Texsox

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 05:40 PM) I would respond to that by saying that there's no reason to assume that the Democrats in Congress are honest, but the Republicans in Congress have ALL the power. They write bills in secret and push them through in the middle of the night with the Dems receiving 1000+ page documents 1 hour before the vote. They completely change things in conference committees and never give the Dems a shot to view the things afterwards. They hold votes open forever in order to bully people into voting with them. They rewrite rules so that they decide what to investigate. They promise investigations and then quietly shut them down when the press isn't watching (i.e. WMD's). The Democrats may well be as corrupt as the Republicans. But right now, the Democrats have absolutely no power in Congress. They can't even start an investigation. So the only ones who even have the chance to be corrupt are the Republicans. As long as we have honest journalists like Rush, Hannity, Savage, Ingram, Reagan, O'Reilly, Colson, Dobson, and all the others on 24/7 watching the Republicans, we'll be ok.

The site I jumped on had them at 65 loses. Thanks for spotting that.

QUOTE(DaGame2584 @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 05:19 PM) I hope we can finish this thing of in Detroit right in front of that prick :puke Magglio. I guess you will never change companies or want to earn more money than what your present company will pay you? Ohh mommy, Johnny broke up with me, he's such a prick. boo hoo. Maggs played his ass off in a Sox uniform.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 05:49 PM) Tex, I said this in the other thread you posted that scenario in as well. You're math is a bit off cause the bosox and yankees each have 7 games left not 6. Oops, I had them with 65 loses, thank you.

QUOTE(winodj @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 05:42 PM) 2 wins clinches a tie for a playoff spot. 3 wins clinches at least the Wild Card. Best possible Yankee / Bo Sox records after sweeping their next series would be 94 wins going into the weekend. Best 1-2 finish 95 and 96 wins. 96 wins assures staying ahead of at least one of them. 2 to clinch. AL E winner 96-66 AL runner up 95-67 Any wins added to the winner subtracts from the runner up. And the runner up is who we need to stay ahead of. Still looks like two to clinch to me. SHow me how the Yankees AND the Red Sox could end up with 96 or more wins??

2 wins clinches a playoff spot, we can't clinch the division without a Cleveland loss. The best we could do if Cleveland wins all 3, is clinch a tie.

Here goes a try at the current numbers (Sunday Evening) Yank/Bo Sox 91-65 with 6 games remaining White Sox 94 wins If both the BoSox and Yankees win all three games to start this week, they would be sitting at 94 wins going into the final weekend. Possible outcomes 3-0 Wildcard winner would need 95 wins (Sox need 1) 2-1 One team finishes with 96 the other 95 (Sox need 2) As Freddy Prinz would say "Loooking Goood!"

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 05:16 PM) It is unreal how easy (and quick) baking is when you get a Kitchen Aid stand mixer. I made butter cookies and lemon bars today and was ready to bake more. Aren't they awesome! I love baking bread so much more after getting mine. I only wish I had gotten the bigger one where the bowl is raised to the mixer. Mine is almost 20 years old and still working perfect. Wait until you whip potatoes

I don't think either party has a monopoly on problems. Just because the list doesn't balance equally, doesn't mean these guys are angels any more than the guys who should be on the list and aren't. To paraphrase Kap's logic, there aren't enough Dems on the list, so these guys must be honest. And a liberal thinker would say the same thing if it was all Dems. They all work in the same industry, with the same temptations, the same problems. When as the public we stop the us and them, Dem and GOP cheer leading that the parties have encouraged, we will begin to get back honest government. Until then GOPerheads will denounce any attacks on Republicans as biased and untrue, and Dems will do the same for "their" guys. Of course we will get what we deserve.

I noticed you didn't say anything about having a passion for the first job?! I think you need to find door #3

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 12:25 PM) I'll wait until the Parks director determins how many people were there. We saw the supposed stats about attendance at the million man march, and all the other supposedly huge marches that in actuality had way less than the organizers claimed. It is an inexact science at best. I remember a long ago journalism class and the prevailing wisdom of the day was to find someone like the police chief to make a estimate (guesstimate?) I'm not certain if numbers are meaningful anymore. Getting 100,000 together in 2005 is a lot easier than in 1969. Reagrdless of the numbers, they are growing. I pray that we reach an end that does not cause the thousands who died to die in vain. The sooner the better, but sooner isn't always better.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 11:42 AM) And protesting never changed anything and never will...........whats your point? Are you familiar with the works of Jesus, Martin Luther, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Cesar Chavez? Not every problem requires a military answer. Non violence also has a roll in shaping our world. I know it isn't as deeply satisfying as actually killing people to get your way, but is has worked.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 12:01 PM) From cnn.com Put the rope away Tex.........no lynchings today. BTW, do you ever read? I've been saying all along that I don't think he has violated any laws. God I pray you go into battle better prepared or your co-workers are in trouble. Notice that the investigation is for insider trading, something the trustee would not be involved in. So I guess we're back to investigating the one person who could have done something wrong, Frist. Or do you have another person he could blame? Perhaps his mommy for telling him? And once again, it would seem to me, with all the public records of company officers selling, that Frist would not need insider information to reach a sell decision. I also do not think he would have risked this with a Presidential bid so close. I do not see him being charged with anything from ethics violations to insider trading.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 12:02 PM) Wanting to go after the right people doesn't make me an ultra liberal but hey, you get an A for effort on that one. Isn't the right person the person who is the Majority Leader and whose job requires him to conform to ethics rules? The person who may have been given inside information on his families business? The crime, would be insider trading and the trust fund manager would have no responsibility in that. SS believes that the Trustee was not allowed to take direction, however Senate ethics laws do allow Frist to ask that all his holdings be sold. If you take bad advice from a tax accountant, you are still held accountable for taxes owed, interest, etc. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. Every Senator and Congressman has a responsibility to know the laws and conform to them. They can't blame it on someone else. That's as lame as the "I didn't know what was in that Balco syringe" defense.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 24, 2005 -> 04:48 PM) Unless there is something more than one poor quarter, a 15% drop in price may not be that big of a deal to a long term investment. IIRC, Martha's stock was about to become worthless. A notable difference. This just doesn't seem like a big deal, and with all of the other company officers selling, it is something he could have pieced together without insider information. It looks to me like no harm, no foul, keep playing. But hey, I'm backing the Hammer in '08 I Republicans. Nuke, shall I read this to you? Texas lynch mob? LMAO.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 11:54 AM) It seems to me just from what you wrote there that someone in this Trust company either was stupid or complicit. Whoever said that in going after Frist you missed the real offenders seems to be spot on. Your honor my client is innocent because the police officer failed to patrol that area properly. Come on Nuke, you are sounding like the ultra-liberal, society is at fault type, that I can't even respect. It's not my fault, I didn't know?? What happened to personal responsibility?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 11:47 AM) Since when is the burden of proof on the accused............... Just curious about what you armchair constitutional scholars think about that since you're so eager to extend that courtesy to rapists and murderers. Sorry, what I wrote wasn't clear. The Trust Company is there for Frist's benefit and to help him comply with ethics laws. Shouldn't he be the expert on those laws and work to stay within them? Or are you saying that politicians can use ignorance of the law as an excuse to break it? In other words, the burden is on us to not break the law, not on the police to prevent us from breaking the law. Nice try Nuke. Keep playing.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 10:53 AM) Trusts are supposed to go a level beyond that even. I don't think anyone is supposed to have knowledge of what they own in trust, but I am not sure how it works for a family holding. Most blind trusts don't allow ANY knowledge of what they own, just for the conflict of interest reason. That is why Cheney liquidated his Haliburton position before assuming VP. As I understand blind trusts they are to be completely independent of any influence by the owner. That's what makes it a blind trust. There are regular trust accounts for those who want info and influence. But earlier in this thread someone quoted a source that the Senator is allowed some direction in his assets. Like directing the sale or asking for long term v. short term goals, etc.. Because the trust would be set up to conform with the Senate ethics laws, not SEC laws, it would have to conform to the ethical guidelines that Frist is under. From reading your comments, I think we both would agree that these ethics laws need strengthening if Frist is allowed to direct a liquidation of a holding.

QUOTE(winodj @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 11:30 AM) Cops were pounding on my door at 3 AM last night. Damn, forehead hickey and coffee table laws are so unjust You OK? I told you hanging out with radicals like Nuke, Evil, Jim, and myself would earn you a FBI file and labeled an enemy of the administration.

QUOTE(winodj @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 11:15 AM) I wouldn't necessarily confuse the issue here between a private school and the boy scouts. The Boy Scouts do enjoy special privileges and guarantees conferred on them by the government. The issue is a private group being able to set membership standards for their group. That is what allows all of that, and is something I agree with. As with many things, there are unintended consequences both negative and positive. The BSA debate is how "private" they are, and what access to public facilities should they enjoy. I believe in a consistent ethic in life. If a group is a private group, and sets their own membership standards, they have to take the good with the bad. So if they are excluded from groups that do not share those values, they have to accept that. For example if a private school opened for children of gay and lesbian couples, I would not expect them to allow any BSA advertising or for that matter, could deny school enrollment to straight parents and those that choose to join gay unfriendly groups like BSA. I supported the United Way, Levi Strauss Foundation, and other organizations that stopped donations to BSA after the Dale Ruling. I feel that those people who whined about it as unjust were the height of hypocrisy.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Nice. I wonder if they are dead or alive?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 09:21 AM) Beat me to 32 : Happy Birthday Kiddo, and here is to what you really want for your birthday... 11 more wins starting October 4th I will absolutely guarantee 11 more wins after October 4th. It may take until May '06 to get 'em. But I guarantee we will.

This is way out of my knowledge area, so permit me to ask a couple questions. The purpose of a blind trust is to negate the possibility of the Senator having an unfair advantage in the market, because of possible laws that may be enacted or investigations he would be privy to. The Trust company is then protecting the public from a potential abuse of power. Now I can see why they would have a legal and moral responsibility. I am assuming that the trustees are allowed to use their knowledge to buy and sell holdings held in trust. If I have read and understood this correctly, the owner of the trust is allowed to offer directions like "sell all my holdings in XYZ Corp.", because he knew he had them before his holding went into a blind trust. He would not be allowed to know how much he had at that moment, or the purchase price. He would not be allowed to order a purchase of XYZ Corp. because he would then know what was in his blind trust. Correct? Another assumption is once a year he would see any gains or losses that would impact his income tax return. Correct? So at some point the veil is lifted? Frist's violation would be in obtaining any insider information, not in directing the trustee to sell his stock. The trustee's violation would be in sharing with Frist the amount of stock he owned? A key difference in the after hours trading is it allowed those traders to know results before making the transaction. Problems in Tokyo? Make a trade. Big, big difference. Having tomorrow's newspaper when investing is a big difference from knowing what you own and asking it be sold.

The same laws that allow Boy Scouts to deny membership to an avowed homosexual also allows the Daughters of the American Revolution to limit membership to daughters of the American Revolution, allows the Knights of Columbus to limit membership to catholic men, allows Girl Scouts to deny me equal standing with my wife as an adult volunteer. allows the Salvation Army to only allow Christians, and allows the Aryan Nation to exclude everyone. There is good and bad. Imagine if every private group had to be open to every person. The GOP would be open to Democrats. You couldn't have any special interest groups.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2005 -> 09:25 AM) What is interesting is I have yet to see ANY articles talking about anyone charging the Trust company with a complete violation of their charter and ethics. It seems like everyone is so worried about nabbing the big fish that they are completely ignoring the biggest violators. Frist might have asked for the information, but a much bigger act is the company actually giving it to him. Were any laws violated by the Trust Company in giving him the info? It seems that the burden is on Frist. The Trust company is violating ethical standards, Frist may have broken the law. law>>ethics (although it would be nice if they were the same)