Texsox

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 02:05 PM) Well, you'd have to admit that the tar in your lungs wouldn't be good. But that's such a bs line of logic. Let's refuse people the right to use cars or to eat fast food. God knows how many trillions of dollars governments spend on those health care related costs (yet another reason why a government funded health care is a terrible idea). bs line of logic? We would be taking an illegal substance and legalizing it. You are describing legal things and then making them illegal. The bs logic would be since A is bad we should allow all bad things as well. Would legalizing cause usage to increase or decrease? I believe it would increase. So why would it be a bs line of reasoning to actually look at the risks and health costs before taking that step? It would seem that a prudent thing to do is analyze all factors before acting.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:56 PM) I define negative as spending a majority of your time pointing out how the other person is a bad guy have you looked at your last 3,000 posts

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:40 PM) Cindy McCain on the Today Show, May 8, 2008: "What you're going to see is a great debate. Which is what the American public deserves. None of this negative stuff, though. You won't see it come out of our side at all." And how should this make me want to vote for Obama? What in your bolded message should make me want to vote for Obama? Or is this an example of the negative campaign strategies you oppose? The most negative stuff I have seen this campaign are your posts

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:52 PM) To my knowledge there are no links between marijuana use and cancer. There was a guy on another board I go to that had access to databases of medical studies (not open membership unfortunately or I'd go dig it up) and he couldn't find any studies that said there was. I wonder who would fund such a study? To determine if an illegal substance also caused cancer? I'd have been more surprised if he found one.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) Based on the record number of people who voted in the Dem primary I beg to differ. Based on the tighest primary race in my lifetime fueling voting late into the primary season, I stand by my statement. Negative ads would have been extint a few decades ago of they didn't work.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:52 AM) The Age issue went away after 9/11 when the US cracked down on the fake birth certificates and that sort of stuff. The young players just can't get away with that phony documentation anymore, at least not when it comes to them playing professionally within the states (minor league or major league level). If they are playing in the Venezuelan leagues there is the possibility that they aren't the age they indicate. Realistically the only players who could be of the wrong age are players who already were granted visas pre 9/11 (El Duque, Contreras, etc). While tougher, it still is not impossible. Plus, it is easy enough in Latin America countries, where mordida or "little bite" is a way of life, to bribe an official and have an altered birth certificate. Is it as bad as it was? No. It is way better. Would I accept absolutely their ages are correct? No.

QUOTE (DABearSoX @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 11:17 AM) THIS.SEASON.IS.OVER. GREAT! We won the division by .5 games and play Tampa Bay in the 1st Round!!

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 01:02 PM) You and I know that but the average American who doesn't pay much attention as we do will look at things like commercials and newspaper headlines. Most people don't spend several hours per week reading political blogs and what not. Which is why negative ads work so great. Fear is a far bigger motivator then hope.

Makes a lot of sense, but it has made sense for fifty years. And I was thinking the smoking bans around the country may make it easier to pass this. It would be unlikely to have pot smokers in bars, etc. since tobacco has been banned in so many places. Have they ever developed an instant roadside check so that the impaired driver issue could be better resolved? That to me is still a huge hurdle. We can nail drunk drivers pretty easy, we would need the same for pot smokers if this was to pass.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 12:37 PM) I don't know why he should be president. He's too busy complaining about his opponent to tell me why I should vote for him. Really? I was just looking at his web site and there was plenty of information there. Unless your mind is already made up.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 12:49 PM) That money has to come from somewhere when a bank fails (taxpayers). Also, don't keep more than $100k in a single bank account. If you really want that much cash just sitting there, open up a second account. Which basically means the entire amount would be covered anyways. I did a little reseach, the anount was raised to $100,000 in 1980.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) kudos on the subtitle. Thanks, I do what I can . . .

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 11:33 AM) McCain likes to make it sound like every "pork" project would no longer exist under his watch. It's just not true. his argument is that it should be it's own bill, not an earmark. He tends to gloss over that part. And what is Obama's plan reagrding pork barrel projects?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:30 AM) Right. I would think that they would take a loss if the bank completely failed (which is almost certain to not happen). Isn't it time to increase the FDIC levels? Hasn't it been $100,000 for about fifty years?

So McCain is running negative ads. Tell me how that makes him a bad choice to be President? To me that is all about style and not substance. How does pointing to his ads and screaming negative! negative! translate to why I should vote for Obama?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:39 AM) I want to point out that its never a good thing when you have to bench a guy making 12M a year for the next few years. It prevents you from moving him and obviously since your benching him you are clearly getting on production. The deal which was once a bargain is quickly turning into a complete albatross. I love Paulie for all that he's done in a Sox uniform, but I honestly could care less what the Sox could get for him as long as they could find a creative way to unload that contract and free up first base. I think it is still a little early to believe Konerko's career is almost over, or that he will drop off that steeply. I believe some rest will work wonders.

Funny we don't seem to mind these "illegal aliens".

Seriously, someone run through this visit/non visit and tell me how it should influence someone's vote? What insight does this offer on Obama and how he would be as President?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:21 AM) You remind me of a troll I used to know...

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 10:23 AM) 'Tis the truth but with the way the pitching has been lately, it certainly wont hurt to have your best defense out there and Anderson might just be the best defensive cf in the AL. Looking over the season and looking forward, this could be the September slump, only sooner. A couple banged up players needing rest or rehab, summer doldrums, a division rival getting hot. It's easy to believe the Twins cool back down and we get a surge and bump from a couple veterans returning and life is good in Soxdom once again. I don't think that is pie in the sky or blind optimism. Just the realities of watching many baseball seasons unfold.

While and improvement, it isn't like we're trotting an All-Star replacement out there. If that was the case, the decision would have been easier.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 08:20 AM) Wait a minute, so this person is blaming the "hate filled right wingers" for the shootings? Or am I not reading that right? Nevermind. I was reading it wrong. But, I think the premise here is a lot over the top. Yep, over the top. There is a valid point in there. I cannot think of a vice or hatred that cannot be fueled in modern day America. And that fuel is out on display and readily available, without any restrictions. Such is life in an open society.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2008 -> 08:38 AM) Exactly the point I was trying to make. There is NO WAY that a person in their own party would be saying that they want Stevens seat right now. Yet the question has to be asked and denied. I do have some thoughts about him losing his positions while enjoying the presumption of innocence guaranteed by our Constitution. Have we finally all but abandoned that legal ideal in favor of media reports and rush to judgments?

I agree. Plus if we want to truly get rid of crappy teachers, and there are some, but not as many as some may think, who will do that if we cut back on administrators? Someone has to be reviewing the teacher enough to offer a fair evaluation. We keep demanding more and more accountability from teachers, but accountable to whom and how? That usually means additional supervisors. Once again, we have to be careful what we wish for. And test scores suck as a barometer. My bestest friend teaches third grade. I have subbed for her and have helped grade papers the past three years. The difference in the overall talent between those classes was easily seen. Was she a better teacher with the high achieving group and worse with the low achieving? I seriously doubt it. It also fuels all the workshops and classroom time devoted to "how to take this test". I wish I had a better example, but some of the "skills" are along the lines of "if you see the word compare in the question, eliminate answers with exact, more, and less, and look for like or almost". It is a soft science in evaluating teachers, but we have demanded some objective evidence, and are paying the price for it.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jul 29, 2008 -> 11:14 PM) You still have to show that he more likely that not was drinking. With the more recent allegation that he admitted to police that he had a couple of drinks he would be screwed. Otherwise just saying he smelled of alcohol would almost certainly not be enough to show he more likely than not was drinking. Cases are decided all the time on the testimony of witnesses and cops make excellent witnesses. A jury or judge would have to decide if, based on the testimony, he was drinking. Cop and other witnesses on one side and other witnesses and Smith on the other. The cop gets on the stand and describes what he saw, heard, and smelled, and I can easily see a conviction. Remember it was zero tolerance. They don't have to prove he was drunk, just that he had a sip.