Texsox

and always, always, show her all your posts here, that will really impress her

I heard the family is supporting her. While she has no income, the family does. She is practicing traditional family values and staying home to raise their children. The zero population growth discussion has been around for 40 years that I can remember. Nothing new. Some countries already have programs in place.

You better come at me with more than a flame shirley

wtf? Tex is nominated!? Who the hell wants to drink with a crazy ass, gun totin', religious nut, liberal? I nominated Shipps. Could it be the warm beaches and legal brothels close by?

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 3, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) You'd hope so, but it usually doesn't work that way. Most people are jerks and when they get free or reduced cost meals they manage to forget it takes just as much effort for the waitstaff to serve as full price meals and go cheap on the tip. I tip free drinks big.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Feb 3, 2009 -> 10:29 PM) In their defense, 15% of $0.00 is 0. Cheapskate 25% of $0.00 is $0

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 12:40 PM) I understand how prosecutions work, I just believe in this case the govt is out for spite against Bonds because he did not give them what they wanted in the Grand Jury. The truth? yeah, they can be vindictive when you f***ing lie to a grand jury

The argument that it is unfair you are prosecuting my guy, but not these others, is silly. If we actually believed it, no one would ever be prosecuted. That is not, and has not, ever been the case here. There are just too many variables between cases. I was a huge Clemens fan, I felt he was one of the greatest pitchers I've witnessed play. Now that I know that was partially drug produced, I am very saddened. I hope they keep him out of the HoF.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 12:51 PM) Or Foley or Hastert? Nope, I just never really pay attention to that position.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 12:43 PM) No Newt Gingrich or Tip O'Neill? Newt was the only one I could remember, mostly because I place him in my top 5 most intelligent elected officials of my lifetime. I forgot about the Tip'ster

At this point I do not believe Obama has an option other than allowing the military to dictate the strategy. IMHO he risks too much by making changes until he has his feet underneath him. Plus it will build trust as a non-military guy takes over as Commander-in-Chief.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 10:37 AM) She has to be the stupidest Speaker of the House we have ever had. I couldn't even name two other speakers, so I guess at least she's been memorable and quote worthy.

QUOTE (mreye @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 12:03 PM) Yeah, I get that, but I still don't like it. It's like the people of my church voting down an usher and then we introduce him as our new Deacon. (No, we don't vote for ushers. Just saying) It should make someone pause. But I think the skill sets are sufficiently different. My Deacon would suck at running our basketball league. I wouldn't want the guy that runs our men's basketball league, leading the choir, and the choir director would be the last person to run a youth program (he's old and ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz) and our choir director would never win an election.

The Killer Bees, my local team, then auctions them off for charity.

Since moving to a minor market, I've grown to love minor league promotions. That one is so sweet.

I see him popping up around the All-Star break to make a run with somebody.

QUOTE (mreye @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:52 AM) Just to throw this in the mix as well: I disagree with the pick of Daschle on different grounds...if the people of South Dakota didn't want him to represent them anymore, why should he be elevated to a position of leadership for the entire United States? Two different jobs, two different skill sets. I can see that. Many great CEOs of corporations would be terrible on the campaign trail and never be elected, that doesn't mean they would not be excellent picks to run a large bureaucracy. Gates comes to mind. So not getting elected doesn't concern me too much.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:36 AM) How do you rack up $120k in taxes on a driver and car in 3 years, anyway? Basically certain perks are considered taxable income. For example, if your company has a "crash pad" in Mexico for employees to use when it is more convenient than crossing back into the US and returning, your nights living there could be considered income because they are providing housing. And while they are scrutinizing this, they may see flights from Texas to South Carolina with a long layover in Chicago without any natural business dealings in Chicago. A portion of your plane ticket could be considered income.

QUOTE (mreye @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:42 AM) OK. I hear ya. I thought you meant the "official" process. For the most part, I'm with you, I believe. I don't sit hear and believe that Obama knew that Daschle didn't pay his taxes and decided to nominate him anyway. My main problem, and this is a problem I have with both sides, is that he still defended the pick once the tax "evasion" was made public. And continued to defend until Daschle pulled himself out. That is a fair question and I really dislike the ethical quandary that puts the country in. On one hand, we want the best results with every pick. On the other hand, we want perfection, or pretty damn close to it, before we confirm somebody. When we start tossing stuff like this on a scale, it begins to stink. But getting back to the original comment by Biden. I disagree. Just paying taxes does not make you patriotic. There is so much more.

Dear bailed out companies: So we taxpayers gave you money and now you want we the taxpayers to butt out. I have a problem with that. If you want my money, it is coming with some strings. I did not give you money for a new jet or to throw a party. So if you are now pissed that I want some control, too bad. I'm going to be p;aying for your mistakes for many, many, years. Yours truly, Tex

QUOTE (mreye @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:31 AM) I get your point, Tex. But, did the process find this out or was it some blogger or the like? (It's a legit question, I don't really know) And I would consider the public as part of the process. The names are released and all of a sudden many, many, people get involved. I always like the public getting involved. Bottom line for me, and ymmv, I'm done expecting any vetting process to be 100% fool proof. No administration has managed it for a very long time. To me it becomes silly partisan b.s. which flips each time the party changes. And in the back of my mind, I knew this would happen, and when I was saying the same thing for Dubya, I knew the day would come when I could come to a Dems defense as well and it is going to happen for the next Rep President. So, I ask my fellow American GOPs, why not be consistent today and say, at least it was caught before the nominee was confirmed. Because y'all know this will never end.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:25 AM) How many Americans on average per year as a % would cheat on their taxes though? Homer Simpson did. Does that make him unpatriotic? It isn't so much cheating, but the average American can not truly understand the totality of the tax code. Errors are made, and corrected.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:17 AM) It's the job of the vetting people to assume that people being considered for positions may not disclose all of their personal issues if there are in fact any. Or at least it's supposed to be. That does not excuse someone from lying or withholding information. That is what a responsible person should do. Shifting their bad behavior to someone else, seems wrong to me.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 11:17 AM) That is what the vetting process is for. Agreed. But we have had these sorts of surprises for 20+ years. Are we seriously going to believe any administration can solve this? We have an entire process, including the hearings. I'm not going to blame any President or staff when the process turns up these sorts of issues. When these sort of issues are not discovered until the person takes office, then we can look at the process and begin to see where mistakes were made. So while some go flipping based on who the President is, I'm staying consistent. It's kind of nice

The entire vetting issue has gotten too out of hand. And just like I said for Bush's picks, I can say here, discovering this stuff is why we have confirmation hearings. The process is working as long as this stuff is discovered and dealt with.