Texsox

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 29, 2009 -> 11:41 AM) The problem is that everyone won by Rose going to college. Memphis won because its program got recognition and went to the Championship. NCAA won because Rose played in the NCAA and therefore presumably brought in more fans, viewers etc. NBA won because they didnt have to draft Rose right out of High School so he got 1 year of development free. The NCAA wants these players in Division 1 programs, they dont want Rose going to a Juco and then the NBA. So if it wasnt Memphis, it would have been somewhere. I think thats why Rose is some what being let off the hook, because the NCAA knows this is what it takes to make sure the the top players go to big time NCAA programs. So true. As a society, and especially sports fans, now accept cheating as ok, or even necessary. Sad. Actually earning what you get is no longer necessary. Other kids in that class actually worked for their grades, but that is only necessary of you are not athletically gifted. f*** the regular students. Sorry, but when cheating is condoned, we all lose. It erodes at the foundation of our education system and our society.

QUOTE (rangercal @ May 29, 2009 -> 01:08 AM) anyone dogging rose should just go back to their cubicles at their 9-5's and take some more orders from their respective bosses. Too bad someone didn't alter their transcripts so they wouldn't be taking orders, they would be giving them.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2009 -> 08:18 PM) Excellent. Now you get why it is even dumber to be pissing away tax dollars into the auto industry under the guise of "high paying jobs". I've been trying to wrap myself around the current concept that high paying jobs are bad in almost every industry. It seems sad that Americans gave up on high paying jobs, at least for the "other guy".

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 27, 2009 -> 08:49 AM) The media outlets who think Ozzie is a clown are the out of town ones who are too stupid to realize that they are tools in the game of motivating his players. Ozzie is very calculated in his meltdowns, you do notice that they never happen when things are going good, right? It would be more accurate to say he "acts like", which is about the same with most people. How they act and how the are, often times can be different.

QUOTE (OilCan @ May 28, 2009 -> 10:28 PM) Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad, bad, bad... Roy-Os best days are behind him. Yes indeed, but what needs to be considered is this; are his current days a significant upgrade from the current days of the rest of this staff? A declining Thome (for example) is a upgrade from most other DHs in baseball. (To pull an example out thing air) The danger, and what you are probably alluding to, how fast and hard will the decline be?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 28, 2009 -> 08:49 AM) But there are people with spiritual beliefs who think you can live without food and water. We know they are wrong and that their child will die just as we know that these parents are wrong and that their child will die without treatment. No one is saying its 100% successful--that's not the point. The point is that not getting the treatment is 0% successful. You asked for a non arbitrary reason for the courts to step into one and not the other. That is what I am addressing here. The overall concept, nothing specific to this case. I've never heard of a spiritual believe against food and water, but as I mentioned, the rational for stepping in for nutritional neglect is scientifically we know that 100% of people who abstain from food and water will die. We cannot attribute that same certainty to any medical procedure. Treatments are not 100% effective or 100% without risks or side effects. So at best we can say that the odds of survival drop from X% to Y%. I do not believe it drops to 0%. There have been just enough non medical cures, especially ones the medical community does not recognize, to tell me 0% is not correct. That opens up a gray area, which is, IMHO, the reason why nutritional neglect, and it's solution (feeding tube) is justifiable in all cases (Terri Schiavo), but should be looked at very carefully with medical neglect.

Woo Woo! Double Senior Discount Day! Tell us the story again about driving to the '59 series? We'll pretend you aren't repeating yourself. Happy Birthday Doc!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 15, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) The courts are ordering the parents to follow the doctor's advice, so, no. Give me a non-arbitrary explanation for the courts stepping in for nutritional neglect but not stepping in for medical neglect. We know people will die without food and water. We also know that not all medical treatments are 100% successful or without side effects.

QUOTE (BearSox @ May 27, 2009 -> 08:17 PM) I'm sorry if I don't find an "empathic", racist, and socialist, judge who had to "struggle" to where she is now as qualified. This is nice, she quoted a socialist in her college yearbook: http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/20...t-yearbook.html "I am not a champion of lost causes, but of causes not yet won." Yeah, do you know the cause Norman Thomas was fighting for? Yeah, it was for America to be be socialist! I highly recommend reading this article I am posting. You can't really say it any better than this: http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowel...pathy_in_action Wow. I can't count the number of quotes I have referenced without ever delving into the background of the person. I may be a communist, mass murderer and not even know it. Kudos to you for being so careful about what quotes you use. That takes a level of dedication beyond what 99% of the planet would do.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 27, 2009 -> 01:32 PM) NK has no idea how the rest of the world lives. Their have been millions of people starve to death there, and there are still people starving every day in high numbers. Their average height has actually fallen to inches shorter than their SK counterparts because of the perpetual malnutrition that goes on there. You can trick people into fighting for many reasons, religion is usually the most effective, but not having anything to eat is the quickest way to get people to drop your particular cause. Agreed. Fighting for food, water, or oxygen is the greatest incentive of all. Those are the three primary motivations for everything we do.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ May 26, 2009 -> 10:05 PM) Should've hired some Mexicans from across the border. It probably would've been cheaper and more durable. Ahhhh, if it was built in Texas, rest assured it was built my Mexican-Americans or Mexican nationals.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 26, 2009 -> 09:28 PM) The problem is that unlike Saddam, Kim Il-Jong (or whichever son you believe will be the successor) may believe his own cult of personality that he is invincible and may be willing to send thousands to there deaths without even caring about crippling the country. Im not sure how strong the North Korean army is, I dont think anyone is. I just dont think that attacking North Korea is advisable. I believe he would send tens or even hundreds of thousands to their deaths. Which makes him having a nuke a bit worrisome.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 26, 2009 -> 05:29 PM) And the idea that we have to pay countries NOT to develop that technology is equally ridiculous. Not ridiculous at all. We bribe countries all the time to be our friends or to conform with certain behaviors. That is why a large chunk of our foreign aid is spent where it is. For example we could offer to protect country X from any invasions if they use our brand of nukes instead of building their own. Our collective wealth is one of our best defensive, and offensive weapons.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 26, 2009 -> 05:07 PM) Campaign funding Energize their base, etc etc etc Same for the other side

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 26, 2009 -> 05:01 PM) What's the alternative? Keep telling them no while we watch them build and test and then eventually obtain a nuke? We've tried economic sanctions, they agreed to stop, but they lied (same response twice now right?) I think strategic missile strikes and ousting Kim Krazy would be sufficient to send the message. I dont think it would be easy, or without a cost, but what's the purpose of obtaining a nuke? To use it right? So whose going to be the victim and is it in our best interest to protect them? And who comes to their aid? I really dont think either China or Russia would stand in the way if Europe, Asia and the US give it the green light. How many years have we been at war with Iraq? Now sit back and think for a little while what war with North Korea will be like. If that doesn't scare the shipps out of you, think harder.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 26, 2009 -> 04:49 PM) everyones racist except you impossible to pull that out. Especially when it is a "first".

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 26, 2009 -> 04:43 PM) Well since sanctions don't appear to be working, I would think that soon there needs to be a military option on the table. This isn't a US-NK thing, it's a world-NK thing. The only two parties in opposition are China and Russia (most likely), but I can't imagine they're excited about NK getting to the point of actually having a bomb. IMO there needs to be some serious coalition forces style intervention, lead by Asian countries. Scary if it comes to that. An invasion force on that peninsula will get ugly in a hurry. WW III level stuff.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 26, 2009 -> 01:12 PM) Nope, just love the name Van Reidhead! And the only people I know in the Valley (besides you) have LEFT the Valley. I'm not certain to give it a hard German pronunciation, or a surfer dude

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 26, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) Reidhead?!?! Friend of yours?

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 26, 2009 -> 10:30 AM) Which is why Reinsdorf is right in not signing pitchers to long-term deals. I usually dislike hard and fast rules without flexibility, but here it has served us well. I could see, and it would also depend on the total money, relaxing the rule for Mark B.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 26, 2009 -> 12:06 PM) Yes, as bad as Alito is (and he is by far the worst on that court IMO), Gonzalez would have been like making Andy Gonzalez your everyday leadoff hitter. a tip of the cap to that analogy

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 11:51 AM) Actually you suggested the UN is lying at the very beginning of this about the NK nuclear program actually being shutdown. Personally I really doubt it, but if it were true, it would explain the culture of corruption that goes on there. Perhaps I gave the wrong impression with that. If they were lying, and doing nothing, as I posted, that is wrong. If they were lying, with some justification behind it, *and* doing something, I have no problem with that. I wish I had a better example, but if the US went to the UN and requested, make this statement because we expect NK to do X so we can discover Y, and stop Z, I'm cool with that. Overall, I agree with what your thoughts were, I'm just not expressing mine very well. I disagree that groups like the UN or US have a culture of corruption because they disseminate some forms of misinformation. Again, along the lines of "we are not planning an attack". I would agree that there is some corruption in the UN, as there is in every human endeavor. My God only a fool would argue the UN does not suffer from some forms of corruption.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 11:47 AM) Sounds like the sanctification process started at about the same time. great point . Nothing like watching our two biggest brands, and no that is not Coke and Pepsi or McDonalds and Burger King square off. As Kap would say /popping some corn, watching the show.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 11:34 AM) The lie here is exactly what I am talking about. If the UN is saying there is no nuclear program, while there is, they are doing a diservice to the billions of people within thousands of miles of NK that could be hit by their current missiles tipped with nukes. You are correct that most of the time, in fact the overwhelming majority of the time, that honesty is the best policy. But, there are times when I find lying acceptable. Examples include "We are not planning an invasion", "We do not negotiate with terrorists". etc. I would guess we agree on that. The best outcome of this is for NK to be disarmed. The disservice would be to do nothing. On that we all can agree. That is especially beneficial to the billions of people within range of their missiles. If in the process of achieving that agenda item, the disarming of a nuclear Korea, lies are told, I'm comfortable. If, as you seem to be suggesting, and also sadly within the realm of possibility, the UN response is to lie and say there is no threat, *and* do nothing, then again, we will agree 100%. That is beyond wrong.