Texsox

Someone isn't going to need the clicker that day

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 03:09 PM) And I think that stems from the fact that they are appointed for life. Go back into history and see why they indeed appoint these folks for life, and generally, you get your answer as to why both "liberals" and "conservatives" feel so strongly about who they get onto the bench. Thank you. That was a 2x4 across the forehead. While I see the judicial branch as neutral, and hopefully above politics, that is so naive I am embarrassed to admit it. Of course like the other two branches, each party wants "their" people in. I've always felt character and citizenship was far more important than ideology.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 12:33 PM) Yup. I'm sure the main reason I don't believe in Hell is because if I did then I'd also have to accept that there's a seat on the express train with my name on it. I think there is a railroad car with Soxtalk's name on it, and we're the conductors At least we'll be spending eternity together . . .

QUOTE(SnB @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 09:19 AM) waking up at 9:05 for a 9 o'clock class.............awesome. And logging in here first. Obviously we made a good choice in mods.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 12:22 PM) The spousal notification dissenting opinion came up on NPR this morning right after the nomination was announced and it immediately had me concerned. If Alito doesn't think that cases where a wife is choosing to have an abortion rather than bringing another victim into the home of an abusive/possible rapist husband is worthy of consideration, then he will see parental notification as an absolutely black and white issue as well. QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 12:26 PM) It will be very unfortunate. And the truth is that the ultra conservatives spoiling for the fight are going to win even if their guy goes down. It galvanizes and energizes the conservative base, puts their cause into the spotlight, and will be a vehicle by which they raise 10s of millions of dollars. There will be political fallout come election time, but the social conservatives are looking to be paid for their loyalty to the GOP the last few election cycles. The reason this is such a tough issue is it requires Dems and GOPers to cross over and actually intermingle a bit and reach a consensus that cause some DEMs to admit some conservative tendencies and some GOPers, to admit some Dem points. Can't have that. Plus with every twist and turn, each side can trot out an example of why either extreme is right. Cruched, loving, devout Christian whose wife terminated his little son's life. Followed by the poor abused wife who was abused and raped by her husband. Reality is clearly in the middle.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 11:39 AM) I think there's a difference between an amendment process, which indeed does reflect upon societal changes, and striking down laws or upholding them on some basis of societal norms. Therein lies the difference to me. Checks and balances have served us well for over 200 years. The current legislative and executive branch would love nothing more than to destroy any judicial review and destroy any confidence in a free press. What have we then? One party running over everything. Our country is no longer an agricultural based, slave based, economy. I don't believe the original framers are any smarter than our current leaders. The courts are asked to review laws that could never be comprehended 200+ years ago. Wiretapping, Internet porn, abortion, guns not being a food gathering device, nuclear vs. small arms battles, drug abuse, immigration and the list goes on. If we are basing what is best today, by what our forefathers believed 200+ years ago, we seem to be as smart as the Taliban calling for burkas. As long as we need the legislature creating new laws we need to the judicial branch making certain they are within our constitutional rights. Societal norms changed slavery, civil rights, interracial marriage, and a host of other issues. If not for a critical mass of citizens (societal norms) wanting those laws struck down, it wouldn't have happened. Interesting that many conservatives love the Constitution, but when the checks and balances come in and the judicial branch uses their Constitutionally granted rights and responsibilities, conservatives rail against it.

If you would have added he was a Muslim, and would get the death penalty, it would have been more believable.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 11:14 AM) Maybe because while doing their deeds they are screaming "Praise be Allah" or some other such phrase at maximum volume? Praise to Bush, Eliminate all guns! Praise to Reagan, tax the rich! My point is, what makes you believe they truly are devout and not just hijacking a religion to commit their crimes? I can't see judging Christianity by Timothy McVeigh. The KKK and other loony tunes groups quote the Bible left and right. Their beliefs are so extreme I don't think as a Christian I need to denounce them. When we finally catch up with some of these wackos in the US, they always seem to be more than a bit crazy. Moms killing their kids because God told them, Doctors killed for performing abortions because it's God's will. They too are shouting Christian phrases, yet most mainstream Christians would not want to be painted with that same brush.

One of my favorites of old at Six Flags (then Mariott's Great America) was the Tidal Wave. Same basic concept, blast out of the station, loop and return backwards.

I've never been an originalist with the Constitution. They could not begin to comprehend today's world and I believe changes can be made to improve and to keep up with the world we live in. That battle sometimes comes down to party politics, which unfortunately pollutes the discussion and debate.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 31, 2005 -> 09:27 AM) Tex. You dont have to keep repeating to me that the death penalty in its current form is not a deterrent to anything. I agree. Its a joke. And you are also absolutely right that states and countries that do have it are no different than other states or countries with regard to murder rates. Like I said in my earlier post. To create a deterrent effect the death penalty needs to be administered in a uniform fashion for serious violent crimes ( Murder 1 , rape, etc ). That way it doesn't matter how much money a guy has, he's gonna get his appointment with ol sparky if he crosses a certain line. Additionally you need to limit the number of appeals to 2 and thats all. Most of the time death row inmates spend there is spent in frivolus appeal after frivolus appeal presenting basically the same BS argument they presented before with a minor change here and there. Im also not a fan of your "lets be sure" argument either. If you wanted to you could make the same argument for not even incarcerating them. "What if we're wrong???? We're gonna ruin this guys life." Im surprised criminal advocate groups haven't tried that line yet. You can open the jail and let them out. You can't open a coffin and bring them back to life. It's that simple. Money buys a not guilty plea. It buys reduced sentences. It buys better expert witnesses. Again, describe to me the person who would not kill someone if they knew it meant the death penalty instead of life in prison? (I don't care if it is 6 months of 6 years) Who is it deterring? An angry spouse? A gang member? Someone with road rage? Co-worker on a rampage? And you don't like the let's be certain before killing them? Are you certain you don't want to rethink that one? If that is really what you believe, I can't even begin to tell you how little I think you value human life. Prisons have walked free from death row through new evidence. If you have so little regard to human life to not believe that certainty is important, there is no need to continue. On one hand you bring up the innocent victims, yet value so little a process that as close as humanly possible tries to assure the state doesn't create another innocent victim.

Things are done in the name of religion that would make the God/Deity/Concept being worship cry in disgust. No group is immune, I think we've tossed out enough examples of that. What surprises me is how intelligent people can take a small number of people and extrapolate to a conclusion that all members think that way, or even a majority think that way. I don't believe that is fair, accurate, or helps to make the world a better, safer place. Universally, mankind is trying to create a planet that fits their view of what a utopia society would be. PA has a vision which would eliminate a lot of popular culture. EvilMonkey has a vision that would wipe out a religion. Jim has a vision that would eliminate religion as unnecessary. I know those aren't 100% accurate, look at the point. Those visions are made bigger when they can be attached to a bigger group. If an extremist can latch onto a group and gain a bigger voice, they do. Look at the woman camping outside Crawford. She attached to a bigger group, her message becomes magnified, and viola` she is now speaking for all Dems. We know that isn't accurate, yet that's how our society reacts. The GOPers here automatically challenge the Dems to defend her because she is standing with other Dems. Same concept with religion. Just because someone professes or is born into a faith, doesn't mean they believe it themselves. I could call myself anything, and the media would report it, and some people will take the leap to believe all of that group believes that. I'm an NRA member, but I don't agree with everything the group does. I'm Catholic but I don't agree with everything out of the Vatican. And I am as busy a Boy Scout leader as there is, but I don't agree with every stance there. Why would anyone believe that these murders, rapists, thugs believe 100% of their religion and are motivated by it?

There are articles everywhere, so I won't link or quote. Seems like a solid citizen. I don't believe being a conservative or liberal should factor in the debate. Is he fair and honest? Has he himself committed any crimes (Nannygate)? Does he have legal experience? All seem to fall in his favor. Our Constitution allows for the President and Legistlative branches to decide this. With the current political climate, a conservative will be nominated, and I am fine with that. Just as long as he is a solid citizen, of high moral and ethical behavior.

I wonder how often we blame a religion for the acts of criminals. Pick up the Tribune or Sun-Times and look at the crime stories, if we started reporting their religion, would it be accurate? Christian drug dealer arrested. Jewish City Official Indited. We are assuming that all of these crimes are done for religious reasons. Could it be that they are criminals? We toss around these labels and accept them as fact. If Gacy was baptized, would we call him a Christian serial murderer? I don't think religion had anything to do with Gacy's crimes, and I wonder if religion has anything to do with some of these.

Damn, I just saw the video, I'd love to ride that one.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 30, 2005 -> 01:14 PM) Its funny how you allude to the 3 strikes laws in your post as the 3 strikes for more minor felonies have been a huge factor in the dramatic drop in crime which has occured since the early 1990's. Indeed locking up people for a long period for multiple minor offenses has the effect of serving as a strong deterrent from committing more of those offenses, but in getting them off the streets it keeps them from graduating to far more serious crimes as happens so often with repeat offenders. Tex. With reference to the death penalty. If it was imposed in a uniform manner ( say everyone guilty of Murder 1, Rape and Child Molestation ) and the sentences were carried out swiftly ( lets say within a year at the very most ) then there would be a true deterrent effect on serious crimes. Again, please describe someone who isn't murdering someone because of the punishment? There are no differences in the murder rates in states and even countries that have the death penalty and those that don't. We cannot turn back death. We can release someone from a cell down the road if our justice system makes a mistake. Can anyone here honestly say our justice system is so perfect we should use it to put someone to death? Money buys great defense. A lack of money buys a public defender who is willing to work for relatively low wages. We all know that justice can be bought. One year Nuke? Are you elminating appeals? Shouldn't we be absolutely certain we haven't made a mistake?

Too bad he wasn't Peter Pumpkin Eater, he wouldn't have been nearly in the same trouble.

And he's in the gene pool :headshake

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 30, 2005 -> 01:44 PM) You can make jokes all you want to but the fact remains that people in those jobs get paid what they do for a reason. Its called supply and demand. There are far too much unskilled labor in this country to support high wages for them. But why let something like economic reality get in the way of a good emotional liberal cry-fest about the poor. Who sets your wages? Isn't your job like a union job, everyone at a given pay scale gets paid the same regardless of individual performance? How does supply and demand fit into your job? What skills does the average recruit need to have? From the articles I've read a HS diploma, minimum amount of tatoos, and a relatively clean criminal record gets you a job in the US military. I know we are spending way more than minimum wage there. Trusting supply and demand and eliminating the minimum wage low would make it easier for companies to pay far less for menial labor that currently is being done by illegals. It would help the economy if restaurants, farm labor, etc. could get down to $3 or $4 per hour for loading a dishwasher or picking lettuce.

Linkage Here

Happy Birthday Y'all

Go ahead idiot, close your first thread :finger

RIP Al.

Is always great when a team is winning. It's all Barney videos and huggy feely when the team is winning. I think we may over emphasize how well this team got along. It may be 50% the great regular season start and 50% the actual players involved. Early on, if some of those bounces go another way, and the team doesn't get off to a lead in 37 straight games, we may not be talking so much about chemistry. In other words, it's a cycle that feeds itself.