Texsox

X-rated sells

There is no way that Ozzie would have misused him, that's crazy talk.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 05:59 PM) Sanctuary cities seem to make a lot of illegals pretty damn happy. Selective enforcement on immigration cases by INS makes a lot of illegals happy. Selective prosecution in the Justice Dept on discrimination cases seem to make progressives happy. Seems the side in power now chooses to ignore a lot of laws. Are you thinking of the same laws that have been ignored for the past 30 years by every administration?

Perhaps I will write a book which will be all my best and most illuminating posts.

Actually he placed blame on all corners of the government. unlike some here, he'll criticize both sides of the aisle. Of course since I want to support the troops, I support whatever mission the President has for them.

You keep looking for a perfect law in an imperfect word.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 05:16 PM) And can someone please tell me why having Congress actually deal with this issue over the last year when it was clear this person would be a target is a bad thing? Because the situation defies easy definitions which are requirements before writing the law.

more if you want it

know what I think?

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 04:21 PM) Obama Fried Chicken opens in Beijing. This is hilarious. Props to the Chi-Coms. They should have the rest of the Colonel's troops in there as well

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 03:47 PM) Again, you're 100% ignoring the point. Repeating the ways that the bad guys are bad does not change the fact that what happened in this case is not permitted by the law. If the bad guys are as bad as you say they are, and its been known for months, years now that this particular person was a target, then why has Congress not adjusted the law to deal with this scenario? Your argument that these guys are so bad because they don't follow the law is a great reason for Congress to act and fix the law. It is not an argument for why the law should be ignored. There is absolutely nothing stopping Congress from acting if you're right. The only logical conclusion that one can draw from Congress not acting is that Congress has higher priorities than dealing with people willing to commit acts of war against the U.S. Therefore, I must judge that Congress believes your points about how bad these guys are must be incorrect, because otherwise Congress would have acted. Because this isn't the first, nor will it be the last time, we have dealt with this kind of situation and used deadly force. Let me phrase it this way, during a war is it not appropriate to kill the enemy using drones, bombs, and assorted other weapons? The only difference I see is the enemy has no one national affiliation, there are no clear battle lines. You law does not apply.

Nah, go for it and see how it works out for you. College is all about experimenting and learning. You will learn a lot from that experience.

Great time to think of a new thread idea.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 12:15 PM) Again...the answer to this problem is to make it so that they also have the highest tax bill. But Ozzie is a job creator, we tax him and he will not be hiring more employees!

You are talking about laws, our enemies, including the people targeted, are committing acts of war. There is breaking the law, and there is flying jets into buildings. It would be nice if we could arrest them, but that's not how wars are fought.

And they said it wouldn't last . . .

well done grasshopper

u come as you are

smells like teen spirit

Most everything I post

Bench coach = Asst. Manager for many teams.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 11:58 AM) Kinda hard for Pena to be a surprise candidate when Rosenthal already reported the Sox's interest in him and Fisk would be a disaster; the last thing this team needs is a grump old man with ZERO experience running the show. Then no one would ever receive a promotion. I'm not certain Fisk would be a disaster coming on the heels of Oz. I also think there are better candidates than Fisk.

Well I guess you sat out the last few elections.

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Oct 2, 2011 -> 11:14 AM) Of course, you already know my solution. Never vote for non-veterans.

You presented the idea that you either support 100% or not at all. I am just pointing out it is really easy to support some but not all. People make decisions on where to deploy our Troops and under what conditions. Sometimes those decisions are wrong. Supporting, for example, ridiculous rules like only return fire, do not initiate or do not follow combatants into Cambodia, because to question it somehow doesn't support the Troops, is silly. Just like you can support some of the military but not everyone, others can support the Troops while while being critical of how they are being used. I find it morally reprehensible to cause the deaths of American soldiers for certain gains. Just because Congress or the CiC decides something is a worthy cause is not reason enough I should support that cause. That is your job. To blindly follow their orders. My responsibility as a citizen is to question why soldiers are being used. That's one of the oversights we have as part of the Constitution. And I lol at you voting for a liberal candidate who is a vet over a non serving conservative candidate. It just ain't going to happen vato.