Texsox

Wow Brando. You win. I was there and you weren't, but I have to admit your opinion of them must be more accurate. Not many people would try and argue about an event they have no information on. How about the traffic at Nolana and 10th. I think it needs a longer left turn lane since B&N and Buffalo Wild Wings opened, what do you think? I think they should have rebuilt the Civic Center on 10th Street instead of moving over to Ware Road, what's your opinion on that? By the way Aquilera's biography is "a road map for immigrants to follow". I found the comment to be rather silly, but I guess you'll defend the person who said that. This student thinks "every immigrant should read an follow the Aquilera story since she is successful." Oh yeah, the first generation Mexican immigrant who is working two jobs to make ends meet should emulate Aquilera. Anti-intellectual because I want to hear people's opinions not what they just heard from a talking head on the tv? Anti-intellectual because I do not think there are many great truths in the pulp bio of a sit com actor or rap star? These books sell because of advertising. I am certain you, like one gentleman in my class, may find "great ideas and how to solve life's problems" by reading about the cast of Friends. 5)

Career DH, love affair with the media, championships, All-Star appearances. Sorry not a first ballot. I find the whole first ballot thing weird. Like the guy improves in a year of not playing. Frank is going to need another strong season or two. I believe for a couple year span he was the best batter in baseball. I was going to say hitter but his eye was awesome. I can remember bars falling silent when Frank came to bat. The confidence he showed at the plate is world class.

Even without a PAC, groups have been known to bundle their contributions when presenting them to the candidate. As in "Hi this is Morey. We have 20 checks from our execs and we would like to meet with the candidate to give them to him. By the way is the candidate aware that recent gov't regulations have impacted . . . "

SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - Janet Jackson's nearly bare breast during the Super Bowl halftime show was the most replayed moment measured by TiVo Inc. (TIVO) in its short history. The TiVo service, which allows users to pause and do instant replays of live television, found that Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" attracted almost twice as many viewers as the game highlights. San Jose-based TiVo did not release specific numbers. It has measured Super Bowl viewing patterns since 2002. The data was gathered on a zip code basis from an anonymous sample of 20,000 TiVo households. How many tapes would have been running if they promo'd it?

Rest of the story

From http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/2816089/detail.html

I see what the Hidalgo Killer Bees are doing to build a fan base where there was none and it is amazing. They will do everything but have a player come to your door and take you to the game. Of all minor leaguen teams, they are in the top 25 in attendance in the US. And they are less than 10 miles from Mexico. The only ise down here is in a margarita

Best commentary so far

Wirtz is a puzzle. Certainly he knows he could make more money by selling home tv rights, yet he doesn't do that.

I do not think you can compare a sports franchise with other businesses. First of all, in the real world, you do not have to lose money for a quarter to make money. You will have expenses of course but most small businesses can not withstand a couple quarters worth of loses. Most corporate boards would be breathing down the neck of a CEO who isn't showing a profit every quarter. Businesses need to plan for future expansion, structure their debt load in a manner which enables them to operate, etc. But this really doesn't amount to anything with a baseball team. Most owners have made a pile of money before getting into sports. I can believe some owners plan to continue to invest every year and operate at a loss. "Hey, I made $46,00,000 at my day job, so I will give the team and extra $12,000,000 to get a player. Others will try and break even, and I"m certain a few will try and make some money. This is, for some, a hobby, albeit a very expensive hobby. Do we care what the Sox bankroll is if we win? Get to the playoffs every few years and I could give a s*** if it costs you money or you make money. Baseball doesn't have an artificial salary cap, they operate like all of the businesses we work at. Free market. You can spend as much as your business situation will allow. Baseball workers are like us, free to cut the biggest and best deal possible. If your company came to you and said we could improve market share by 3% if you took a pay cut and we hired Jaime Smith, would you say Sure! Let's do it!? Likewise, it's tough to fault a player for not doing the same. We have what we have with Jerry squared. I would love to see Cuban buy the team, I think he would throw everything into trying to win like he has with the Mav's. I also think he would take seriously the contest for fan loyalty in Chicago. But it will not happen. There are only a handful of owners in all of sports who are that focused on winning and have the resources. I believe the Sox payroll would be much higher if we were the only team in Chicago and had the revenues to justify it. I do not think Sox ownership is making millions in cash every season. There riches as based on the value of a baseball franchise rising. Something you really can not spend until you sell.

It's 33% great 33% OK and 33% what was he thinking putting this crap out. It's been out for almost 1 year I believe.

I've seen some of those as well. I am going to assume that until the contest is crystalized, people will be in flux. For example if Kerry is sellected and picks (for example) Sharpton as his running mate, minds will change. If Bush makes a monumental blunder minds will change. I do not believe 90% of Americans will stay firm for 10 months.

I think I still have my "black box" descrambler from those days. Hmm, maybe I will put it on eBay as a collectors item . . .

LMAO Weird Al's parody is better

Yes, and it is

I love how politicians try and argue both sides of an issue. Clinton's draft issues wasn't suppose to mean a thing in 1992 but the GOP kept trying to hammer at it. Now the roles are reversed and the GOP is saying W's favors are not an issue and the Dems are trying to hammer away. Both sides make me laugh. They are mostly cut from the same cloth and we accept it.

Damn East Coast bias How many hours does your next program require "in residence" to earn a degree? Some require more than 30. I'm certain you checked.

Looking at the law of thirds. A third will vote for Bush no matter what. The straight ticket GOP, the conservative, the anti-who ever is on the Dem ticket, etc. Another third will vote for the Dem for the same reasons, including he isn't Bush. Winning the other 1/3 is the battle. Generally they are the middle of the road politically. Do not identify with either party and they may or may not vote. That's were they start selling sizzle over substanance. Sound bites and negative ads. It's too bad because free elections are the backbone of our process.

Popular theory is spending money = votes. I think you are correct. For some reason this time the public doesn't seem to be in the mood. I wonder how he will react.

For a long time I read very little fiction. I've been reading a bit more fiction and I find it more enjoyable then when I was younger.

The Dems are the hot topic since their nomination is being contested. I thought we should also have a GOP forum. Even if George W isn't on the campaign trail he is campaigning from the Rose Garden. Is he doing the right things? Will some weird karma be in play where both he and his dad are 1 timers? What can he do to get re-elected? The last scientific poll I read shows the country about 50-50 regarding his approval rating. Obviously he can win or lose. Would a different running mate help or hurt? Some said his dad lost when he kept DQ. Is he trying to buy voterd with election year spending? Does it work? I am trying to separate politics of a policy vs. the relative good or evil of the policy itself.

Public money means spending our taxes. Private money buys advantage and opportunity for the weathly. Both mixes the worst of both. How would you fund the elections? If you decide public or both how would you determine who gets funded? Can anyone apply? Should it be matching where they only get funded if they already have money. If private should there be limits? Should an American have the right (some would argue it's a free speech issue) to give $10,000,000 to a candidate? Does that buy too much favor?

I never got past the birthday party when I was in High School. ZZZZzzzzz A few years ago my son begged me to read the first book and I was hooked. I guess everything in it's time.

Interesting points. Politics is money. But money flows to the guy who is in need. If my guy is cruising to an easy victory (theory is) he doesn't need my donation. If my guy is locked in a struggle I better send him some support ($$). Then you have the front runner mentality. The guys who are 4/5/6 in this are toast when it comes to raising money unless they have a single agenda that is fueling it. For example, Sharpton's financial supporters may continue while his/their message has a wide platform.