Texsox

I friend of mine sent this to me. It turned up in west Texas. That is some excellent eating. Spread out on a grill.

The Top 5 Signs It's Opposite Day 5> Osama bin Laden scores a double when he signs on as spokes- person for Jenny Al Mohammed Craig and sells his "Skinny Arab" sitcom concept to Al Jazeera television. 4> As you're laughing your butt off watching the latest hilarious episode of "Joey," a thought-provoking Mentos commercial comes on. 3> "We picked a good day to come here -- Branson doesn't suck at all!" 2> Britney Spears wins a Rhodes scholarship and husband Kevin Federline celebrates by taking a bath. and Topfive.com's Number 1 Sign It's Opposite Day... 1> You're awakened in the morning by the sound of a monkey spanking your boyfriend. Join ClubTop5 to see the whole 17-item list! http://www.topfive.com/html/ClubTop5.shtml

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 01:29 PM) They started giving out this award in 1983 and the Chicago White Sox have won it 5 times, well more than any other team. WOW. 1983 - Tony Larussa 1990 - Jeff Torgorg 1993 - Gene Lamont 2000 - Jerry Manuel 2005 - Ozzie Guillen Congrats Ozzie for taking us to the promised land!! Congratulations Oswaldo Reagarding the list, one of those will be a Hall of Fame manager when he is through.

Kap, I'm going to call b.s. speculation on your statement that we haven't been attacked again because of Iraq. What did our war with Iraq do to stop Bin Laden? Does he fear a reprisal attack on his country? We don't even know where he is. Are all the terrorists in Iraq and we got them all? I don't see how you can say by attacking Iraq we stopped every nut ball idealist from attacking. We have not been attacked fr a variety of reasons and the war with Iraq is not a big factor and I would want to explore the idea that diverting so much resources to Iraq that we have hurt our domestic security, not increased it. I will agree that Clinton's actions *and* the resulting investigation, limited any response he may have had. If he did launch the same attack, the GOP attack dogs would have been chanting tail wag the dog.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 12:45 PM) Being the Soxy of Economics I want to make just one point of emphasis here. We don't, and have never had, anything close a billion dollar deficit. Multi-trillion debt, yes. Trillion dollar deficit no. To amplify SS, here is a nice little CBO table showing the growth in the deficit. http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0 Notice the last surpluses came at the end of Clinton's second term. The largest deficits have been during Republican administrations, the lowest deficits, and the only surpluses in a long time, came during Democratic administrations. I always felt that fiscal responsibility was the cornerstone of the GOP platform and the #1 reason I would vote GOP.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 12:37 PM) And I disagree with that. There's just as much intelligence that was floated out there pre-Bush that said exactly the same thing. I see what you're saying, but there's just as much '*' going on pre-2001 as there was in 2003. Are you stating that Clinton or Bush made the better decision with the data?

Clinton made a decision and the inspectors kept going. Bush made a decision and 2,000 plus Americans are dead, we are billions more in debt, with hundreds of billions still to spend. I believe Bush's decision has turned out to be wrong. In fairness, at the time, I felt it was a tough decision that would be heralded as a huge win or a huge mistake. No middle ground. I still believe that. I would not have wanted to be the man to make that decision. I don't believe it is fair to blame Bush for a wrong decision here. I'm not convinced the "evidence" was fabricated, I think it was judged with a propensity to go to war, and not a propensity to avoid war. Different people, with different views, looked at the evidence and came up with different decisions. I think Americans would be better off today with out our military tied down in Iraq. I think the American economic picture would be better without the trillion dollar deficits. A wrong decision was made, but not for evil reasons. An honest decision was made. I don't know what more I can add.

Two different men, made two very different decisions, based on some of the same intelligence. It would seem to me that in those intervening years, we gathered more intelligence. We will never know exactly why Clinton didn't go to war and we will never know exactly why Bush did. Is the country better off with the decision Clinton made, or the decision Bush made? That seems to be the question.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Nov 8, 2005 -> 11:22 PM) I always knew you were obsessed with me. Once a species goes extinct, we can't bring it back

Two years ago, I thought he should have been fired, so what is my opinion worth? It sucks, I am certain he is unhappy about it. Too bad, it doesn't seem fair.

Just to be clear, they did not sue her, they arrested her. This is a criminal case. I guess the alternative would be to write her a ticket and ask her to please pay the ticket, but since she didn't have the $1.16 for the taxes, I doubt she will pay the ticket. I'm still surprised at the people that think not paying a small amount of taxes should not be a criminal offense. Stealing from the government doesn't seem to have the same thought as stealing from an individual.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 8, 2005 -> 11:13 PM) That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that its a waste of money to prosecute this case. They are going to spend 1000 times the resources on this case than they will ever get out of it. That makes zero sense to do. Thats the problem, they (the government) need to have some rule (on how much to prosecute a person for) instead of using common sense. A business would use common sense, but the government, it needs rules for every damn thing out there and because of that they are ran so god damn inneficient. I'm not saying some rules aren't necessary, but geeze, sometimes all you have to do is look in a mirror and go is this worth it (but they don't think that way because they essentially get an unlimited budget and are always spending there budget, if they don't, then they wouldn't get more money the next year). Its why I stick to my theory that government needs to stay out of pretty much everything (aside from defense, and taking care of the interest rate, as well as schools, roads and that sort of stuff. Basically the essential infastructure). It isn't the money it's the crime. If someone steals $50 from a person, should the government just give the victim $50 and not prosecute? Because it will cost more to prosecute the crime than what they could collect? There is a cost to prosecute CRIMINALS, since when is there a cost/benefit analysis on prosecuting criminals? When did conservatives get so soft on crime? She admitted she knew in February she had to pay and refused to do so and Nuke is defending her? I feel like I'm in some Twilight Zone, the liberal wanting to prosecute and the conservativeforgiving the white collar financial crime, oh wait, maybe this isn't a Twilight Zone. And again, if 100,000 taxpayers who owe less than $100 decided they better pay because of this, it even is a financial win.

If only Boras would use his superpowers for good and not evil. His ability to force teams to pay millions for his clients, against the team's will, and somehow leaving the teams without the ability to say no, could be used to cure cancer, receding hairlines, and premature ejaculations.

Scouting, as always A new friend Lipton Diet Green Tea with Citrus Busting Kap, defending Nuke and Mercy! Love songs

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Nov 8, 2005 -> 10:04 PM) A certain female Your MOM?

Colon is a big time, big game, pitcher and a workhorse. He would still fit in well in the Sox rotation.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 8, 2005 -> 07:09 AM) Well, since they took the time and effort to generate all those notices, and mailed them out, never mind. From the article According to her the city notified her in Feb, this is November. Maybe she never had a spare $1.16??

I assume that's the guy that robbed the bank you were at? I forget the whole story.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 8, 2005 -> 05:53 AM) Yes, it's a good point. It's also a waste of taxpayers money to be prosecuting this case. They don't have to advertise the fact the overlook certain trivial amounts, but common sense suggests that they should overlook them. But you cannot run any organization as large as even a city government without written rules. Imagine the fun of bringing a case for $850 and having the lawer say they didn't prosecute this person for $905, why are they prosecuting my client? Well your honor we have 10,650 agents and they each use their common sense, luck of the draw, this agent prosecutes. I understand and agree that prosecuting a small amount seems like a waste of time, but if this case sends a message to 100,000 other taxpayers who each owe $2.00 that the government isn't going to let it slide, and they send in payment, wasn't it worth it? As someone who has had some disagreements with the IRS, I can assure you they are very good at making certain you have received the notices and have had plenty of time to respond.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 06:50 PM) Well first of all I dont like to mix sports.... they are very different from one another. 2nd it depends on how you view TO. I view him as something to laugh at.... and with every dumb thing he does I find it funny..... if you take him seriously than it pisses you off but the stuff he does is so dumb I just find it hilarious. Even more so in football that depends on teamwork. Set plays, blocking schemes, etc. Spurs and Patriots are winning as a team. All the more reason TO isn't good for a team.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 10:52 PM) This has been one of the more interesting posts of late. Dog pile, on Mercy! anyone? Or is that Captain Fact-check? I think this thread is great theater. It is why I think Nuke would be a great SL&P mod. This forum needs great, pithy, exchanges to be fun. I know Nuke and suspect Mercy! aren't taking this personal. It's just plain good reading. Oneupmanship, some actual opinions being debated. This is so much better than a thread full of I agree and dittos.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 10:06 PM) I guess you give parents more credit than me. No credit, Mom has some serious issues for tolerating the abuse if that was what was happening.

Isn't it interesting that when we have a well spoken liberal that can hang with Nuke and Kap, she gets attacked. Once again, liberals don't stand a chance around here. :headshake

QUOTE(Soxy @ Nov 7, 2005 -> 09:57 PM) I see it as a very distinct possiblity she isn't being abused. Really? So they both are just abusing the kid? I thought in most of these cases, especially when the bio-mom allows the step dad to abuse, the mom is also a victim of abuse.