors first. With NAFTA and other intragovernment programs, it only makes sense.

See, he fulfilled that campaign promise to streamline government and make things easier.

what's that site again? On line polls are meaningless. For example, I was elected to the Soxtalk Hall of Fame in a online poll. Game.Set.Match

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ May 17, 2006 -> 08:34 AM) Of the top 5 things that bother me about the Sox this year, he doesn't even make the list. My list in no particular order: - Boone Logan's suckiness - Jon Garland's woes - Ross Gload's uselessness for this team - Jenk's shaky outings - The incomplete green seats That's about my list as well. But he's in the top 10, maybe the top 7.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 17, 2006 -> 11:16 AM) But see, here's the one problem with something like that. If I want to unionize or try to work towards a better salary, or if I want to file a workplace complaint, or something silly like that, I have that right, and if things get really bad I can always just quit and go look for another job. But if a guest worker has a problem with a company, or the company decides it's given out too many raises to guest workers and lets them go in favor of new blood, then those people are stuck without jobs, and if you're only allowed in this country with a job, basically you wind up having to choose between tolerating whatever situation you're in or deportation. Unsafe working conditions are covered by OSHA, and basic US protections are in place, so I am not concerned about most abuses. But then, let's tie it to the unemployment rate. If unemployement in the skill area the immigrant is applying for is increasing, then decrease the number of immigrants allowed and vice versa. It helps no one when workers are out of work. And I will not bankrupt the US by allowing more workers in than can be supported. Emphasis on worker in a Guest Worker program. Another way to help this is the company would have a limited number of "do overs", after that, they would not be allowed to continue to hire guest workers. The same objection I have to people that make statements that illegal is illegal and we should deal with it without looking at anything else, I have to statements that allow immigration for immigration sake. There has to be a need and benefit to the US. I will admit, when someone like Southsider is so opposed and believes that jobs aren't part of the equation, I start to doubt my position. He is far ahead of me with economics, but it seems too obvious.

Is it necessary for the population to monitor the government and know what the goverment is doing? Or should be just allow the government to tell us? Is it necessary for individuals to have a means to report when the government is doing something wrong? Who can do that, and what controls should the government be allowed to place on the very group the citizens have selected to monitor the government? I am more concerned about curtailing the press than my own phone records.

^^^^^ perfect leader for the times. He also was pretty smart about immgration and what to do with Mexican nationals who were working in the US.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:57 AM) Vote for that man! It's either Kinky or current governor Perry. Perry has looked ineffective in our school funding debates, but overall he still seems like the best choice. Kinky would be a kind of Ventura governor. More celeb than governor and I don't think Texas needs that. Although, if I could be persuaded to believe he really wants to be governor, and this isn't a career move, that could change. I believe Kap is still looking for a candidate and my guess he's going to lean toward ex-Republican turned independent Strayhorn.

I wasn't aware of the widespread gambling that was going on. I never really bothered to learn anything about that era.

Best? Possibly. Most competitive and entertaining? Yes.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:50 AM) Just curious. Does he ever send you an email without asking for money? No I was just thinking the only politician who sends me stuff without a soliciation is Kinky.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:45 AM) After thinking about this, I was mistaken. Please disregard. you probably were thinking "a" seat, not "the" seat.

Dear James, You know what our mission is -- to drive to victory on November 7 by using our online strength to give key Democratic candidates grassroots help they couldn't even imagine getting in the past. This week, we're focusing on a handful of races across the nation that are absolutely critical to the environment. We're out to take back the Congress and defeat Republican candidates who have sold out the environment whenever it really counts. Support pro-environment Democratic candidates now. Yesterday, we helped raise tens of thousands of dollars for three critical House challengers: Ron Klein in Florida, Francine Busby in California, and Darcy Burner in Washington state. Today, we've added a new candidate to the list -- Linda Stender who is running in New Jersey's 7th Congressional district. Linda is not only a strong environmental candidate, she has also fought to protect the right to privacy and she has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's failed policies in Iraq. Linda has led fights in her county to pass the Open Space, Recreation, and Historic Preservation Trust Fund, create the area's largest tree replacement program, and develop a new program to improve the appearance of county property. Protecting our environment and making America energy independent are two of her key priorities when she gets elected. I told you earlier that two of the GOP incumbents we're out to defeat, Clay Shaw and Dave Reichert, had identical 28% voting records on the League of Conservation Voters' scorecard. Linda's opponent, Mike Ferguson, is even worse. In the last session of Congress, he voted pro-environment only 17% of the time. All 3 of these Republican incumbents have voted to open up the Arctic Refuge to drilling, gut funding of environmental protections for clean water and environmental conservation, and sell off our public lands to the big mining companies. We can't continue to let this happen. Support pro-environment Democratic candidates now. We have these anti-environment Republicans on the run. Let's keep it that way. Help build an unstoppable momentum for our environmental slate of candidates. Donate to one or more of our candidates right now. Let's give them the strong support they need to win. Sincerely, John Kerry P.S. In addition to providing direct support to our candidates, don't forget to also include a donation to Keeping America's Promise in support of our broader efforts to help shape the outcome of these vitally important elections.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 17, 2006 -> 08:48 AM) The times I've flown Southwest I've always had an assigned seat. they are talking about specific seats like row 12 seat A. Something they have never done.

QUOTE(samclemens @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:17 AM) you are right. we should give more aid to mexico to improve a foreign country's economy. since mexico is part of the united states, its our responsibility. We give them aid to hire more law enforcement, to help clean up their environment (some of which was US manufacturers mess), to improve health care, etc. Keeping a stable government on our border is money well spent. It certainly is as valid as sending money to everyone in the middle east and half of the former Soviet block countries. BTW, were you away that much of the agriculture in Texas is dependent on the Rio Grande watershed. That watershed is sprerad out across both countries. When Mexico makes improvements, with US aid, to their reservoir system, it increases the amount of water the US has for irrigating crops. Programs like that are excellent ways to offer US aid.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:10 AM) The Dems certainly would have had to been careful. I totally agree with you there. Good points. I was just thinking, from a political capital and opportunity point of view, what President has pissed away, or had taken away, more political capital than Bush? Control of everything up to the Supreme Court and a post 9/11 approval rating that was through the roof. Amazing to think about. That may be the central theme when historians view his career. I think he, perhaps much like Jimmy Carter, may have had too much heart for the job. I may question his mind and intelligence, but Bush has a good heart. I really believe it.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:18 AM) They can be let in, a controlled number, with the caveat they have to have employment within X number of days. Hell ... As I type this, I see all kinds of logistical problems with it. I don't know how to address this. Exactly and the control has to be linked to jobs. I wouldn't let them in until there is a job or someone willing to support them. There is no other criteria as important to both parties (immigrant and US) Perhaps let the employers apply for a guest worker permit and then they fill it. There has to be some way to link jobs to immigration. Anything can happen once they are here, companies may close, etc. and we would have to account for that. But from both sides this makes sense. From the people I know who have immigrated, legally and illegally, the desire to build a better life for their kids and sometimes themselves is the #1 reason for crossing the river. That better life isn't from being on public aid, it comes from working and having your children be educated. From the taxpayer side, we would rather send aid to Mexico than deal with Spanish speaking Mexicans on our shores who are accepting aid. So linking jobs to immigration works.