Texsox

Well when someone looks at the list and says who did not vote Frank #1, it will be me.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 07:18 AM) My generation and even the previous one to a great extent is a HUGE "ME" generation. It pains me to see people who give of themselves selflessly get kicked in the face for it. It discourages one of the things that really pushed our country to being one of the greatest in the world. Not being forced to give to those less fortunate, but WANTING to give. I don't think of it as anything special, just something that we all think about, and contribute what we can. Some people can give money, some can give time, others can give both. Most organizations that rely on volunteers and contributions talk about time, talent, and treasure. Everybody has something they can give. I give a little credience to the idea that earning a living in 2008 iss harder then 1950. It takes two wage earners in many families and they are working longer hours.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 07:44 AM) Where would we find the health care facilities and professionals to treat something like 50 million more people (the 15% of people number that is being thrown about)? I believe many are being treated already. In hospital ERs, without compensation to the hospitals. One area for improvement is moving these patients from ERs into a more appropriate venue. But that does brings up an interesting point. Perhaps the level of health resources in this country cannot support all the people here and having uninsured people is a good thing?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 07:20 AM) So giving people more health care, and less reason to be judicious about the care they seek is going to improve those conditions? No, of course not. That would have to be addressed. Are you suggesting that is an unsolvable problem?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 7, 2008 -> 11:45 AM) How would you add 15% more people to our current medical care capabilities without completely collapsing the system. We can't create more doctors, nurses, hospitals etc. How exactly do we improve the system? I am not certain what you mean. At least in my corner of the country, these people are being treated, often for minor ailments, in hospital ERs. The hospitals are not being compensated, or only partly compensated for these services. So it would seem the question is which is economically best. The providers picking up the tab and passing it on to their patients, or some other plan. Basically it is about the same as the uninsured motorist cost on our auto insurance, only better hidden. In most cases your for profit insurance company is making decisions on what treatments you will receive. Patients without insurance either visit the ER where they know they will be treated, or treat it themselves. While the "handle it themselves" sounds fine, communicable diseases pass from the uninsured to the insured just as easy. I'm also a big fan of small business in America. They are the most likely to invest in their community and not move their jobs off shore. It is tough for them to offer health care benefits to their employees. And someone making $25,000 a year cannot afford to spend 25% or more of their net income for health insurance. And unlike cars and homes, the cost cannot be shared. Four people living in one house divides the rent, but they cannot divide one insurance premium, at least not legally. I think any changes should be in small steps, but just because Canada or Britian has not found a better way, doesn't mean we cannot. We should be able to learn from their mistakes and make our system better. I also think any system will need a private pay option. We may be creating a two tier health system, but even that could be an improvement.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 8, 2008 -> 07:18 AM) You have a nutshell right there of everything wrong with 21st century America. Amen. You may or may not have meant it this way, but I took it to mean that not just unions would be guilty of this. I know you are very active in your community, the schools, YMCA, running a community message board, etc. All this our grandparents would have thought of as "community service". Now community service is what a celebrity in California gets for killing his wife. It happened quietly, but we did ourselves a disservice when we made community service a punishment. Following that reasoning, is it any wonder that some workers feel that someone was stealing their bread by performing something like this?

Chalk up another reason why I dislike unions and why they are losing ground in America. I hope even their members are embarrassed by this.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 6, 2008 -> 07:22 PM) If I had actually been in the audience, I would have been outraged. Nothing faux about it. But it gives everyone a chance to talk about race relations and the history of blacks in America. Gee, we can holler n***** in a public park, but this is wrong?

It's art and should be challenging and make you think. Wrong place and time.

Happy Birthday!!

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 4, 2008 -> 06:15 PM) Except that is was only the 'small' stations that would get charged the $5000 flat fee. If it was $5000 per station, I don't think the stink would be half as much as it is. The clear channel stations would certainly be charged something several times higher. True, but do you think any would be paying "Rush Limbaugh" money for Rush's Spirit of the Radio? The Beatles catalog = zero value. Rush = $400,000,000.

Oh s***, sucks to be him.

We do not pay taxes to pay for any government program. If we actually paid for government programs, why would Bush cut taxes while increasing spending?

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Jul 4, 2008 -> 10:25 AM) That's easy, Stren 4lb test on an Shakespeare Ugly Stick with a good old Zebco 33. Oh, wait. you meant bass, not bass, didn't you. My bad. Well pards that may work for sissy Yankee bass, but down here in the Lone Star state, y'all better bring some man size gear. Perhaps a Shimano Curado baitcasting reel on a G-Loomis rod spooled with 20lb test Spiderwire.

Happy Birthday!

I was just listening to the radio and was reminded of another brilliant thing to do, shoot your gun into the air! Yep, down here tonight guys (it's always guys) will aim into the sky and let a few rounds go. And they will come down, and usually someone is hurt.

Where in Texas are you? Seriously, I agree 100%. Leave the fireworks to the professionals.

And no way we could do something better then Canada!

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 08:14 PM) i had no idea radio personalities were responsible for this much revenue. Seems that asking a music station to spend $5,000 on the 24/7 music they play is a bargain

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jul 4, 2008 -> 04:54 AM) well, the fact that the Dodgers only offered Loaiza for Uribe should be an indication of how much they thought of Uribe. Or how much they thought we thought of Loaiza. I think yours is closer, but do not estimate the chances of finding a GM who is over valuing someone in your system.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 07:50 AM) Yes, its Tesla, as in Nikola Tesla, one of the true geniuses of the 20th centurty. Screw Thomas Edison, this guy was responsible for some of the greatest inventions and innovations of our time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla most underrated scientist ever.

A town decides to not spend the town's money on a play that the town's citizens may find offensive. People outside the town, demand that the play be staged "for the good of those citizens". That is civility and manners. Too bad manners and civility are no longer in fashion. This play would be great staged somewhere other than in a public park. So now public parks must be R-rated? When people cannot differentiate between a good time and a place for something and a poor time and place for something, the rest of the world should just go along with it? I'm done. It's obvious why this place becomes such a hell hole at times.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:13 PM) what is this great argument you think you are making? Yes then, there is a difference between starting to stage a musical then stopping because the award winning musical that families can go see "RagTime" has the N word in it. Because another theatre might not choose it for legitimate reasons like staging or cost, not because they are worried about a hypothetical scenario that would be easily explained anyway. If only the play had just excessive violence, then it'd go on without a hitch. I thought I was writing clearly, but since you still don't understand my "great" argument, let me try one more time: I believe that not offending people in an open air public park is a legitimate reason. It use to be called manners and civility. You obviously disagree. I believe that parents have a fair expectation when visiting a public park to not have their young children exposed, by a staged event, to concepts that may be beyond their understanding. You disagree. It would seem that you think anyone should be allowed to subject your children to whatever language, concepts, etc. they want. I disagree. So they decided, for their audience, a different musical would be better. You disagree.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:02 PM) Well I respect that they have a right not to stage a play but that doesn't mean I have to compliment them and pat them on their back, tell them this production of High School Musical was wonderful for EVERYONE. How many musicals will be staged by park districts this summer at out door venues in the US? Would you also condemn those theaters that never even considered this work? So applaud those that stage this musical and condemn everyone else. If you were staging a play outdoors, in a park, you would not be concerned about EVERYONE? Is there any venue you would? I would think that a park, open to the public, should have GP rated entertainment.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 05:55 PM) what a silly loaded last line. They aren't putting on a musical version of Paul verheoven's Showgirls, this is a fantastic piece of theatre that would be very intellectually stimulating and entertaining for the crowd. And I think some of you underestimate the importance of funding cultural programs. Let's assume it is the single greatest musical ever produced in the history of theater. Does ever theater have the responsibility to stage the musical? Again, the same group that looked into it, decided against it. Why are they more wrong then groups that never even considered it? And is every play appropriate for every audience and every venue? What is wrong with deciding that this is not suitable for children and staging something else?