Texsox

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Aug 28, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) Xaxxon is the Warlord of the Citidel deck. (No, I'm not that dorky. I used teh Google.) you made me laugh

IIRC there are similar measures for television, radio, shortwave, etc.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 28, 2009 -> 12:48 PM) About stopping 'runaway health care' by deciding in advance, for every patient, which tests should be run. Which is impossible and poor medicine.

While I think the team possibly could benefit from a fresh face and approach; he certainly does not deserve the level of blame he receives here.

I honestly never disliked him, even when he was on the Twins. My favorite players are catchers. And gee, what a shocker, a sarcastic, get in your head, catcher, just might be someone I'd like.

Beautiful opportunity there in Minnyhaha

Zoology? Anyone majoring in Zoology?

I forgot he was so disliked. Unlike say, Rodman, where it was easy to see why he was disliked, or even dislike him while he played on your team, I find everything to like about AJ and nothing to dislike. Well, besides, as SS points out, we do not have enough of them running around.

QUOTE (Pants Rowland @ Aug 28, 2009 -> 10:18 AM) Trying to take this thread to the top? unbelievable! Uber cool

Sox season sucks in September

quiet around here

^^yep^^

QUOTE (3E8 @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:44 PM) http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/090826-135734

If only they had Adobe Photoshop, they used Microsoft Paint, no wonder it was f***ed up. With computer graphics, do we even know these were ever actual human models? I remember a documentary from twenty years ago that predicted the demise of television and movie actors as studios just used computers for everything. You want the customer to see themselves in the picture and to be sensitive to the culture of the target market. Poor execution.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 10:58 PM) 1979 through 1983 my dad usually took us to 1 game during each homestand, so that's probably 60 games or so. Before and after that we'd mae a handful of games each year, so I think the total is around 75 games. How many times do you curse out loud during the average 2009 Chicago White Sox ballgame? Less than one on average How many times have you quit a vice only to restart?

optimistic, aren't you.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 02:58 PM) That's what this whole thing is about. Wow. About stopping law suits by deciding in advance, for every patient, which tests should be run? Wow. I guess I've been reading a different thread

More?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 02:50 PM) Yet this is exactly what will happen with governmental health care. Then we need to be certain that does not make the final bill.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 02:43 PM) TEx, do you hear the words 'tort reform' and automatically think that it means nobody is ever gonna be able to file a wrongfull death suit or malpractice suit ever again? Or do you hear that if they ARE able to file that the award would be capped at some super low figure like $10,000? I am not advocating any specific plan for reform, but you can't argue that there doesn't need to be some kind of reform. C-section births are on the rise because doctors fear a natural birth complications. Tests are ordered that aren't needed, or may be needed for that 1 in 50 million chance of some super rare disease, for everyone, just to CYA. That costs time and money which can be better spent on other things. Tort reform needs to happen, in some form, along with numerous other changes. Some of which I posted a few posts back. It is not the end-all, but it has to be part of the final package, whatever it is. Sure, but at the heart of the reform usually is limiting access and awards to victims. And the reasoning is jury's awards too high of and it is too costly. Additionally innocent Doctors (actually their insurance companies) settle rather than fight. I'd rather see reforms that force innocent parties to defend themselves than decide in advance who has a legit case and how much is fair. Name a reform that would not limit someone's access to the courts or limit their award and I'm probably for it.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 01:40 PM) they would rather piss off everyone else in the country, except trial lawyers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaMj-WUC-aE...player_embedded I am certain it would also piss off the victims of medical malpractice while making the borderline Doctors very happy!

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:40 AM) tex, if a doctor is drunk or on drugs f***s up something, he SHOULD have to pay thru the nose. AND not be able to practice again. but when a baby is born and has a birth defect of some sort, the first course of action nowadays is to sue the doctors and hospitals, because it HAD to be somethign they did. Most setttle out of court to avoid the hassles, so it perpetuates the cycle. Those are the cases reform needs to happen for. Reform needs to happen so doctors can stop having to do defensive medicine and ordering every test under the sun just to cover thier asses. People complain about how many tests and labs get run, but if they don't run them, and then discover somethign later, they get sued. So who decides if the law suit is proper or not? How do you decide in advance that 99% of the Doctors would have run that test, or it truly is a waste? Our system is through the courts. When we automatically cut off access to the system who are we hurting and who are we defending? It seems like we take away the rights of the injured and give more rights to the guilty because the innocent will not defend themselves in court. The end result of most of the tort reforms I've seen are less access for the innocent victims and more protection for guilty (and innocent) Doctors. Build a better system and I'll support it. But I do not like the idea of a parent with a child who was born with a birth defect not having full access to the only system we have.

I believe it is called waving a white flag.

X-rated

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:34 AM) On the patriot part or that he should have retiered part? I can see them all vainly hanging onto their position, for the power, perks, money, prestige, ego, etc. None seem to want to give it up. As for the patriot part, like I said, being a Senator doesnt make you a patriot. if you think Teddy served all those years 'for the good of his country', you are sadly mistaken. Of course who would ever devote their lives to public service, that's crazy.