Texsox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2009 -> 11:13 AM) The appellate court judge who ruled against the MLB owners and helped bring an end to the strike of 1995? Sonia Sotomayer. The best And the worse of our political system. But it is still the greatest on earth.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 11:07 AM) And the billions of people within range of their balastic nuclear missiles be damned. Nope. I don't buy that the UN should be purposefully lying to the world. I really believe that when you start to blur that line, it is when you open yourself up for being no better than the countries you are trying to stop from destroying each other. Look no further than the oil for food program. I am sure they had a great reason for that little white lie, but it does no good for the people murdered in Iraq by the enabling of Hussein for decades. As I suspected, we are thinking about two different things. I do agree with your example. But I'm not certain where you get the bolded. That was not my intent. The lives of those billions should be an agenda item for the US, and the UN. So much so that in the process of protecting those billions of people a lie needs to be told, so be it. I'd rather have the lie, than a nuclear armed North Korea. And I am not in favor of all lying, and certainly not for the corruption in the oil for food program. I will agree with most all of your examples, and there are many. However, there is a time and the place. Talk like 'we're not planning an invasion" while planning the invasion, is a perfect example of what I mean. It is acceptable for the US military and should be acceptable for a UN peace keeping force made up, in part, of US troops. Yes they are lying, but I believe it is acceptable.

Linked

Ex-con advised Cowboys on structure that collapsed Comments 0 | Recommend 0 May 26, 2009 - 11:07 AM The Associated Press IRVING, Texas (AP) -- The Dallas Cowboys used advice from a man who falsified his educational credentials and served federal prison time for drug trafficking to make major structural reinforcements to a practice facility whose collapse injured a dozen people. The Dallas Morning News reported Sunday that the consultant, Jeffrey Lawrence Galland, was engineering director of a Las Vegas company called JCI even though he had no engineering license. Galland acknowledged the newspaper's findings, but said his background had no bearing on his ability to help clients. Galland, 42, said JCI president Scott Jacobs, who is a licensed engineer, supervised his Cowboys work. Jacobs did not immediately return a call seeking comment Sunday by The Associated Press. His company has teamed up extensively in recent years with Canada-based Summit Structures, which built the Cowboys facility in 2003 and oversaw last year's reinforcements. "It is Summit's belief that all employees who worked on this project were qualified to perform the task he or she performed" and were properly licensed, Summit president Nathan Stobbe said in a statement Saturday, the newspaper reported. The Cowboys declined to comment. Galland provided a written summary of his credentials that says he has a bachelor's degree in physics from Eastern Washington University. The school said he pursued that degree but never graduated. The summary also says he has been working toward a master's degree in structural engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. School records show no sign he ever attended, officials said. Galland said Saturday that he completed all required credits for the physics degree but did not receive it after Eastern Washington officials wanted him to take a class that "I felt was unnecessary." An aide said Saturday that the summary was being corrected. Galland was arrested in 1994 after breaking into a home and pointing a gun at a woman in Great Falls, Mont., police there said. Charges included burglary and assault. The following year, Galland was convicted of burglary in state court and sentenced to probation. Then he pleaded guilty in federal court to using a firearm during a violent crime and conspiring to distribute cocaine and marijuana, court records show. The tentlike practice facility came crashing down in fierce winds May 2, permanently paralyzing scouting assistant Rich Behm.

QUOTE (Reddy @ May 26, 2009 -> 10:23 AM) maybe i was just ignoring it Some people are very good at that, I wish I was.

Better yet, allow me a concrete example. I believe it is our best interest that North Korea does not possess a nuclear bomb. That makes it an agenda item for the US. I believe it is in the world's best interest that North Korea not possess a nuclear bomb. That should make it an agenda item for the UN. If for example, the US announcing that they believe NK has stopped research, in order to perhaps flush them out, or make them careless, a little diplomatic lie is acceptable. I give the UN the same opportunity to use that strategy.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 10:29 AM) That only backs up my claim that the UN is not functioning how it is supposed to if it has agendas like countries do. I have always considered the UN made up of countries, and has the accumulation, combination, and summation of all those countries agendas. If a strategy works for the US, England, Brazil, and Norway individually, why would those countries abandon that strategy when they are working collectively? I believe we do agree that the UN has a long ways to go to reach its full potential. It brings out the worse in all nations, and I guess, occasionally, the best. I've always respected and enjoyed reading your UN thoughts, so I am trying to understand your point. Could you give me an example of something the UN should be doing that would not be part of some country's agenda? I guess that is where I am lost and perhaps we have a definition discord here.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 10:13 AM) Well if the UN is willing to lie to billions of people under the guise of "diplomacy" that really says all you need to know about that particular organization. It probably goes a long way towards explaining the corruption that has racked it recently as well. Isn't that what the US does as well? It seems every country makes announcements while doing something else. The first examples that comes to mind are moldy oldie, but we denied ever targeting Castro for execution. We denied having operations in Cambodia during Viet Nam. You do not tip your hand fully to the other side.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 26, 2009 -> 10:10 AM) I can't wait for the swift UN response - "hey stop! seriously this time. or else...we might do something..." What would you suggest is the proper response for the UN and how would they back it up?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 09:00 AM) Many are, the UN being the biggest one. I always assumed it was more a diplomatic front, than an actual belief.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ May 26, 2009 -> 09:50 AM) The Republicans have never had the fight that the Dems do or did over Justices. Which is interesting when you factor in their campaign strategy of "activist judges". You would think the group that complains the most about judges, would focus more efforts on the conformation process.

Quality post SS. There are so many games in the season, and they seem to pass by so quickly, it is great when when someone catches a moment like that.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 26, 2009 -> 08:58 AM) This is exactly what I was trying to say in another argument, I mean thread. The pick's political idealogy should have NOTHING to do with it. But of course, it does. I guess I should say, unless the pick is a Communist or something crazy like that. But Bush should have been allowed to nominate, and have approved, a true, dyed in the wool, conservative, if that is what he wanted and Obama should have his choice as well. I'd rather focus on tough to know stuff like integrity, citizenship, honor, and character.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 26, 2009 -> 08:41 AM) Well, yeah, but realistically do you think a liberal is ever going to knowingly nominate a conservative, and vice versa? No they won't, I'm thinking the conformation process. What I have said before, with Bush, was he could nominate the most conservative, far right, person he wants, and that should not be a factor. Same with Obama.

/dreaming As I said with Bush's nominations, political ideology should not play a role. Character should be the focus.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 26, 2009 -> 08:25 AM) So in other words, they never did fully shut down their program when they said they did because they just managed to put together a nuclear bomb in six weeks or so. As long as a country has a University, they have a weapons program. I don't think anyone is ever fooled otherwise. Nothing on this planet elevates a country like oil or a nuclear bomb. Toss in being just crazy enough to use it and instant invitations to all the cool country events.

It is good to see.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 25, 2009 -> 05:00 PM) That's fine then, I guess message boards need those who just come by to take pot shots at the rest while really providing no opinion of their own. I'm not entirely sure why you even bothered to read the comments in this thread considering the vast majority of them are likely to be opinions of the writer's opinion and the rest will be opinions of the opinions of the writer's opinion. After all, that would be boring. Perhaps you just can't pass up an opportunity to point out the many hypocrisies of this board's posters. You say the board consensus is that this team is going to suck for a while, I don't think that's the case at all. So naturally I'm going to be curious as to why you hold this opinion. What I think most believe: this team has a good young core, an owner willing to spend, a s*** load of money coming off the books, a very good farm system and an aggressive general manager with a knack of dealing the right guys at the right time. Sound like a recipe for a quick turn around if things don't work out this year. I still find it interesting that you were able to determine a board consensus after 3 posts (I believe that's how many posters stated their displeasure with the posted article), seems like a sample size issue to me. Of course it's awful hard to determine your real point when you're speaking in generalities. If you're going to start calling out hypocrites perhaps you should start with the people in this thread.

QUOTE (rangercal @ May 23, 2009 -> 11:16 AM) This thread should be renamed to "CROW BUFFET" That's why they play the games.

Happy, Happy, Birthday!(2)

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 25, 2009 -> 12:11 AM) Not entirely sure where you read that one. I'm Curious who exactly believes this team's future is beak, since you're confident enough to put it in a post calling people out I'd love to hear some names. I'm almost positive the 3 people in this thread that have expressed their displeasure with the premise of the posted article are not amongst those you speak of so we can cross them off to start. Blanket statements are fun though. I'm also curious what your opinion is of the article. I am not going to wade through old threads and find those that have criticized KW for depleting the farm system, not finding a reliable lead off hitter, center fielder, or any of the rest. I could point to Josh Fields is a bust type threads. The I'm sick and tired of this s*** threads. The posts where we should blow up this team and start a rebuilding process. If you have not read them, I'm not going to read them for you. And I'm not curious about your* opinion of the article, but I thank you for being curious of mine. The article is the perspective of one guy who does not follow the Sox as closely as most here. Often times the out of town writer opinions take a season or two to change. The opinions have to be formed while writing on deadlines. The writer does not have the luxury of living and dying with one team, so they are never as accurate as the hometown beat writers. Of course, the hometown guy is also an idiot if he disagrees with the average poster's opinion. *or anyone's opinion. An opinion of this writer's opinion is kind of boring.

Did anyone think Peavy came here, read how badly this team sucks, and is going to suck for a long time, and decided not to come? I've been reading for months here how this team sucks, then when it's in print elsewhere, suddenly that writer is an idiot

It's a shame that people of faith receive so little respect here. Their ideas are dismissed on a regular basis. They are told they should not have opinions on much of anything from alcohol laws, to what is shown on TV, to basically anything that has to do with public policy. With that, I shall leave. Sorry of I have offended anyone with my "off the rocker" faith.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 18, 2009 -> 08:47 PM) So everyone who believes in a deity is "off their rocker"?