Soxbadger

Its not a semantics argument, you are changing the entire nature of his post from one that was purely speculative, to one that was "wishing for a certain result." The post does not have any sort of "wishing" and I doubt that Kap or Northside were "wishing" when they said similar comments. I think at the time of the posts, people were some what perplexed by the fact that Republicans had selected some one who was so unknown, and with that selection many people felt there was a risk of it blowing up in their face. I dont really believe that is wishing for one outcome over another, I think that is merely stating an opinion on a subject, hence why it was posed in the form of a question. /shrug But people just want to make points and not care. So far no one has stood up for what was done to Palin, and it seems Democrats in this thread are pretty unified in their stance that this was over the line. So once again, not sure the relevance of that past statement.

Not to speak for Flasox, But I believe the very important part of his post was: Sounds like it was speculation based on IF they found something "radioactive". I dont believe that they ever found anything that fit that statement, so not sure the relevance. It was more speculation on what the Republican's would do if Palin had some sort of massive skeleton in her closet...

I really doubt many sane Democrats would feel that there was any connection between hacking Obama's email and McCain. My guess is it would be filled with people saying it was race motivated...

Okay I understand Richards was going well, but after he gives up the tie why do you let him face Cano who is 2 for 2?

Steam Fangs Palin reporting for service. (or if I dont use my middle name) Pistol Tanker Palin

Thortons inability to control his fastball is what keeps him from being an upper echelon reliever. If he could just throw more damn strikes he could be so successful.

Kalapse, Not everyone sees things the way you or I do. I think Floyd found himself with the Sox, and I think a lot of it has to do with the atmosphere of the Sox versus the Phillies. For better or worse, negativity seems to follow the Phillies organization. They dont seem to really ever embrace players and some guys I just dont think can handle it. Its really telling that at the beginning of the season Jenks had more confidence in Floyd, than Floyd did himself. I just really hope that he keeps working hard because he might be with the Sox for a while. And Uribe is the most dangerous man in the world.

I know people will say that this is crazy but I actually feel Floyd is right now one of our best big game pitchers, and Id almost feel best with him being one of the first 2 starters...

All the pen needs to do is not give up more than 2 runs in the next 3 outs before Jenks can get in. I know Jenks hasnt been at the top of his game, but you have to have faith that a closer of Jenks caliber will get the job done.

Floyd throwing some of his best pitches, 1-2.

Wow Ozzie asks Floyd how he is doing, Floyd says "fine", Ozzie leaves in Floyd for Abreu.

If he gets Damon he can go 1 more batter, otherwise gotta pull him now I think.

Floyd is throwing strikes Id let him try and get out of it.

Do people think that the Owens steal didnt come from the bench? You can b**** about the bunt, but I really doubt Owens has the green light to steal in a 2 run game in the 7th inning. Id venture to guess Ozzie called the steal...

Id let Gavin start the inning but have some one else ready. As long as Gavin throws strikes and attacks hitters I let him win or lose. If he starts walking people Id pull him cause that usually is when he starts to show fatigue and lose his stuff.

9 more outs, thats all the Sox need to get. And with Jenks lined up for 3 of them, the Sox bullpen needs to just get 6 outs with out giving up a run. That is if Gavin doesnt come out to pitch another inning, usually he would be done but after last night I think Ozzie may let his starter go a little longer.

Well if our pen cant get it done tonight, it is what it is. They need to step up and get outs.

Even though Floyd gave up the hr, at least he went after Giambi and didnt walk him. You gotta live with hitters some times beating the pitcher, and Floyd really didnt miss his spot he just got beat. 2 quick outs.

Uribe rbi walk. He just never fails to surprise.

AJ needs to get his act together offensively. 2nd and 3rd no outs, easy opportunity to score 2 runs just with productive outs.

According to classical conservative theory you would be 100% correct Steve. I doubt many have even heard of Michael Oakeshott.

What? Is that some sort of personal attack, because Im really losing the relevance of that statement. Okay this is really confusing. Who is her? What article are you referring to? Are you referring to the OP-ED piece written by Christopher Tarsa? http://www.lebanondemocrats.com/aboutus/execcom.shtml Im really confused here because the article written in Businessweek was by Howard, and the Op-Ed (no reporter just an Op-Ed piece) was written by Christopher Tarsa. Neither of these people are women, so Im not sure which article you are referencing. Once again this seems a some what trivial argument. You dont deny that its given some Republican's an opportunity to try and some how connect it to Obama, so what is the beef? Are you just upset that I proposed an alternative theory that Christopher Tarsa was at one point a Republican and perhaps changed? Im really confused about your argument because I dont know what article you are referencing when you say "she". And I dont know what "reporter" you are talking about either. The Tarsa comment was an op-ed (open editorial), I could write in if I want. The tag line is to give context to the author. Just like i wrote in to an op-ed it would say something like "XXX is a _____ in Chicago." Whatever this is pointless, I just think that its crazy how many people are out to get Tarsa, when it could have simply been a poorly written article. Hes not a reporter, hes not a columnist, hes just a person who has an opinion. Right or wrong, Americans have the right to express their opinion.

Im not reading??? Here is what I said in my first post: You then respond: You then link a businessweek article that does not support that statement. To me it seemed like you were implying that the businessweek article was a story about Axelrod being behind the scenes posting on blogs and websites, when in reality the article talks about astroturfing in a completely different way. So basically you just wanted to agree with me? Because my first statement on this point was that this is going to give Republican's an opportunity to act as if this is some Obama scheme. And your last post says: Which is basically just a different way of saying "Republican" blogs.

I see nothing in that businessweek article that suggests Axelrod has hired people to post fake things on websites... The article mentions ads on tv, I really do not see any connection besides the fact that Axelrod has run ads on tv that used: So is the argument that because Axelrod set up front organizations for public-issue ads that Obama now must be using "fronts" for hundreds to thousands of posters on the internet to parade as fake republicans? One of them (the fronts for ads) is a sophisticated operation that requires millions of dollars. The other (posting anonymous messages on an internet board) could be run by myself out of my apartment. The connection is illusory at best. It would be like saying McCain is a Republican, Nixon was a Republican, McCain must be up to something like Watergate.

No one has ever switched parties in the United States history. (hears whispers) No one besides the great Teddy Roosevelt has ever switched parties in the United States!