Texsox

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 12:10 PM) Testing clean doesn't mean players are 100% for sure clean. See also Armstrong, Lance. http://www.texasmonthly.com/2013-01-01/editorsletter.php 2012 Texas Monthly Bum Steer of the Year Winner. Beat out Snoop Dog (busted for pot at a checkpoint after Willie was busted at the same one), Randy Travis (found naked and drunk passed on in the center of the road), and Rick Perry (how not to succeed in the GOP primary).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 03:00 PM) And use the extra millions to improve something else. I am thinking of areas that could be improved and trying to think how money will help fill that hole. So far I'm kind of at a blank.

Grades were posted, if I was a battery, I'd be a AA

I was thinking about supply and demand and the comments that criminals will get guns anyways. If my economics logic isn't faulty, being able to rent a gun on the street for less than $10 tells me that there is a large supply to meet the demand. If the supply was reduced, guns would cost more to rent, and disrupt the nickle and dime armed robberies.

What I've learned is we can throw away all the laws. Criminals ignore them and it restricts responsible citizens. So forget drunk driving laws, people already drive drunk. Forget basically every law.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 16, 2012 -> 07:58 AM) Is the answer to make them safer take away MY guns? Seriously, because some people are f*cked in the head, do you think the solution is to stop ME from having a gun? And Tex, your suicide story would have happened anyway. He didn't just decide to do it because he had access to a gun. That is a whole different bag of issue. I'm not certain the suicide would have happened without a gun, but I will take your word for it. What I do know is with all those options, he selected a gun. Good choice, not many survive that attempt. But I do know that death by gun was at least one option he picked. What other options did he consider? And no, taking away our guns isn't the solution. We raised the drinking age and lowered the blood alcohol limit before someone is considered drunk driving. Now that hasn't stopped anyone from drunk driving or from 20 year olds from getting alcohol. Using the gun argument, we should eliminate those laws and allow anyone to drink and drive. There are plenty of responsible 17 year olds that could sit and have a couple drinks without any problems. But we decided that the answer to drunk driving was taking away their beer. Currently the debate will not be what is best for the country, the debate will be based on how much money the gun industry is willing to spend. The NRA will send out a fundraising appeal and people will line up to donate. I get it, if criminals are going to do it anyway, than why have the law? I'm just not certain if we would have any laws then.

After 9/11, to make planes safer we banned liquid soap and nail files because they are too dangerous. But to make theaters, schools, shopping malls, and damn well every other public place safer is more guns? Really? I just wish we could sweep away the bull s*** and have a national debate on what should, and what should not, be allowed. The world has changed since the original Constitution was *changed* with the 2nd Amendment. We now have a very large standing army to protect us. We now have supermarkets with lots of meat. We have gone from weapons that could be reloaded and shot once every 60 or 90 seconds to shots per second. We've gone from a single round in the gun to large capacity clips. We've improved the accuracy from 25 yards to half a mile. Certainly the boys who wrote the changes that were approved in 1791 would have had different ideas based on today's facts about armies and weaponry. Let's stop pretending that a gun is the same as a knife, bat, or pencil. Come back when you killed a deer with a baseball bat. A gun is one damn fine killing machine. They are incredible tools, with awesome capabilities. They are fun to shoot. But better than a Charles Atlas workout, they turn cowards into wanna be Rambos, they allow someone to extract violence from a distance. They can be used in moments, they don't take many steps like bombs or cyanide (couple emails I received showing how similar things are). I've told the story before, I made the decision when my kids were small to not have a gun readily available in my home for protection. To be ready, it needs to be easily accessible, loaded, and probably without a safety. You'll only have seconds. That is a recipe for disaster. But my attitude was shaped when I was in H.S. A neighbor of my girlfriend shot himself with his parent's gun. They said all the things that parents say who do have guns around "we taught him to respect it","he knew how to safely handle it", "we went to the range all the time", it didn't seem depressed". Now that my kids are older and mentally healthy, I keep a gun or two around. I don't need a M-16, I don't need high capacity clips, I don't need 10,000 rounds stored in a bunker.

26 people, still on the floor of their school, slowly getting cold, waiting to be transported to the morgue. Nice thread y'all.

I stopped my class around 2:00 and we talked for a few minutes then watched President Obama. My mom sent her second text message ever asking me if we had good security at my school. I explained they had Fox 40 whistles, the best whistles made. The lesson I taught about this, as it was happening, was how chaotic the reporting will be. How "facts" will change as the night leads to morning, as the weekend becomes next week. I even said serious mistakes, like the identity of victims or even the shooter may be made. Before the internet, the newspaper would have hours and hours typically to verify, now they are under pressure to report what they are told, as they learn it. BTW, not certain if it changes any opinions, but the parents have to agree to allow their children to be interviewed. I would have allowed my own kids to be interviewed. I did not see a problem with the interviews that CNN ran. They were first hand witnesses and could tell the story better than anyone.

How many Birthday Wishes have I sent you here? Eight? Nine? Damn, you are getting old! Happy Birthday!

QUOTE (Pods70Rowand33 @ Dec 13, 2012 -> 07:37 PM) What is GA? This is my third year of being a TA and I'm ready for it to be over. I don't think being a TA takes up a bunch of my time, it's just the lack of effort which bothers me and chasing down students to turn in their reports. I'm just really looking forward to this break Yes, graduate assistant. Here you would be helping with research not teaching. I was offered a spot with one if my professors to help with a book project he's got going. We couldn't make the schedule work out or I would have jumped on it.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 12, 2012 -> 08:01 AM) Turning in a revised paper this afternoon, then I am finished! More importantly, I'm hoping to get this published (fingers crossed). Looks like I'll be finishing this semester with 2 A's/2 A-'s or 2 A's/1 or 2 B+'s. Damn you, grade deflation What are you studying in grad school? Are you still teaching? Literature. Still teaching, but i stopped coaching while I'm working on the degree. But, the principal asked me to mentor a new teacher, which I am. Then yesterday I was asked by another new teacher to mentor her. The extra money doesn't make up for coaching, but it helps. Texas Tech has a non resident PhD program I have my eyes on.

I'm disappointed this thread never took off. I could easily be a REP if they went back to truly trying to balance the budget. The trouble I see is the difference between the GOP in media (Rush and the rest) and conservatives I know. Socially most (but not all) reject the party platform concerning women's rights and gay rights, yet the party leadership clings to it. The Tea Party types also drive me away. If SS2K5 ran the party, I'd be more comfortable. But from the leadership whose base is extreme religion or the Tea Party, it seems really racists, bigoted, and hateful. At the same time the DEM leadership that rejects religion irritates me as well.

You are correct and qi is another useful word

We're back!

So why did you click?

I agreed with Republicans on more issues fifteen years ago, but the divide has gotten bigger and bigger. I believe our best defense against the government are the courts and the press. The GOP seems to think those are threats and the only real defense are guns. I also agreed with the GOP more when I felt they were trying to balance the budget. Now that neither side seems to take that idea seriously, I find myself supporting those candidates less and less.

I am sitting here wondering what the level of interest is from the Sox. We want him back at any price (Definately not IMHO) We want him back at a fair price (Doesn't seem likely at this point) We want him back at a bargain price (Seems likely) We don't want him back at any price (unlikely)

My hot button issues are immigration, a balanced budget, health access for everyone, engaging in wars as a last and final resort, I prefer money be in the hands of the middle class, if someone should be allowed to kill another human, I prefer a woman killing her fetus to the government killing an adult. (I pray neither happens). I think we can always do better by going forward not returning to the 1950s.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 01:20 PM) There have been a lot of good stories here. It's fun and lighthearted reading. Great thread idea.

I know we're talking the team as a whole, but with all the Frank talk I want to add this, In my lifetime, no one could quiet a crowd like Frank at bat. Even if you weren't into baseball, you knew who Frank was. If you were at a bar, it seemed like time would freeze as everyone watched his at bat. Frank had to be Frank, but if he had MB's smile and outward love of the game, his endorsements would equal Jordan's.

The South Side Hit Men solidified it for me. Growing up in the north burbs I guess being a Sox fan connected with my contrarian side. Then there was fun at the ballpark. Nancy Faust, Bill Veeck, exploding scoreboards, roof top shots, it was a secret world so different than what I saw around me in Des Plaines. I would attend at least a game a week, sometimes more if I could get a customer to go. I loved the dumb ass windy 40 degree games when no body would be there or the 30 games out end of the season, again when Comiskey would be empty. I could go to a Cubs game and have a good time. But it was too corporare, too antiseptic for me. Today, hell if it's good enough for the President of the United States of America, well paint me red, white, and blue, it's good enough for me!

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Dec 10, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) Baseline budgeting is the problem. Fix that and we can start to have honest budgets in this country. Calling a cut in the rate of change in spending as an actual cut in spending is ludicrous. But these guys in Washington are clowns, so I expect nothing less from them. While I understand slowing growth could be considered a win, you are right. The other thing I dislike are announcing $100 bazillion dollars in cuts spread over 20 years