Texsox

Mental illness is such a nightmare. Even with, presumably, access to the best medical care, he still wound up like this. Tragic for everyone involved.

Too bad Maggs doesn't have a good agent that would get him a one-year for $1.2 million with incentives.

They also have a caramel and chocolate covered popcorn The $7 version of Cracker Jack is very good also. I forgot about 6 tins I had in my garage for almost a year. I opened one and passed it around a meeting and thought, these damn kids will eat anything. Then I saw one of the adults chowing down. A year later, it still tasted fresh. Damn that scared the crap out of me. What kind of preservatives do you need to keep sealed popcorn fresh for over a year It was good, I ate almost a tin by myself

Sitting here wondering what I would do. If I had just wrote a column that states Dubya has put together the best cabinet of any President this century and I pick up the phone and Chaney is offering me $50,000 to promote the Bush cabinet, do I take it? It is clearly something I already believe, I am not altering my views, and it seems like easy money paid to me wink wink consulting firm.

http://www.jordanzane.com/

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 09:40 AM) Yeah, but hearing about someone from Hamas getting wasted brightens my day ( Damn I miss I4E ) Like I said. I think this is a wrongful use of taxpayer money. Scary enough, I also miss 4E.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 09:37 AM) There is no justification for this. It's flat out wrong and even the biggest Republican around here ( me ) wont dispute that. It sounds striking like Chicago machine politics to me. Which is why I'm guessing it has been done before, and I wouldn't be surprised if it reached back to Kennedy or before. If the Department took ads out in major newspapers and on various talk shows to promote the policy initiative, would that have been ok in your eyes? I am leaning towards yes. The administration also has access to all the talk shows and Sunday morning news magazines. For programs, I am solidly in favor of the government spending money to promote the program. What good is a program if no one knows it exists?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 09:17 AM) I didn't say I agreed with this if it's in fact true? Cause I don't. That pithy enough for you? It lacks the usual effort you would give if it was like someone from Hamas getting wasted or the offspring of a DEM getting busted for slashing tires. By the way, it was public records that revealed the payments. Our government cannot hide most spending from our eyes. At this point, the payments are not considered illegal, they just raise an ethical debate. I also would prefer to not call it a Bush initiative. Calling it a government initiative better frames the debate. Our government had a policy they were wishing to promote, they paid commentators to write nice things about it. Is that a good use of tax payers money?

To swerve this from political swipes, what should the governments role in propaganda be? Should our government be allowed to advertise, plant stories, pay commentators, etc. to champion government policies? As I mentioned earlier, I doubt Dubya and Chaney thought this stuff up on their own. If it didn't happen under Clinton, I will be really shocked. I don't see this as much as a DEM or GOP issue, but a role of our government. I do believe it is appropriate for the government to promote policies and programs. Perhaps they could do even better when someone like Lesko can write a book that lists government programs and make money. Taking ads out, printing up fliers in various languages, hosting community outreach events all seem like valid uses of our taxes. Paying someone to write an opinion piece just seems wrong. When I listen to a commentator, I want to believe it is not a paid political commercial. I understand that Fox panders to the right for better ratings and more money, like the LA Times does for the left. I would hate to believe in addition to the advertising, their staff was being paid by the White House. Further, it's our White House regardless if we voted for the President or not. His duty is to all Americans. Again, this issue highlights the b.s. in our current political climate. Defend anything "your" guy does and attack anything "my" guy does. It's dividing the country. This shouldn't be a partisan attack on the GOP, but rather a taxpayer's attack on the government for wasting our tax dollars. Can anyone justify the government paying a columnist?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 09:05 AM) LOL! Actually, Rush is well compensated for his efforts. However, all the sources you mentioned ( save for Fox News ) are COMMENTATORS, not newsmen. Commentators give their opinion of issues and that's it. Newsmen are supposed to be unbiased. There'a a huge difference. How noble, the administration is only paying off poor commentators. And we thought they didn't have a plan for helping the poor. LOL. They paid off minor columnists, but nothing for Rush? Again, shouldn't he be pissed? You know, I little something for the effort? If you were looking to pay someone shouldn't you go to the top? Isn't that a better use of our tax dollars? If the administration is going to pay off columnists, I want the best value and Rush and Hannity would be the best value. Quit wasting our money on minor league columnists in 50 papers. As I mentioned, I will be shocked if the Bush Administration invented this. Give it time, someone will unearth other payments from the Clinton White House. Nuke, care to write what your pithy commentary if this was Clinton? You'd be all over his ass for wasting tax dollars that should have gone to fighting terrorists or something.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 08:52 AM) And its the exact reason that satillite phones have never taken off, and Iridium went bankrupt. Those phones work ANYWHERE in the world, and they are dependant on towers and antennas. That's why they were the only phone network not to crash on 9-11. But the problem is they had to put up a bunch of satillites (I don't remember the exact number but it seems like it was 50+) in order to support the network. It is ultraexpensive to maintain and upkeep. I believe you meant to say they are *not* dependent on towers and antennas.

From the catch-all anything thread QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 02:42 AM) Because the people that do that are getting pissed and smoking f**s in Britain. context is everything

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 02:42 AM) Because the people that do that are getting pissed and smoking f**s in Britain. For what it's worth, the best microwave butter popcorn I have ever had is Trails End extreme butter. Every last kernal pops and the butter actually comes close to tasting like butter. Available from a Boy Scout near you.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 08:59 AM) If that's the case then the NY Times, Washington Post and Boston Herald and LA Times would all have to close down. They have been shilling for the left for decades. This stuff works 2 ways. I wonder if they knew they could be paid for shilling for the right if they would change? I wonder how much Rush, Hannity, Fox, and the rest of the GOP Media Network are getting paid? If Rush isn't, shouldn't he be pissed? No one is a bigger champion of GOP strategy than Rush. All those hundreds of thousands of dollars and he isn't getting any taste?

QUOTE(The Critic @ Jan 28, 2005 -> 08:31 AM) Only difference is, Timo knows his role on the team and Willie is a disgruntled employee right now. Harris is of no use to the Sox unless (1) he accepts his role and is willing to do it or (2) if Iguchi or Uribe get hurt. Is Timo's role to say, they're better than me, I'll just back them up; or to push them and make them earn their starting spots?

QUOTE(Jeckle2000 @ Jan 27, 2005 -> 08:10 AM) I couldn't disagree with anything in the article. ...and he's completely right, if you don't yank him out of the lineup when he's hitting .330 and bench him for 5 straight games and then expect him to be an all star every other day when you finally decide to play him your nuts. Rowand didn't start to hit until he was left in the lineup for a few weeks and that was only because of a hitting streak (could you imagine where we'd be now if AROW happened to be an 0-4 that day. Timo would of gotten about another 100 at bats in CF :puke ) He's right. They either need to give him a fair chance to make the starting job or trade him. You can't blame a guy for being a little pissed when the organization has jerked him around so often. I agree with Jeckle Willie sounds like most any person would in this situation. If your employer just hired someone to replace you, I bet you wouldn't be all happy and whatever helps the company. He's asking for a chance to compete for the job. I thought that's what sports was about. I don't want guys on the team that wouldn't want a chance to compete and believe they should be a starter. Anything else is a loser attitude. To be fair to Harris, they probably need to trade him before ST so he has a fair chance somewhere else.

Thought number one, this current Administration probably didn't invent this. How long until we find out that this reaches way back? I will be shocked if this didn't happen during Clinton administration as well. At least the people that accepted the money are also the same ones that reasonably would have been accepted to approve of the plan even without the money. Maybe we are talking government waste here? Personally, IMHO, any columnist who has accepted money like this should be looking for new work.

Thank you.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jan 27, 2005 -> 03:18 PM) Dang, I pegged you as one of the few here that might also own a copy of that on good old vinyl. Cheater. I knew it was a Pink Floyd at least. It just took me a while to search out the exact title.

We lost Maggs and Lee, and Frank is a question mark. That's a lot of negative on that side of the scale. 5 of the 9 starters are gone from a year ago. They are replaced by a guy from Japan, guys coming off less than career years, and a guy trying to shake a clubhouse cancer tag. Where is the love?

QUOTE(mreye @ Jan 27, 2005 -> 03:01 PM) While I agree with you, I also see the miltary's point. Think about the costs. I know that the cost shouldn't really matter when it comes to the troops, but in reality, it does. Look at the budget to rebuild Iraq. I know there must be some accountability, but begging phone cards from US citizens isn't how I think our Troops should be treated. I want Nuke to have internet access to argue with me

QUOTE(mreye @ Jan 27, 2005 -> 02:36 PM) No comment, Tex? I still think it is ridiculous that soldiers rely on gifts and charity for a lot of their calls home. It is also up to their CO to determine if they even get those two. We are asking a whole lot of these people, and I believe close to unlimited calls home is the least we could do. Bush just asked for $80 Billion more, aren't are service men and women worth a few million in phone calls.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 27, 2005 -> 02:18 PM) Placing a player with a well run organization isn't a consideration of an agent? Yes, but telling a player to sign for less so the team can pay other players isn't. If the team doesn't think they can be successful paying the player that contract, THEY should not sign him to that contract. How do you define well run?

It isn't up to Boras to tell a club how to run their business.

Received today from my Senator