EvilMonkey

Apparently it was a challenge issued from one blogger to another, and someone did a search and found out some results. At least according to this guy, there is an 18-1 advantage for one side. Care to guess which one? No? Well @&%^$# you too! http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2007/02/sev...ver-say-on.html

He wants us to 'respect his position'? Is that position bent over and f*cked up the ass whether he's guilty or not because of his name association with this pharmacy?

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 1, 2007 -> 12:58 AM) yes, tricep not bicep. Hey, what's one cep more or less between friends? And this whole thread has gotten rather silly. To Rowand and everybody else on the opposite side of thinking here, I believe the original comment that set this all off was J4Life innocently saying "I hope he gets [#500] against us" Then all of the silly scenario playing came out, with Rowand saying "no you don't" and others saying 'well what if it resulted in a loss that cost us a playoff berth?'. . . yada yada. . . Focking-A. No, there isn't anybody on this site that cheers over a Sox loss, or puts a former player ahead of the current team. But get some perspective. It's going to touch a lot of us to see Frank get #500, and if it happened at the Cell where thousands of lifelong Sox fans who grew up watching the man play could feel they were a part of it, that seems kinda cool to me. But for the record, I promise I only want to see it happen if: A ) it doesn't cost us the game, or B ) it costs us the game but doesn't affect the standings and/or C ) it doesn't eliminate our playoff chances or D ) it doesn't occur in post-season competition or E ) it doesn't result in so much excessive cheering that it shakes the rivets out of the stadium and we all fall to our untimely deaths Given all of those conditions, yes, it would be cool to be there if it happened in Chicago. My Cousin talks about seeing Denny McLain pitch at Comiskey in April of 1968, beating us in the second game of a double-header in a year where the Sox didn't win their first game until almost the end of that month. He doesn't dwell on the fact that the Sox lost the game (and they did that 95 times that year). Instead he talks about being there to see a pitcher who grew up on the South Side and went to Mt. Carmel win one game during his historic 31-win season. That's a pretty cool memory to have. If I was lucky enough to see Frank hit #500 at the Cell – even with a (*gasp*) Sox loss (so long as it didn't knock us out of playoff contention or somehow otherwise instantaneously cause us to lose every game for the rest of eternity) then, yeah, I think in 20 years I'd remember being at the game where Frank Thomas cemented his spot as a first-ballot HOFer a bit more than the fact that we dropped a game to the Blue Jays that day. Very well said. I agree!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 09:17 PM) So, overall, there are 2 issues here; critics of Mr. Gore can feel free to pick one. The first one would be; is Mr. Gore carbon-neutral or not? Based on his purchasing of green power from the TVA and his purchasing of carbon offsets which fund renewable energy, I believe he is following his own advice. The best objection I've heard to this so far is "B.S", so I'll leave it at that. Actually, we don't know what his carbon offsets are. They could be funding renewable energy, they could be buying energy efficient bulbs for poor people, we don't know. Is he trying to be greener? Sure. But since he is the Goracle, he should be doing more. No limos, no private jets. Simply buying 'offsets' so he can continue to live his extravagant lifestyle is a shell game. I'm not saying he needs to bike to the office, but he should show a little more discretion when criticizing people who drive SUV's. That's what the BS is for. Also, when you donate money to build a new windfarm, you don't take any of the old, polluting power offline; you increase the supply of power, reducing the price until others are encouraged to buy more carbon-emitting power. Now, if the offsets were used to purchase a coal-fired plant and then shut it down, THAT would be contributing to the long term health of the planet.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 07:47 PM) I don't understand... who is the company, who thinks they are villains and why? Walmart

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 1, 2007 -> 12:22 AM) Just out of curiosity, do you actually understand how those credit systems work? Several ways. One of the ones is where a business has to reduce its output by 20% or some such number., They succeed in lowering by 30%. They can sell their 'overs' to others who failed to meet their goal, or just want to make themselves feel better. Another way is by sponsoring the planting of trees and other such enviro-friendly things. Not everyone can afford to plant a forest. Wanna buy some carbon credits yourself? Buy enery effiecient bulbs for a Jamacian village, that counts! http://www.carbonneutral.com/pages/carbontrading.asp Hell, I could plant a forest, and then sell the carbon credits to al myself! If I owned a huge tract of land already, I could sell those credits! It's just like rearranging deck chairs on the Titantic, only The Goracle gets to have a clean conscience when he snuggles up next to Tipper.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 04:31 PM) Perhaps you should read earlier posts in this thread that explain what is really going on. And when did saving the Earth become a liberal idea? I figured everyone would be interested in saving it. Perhaps YOU should read what I wrote. Gore's own response stated that he buys carbon credits for whatever other pollution he creates and can't offset with his new light bulbs, etc. THAT action, the buying of credits so you can still go on polluting like before only with a supposedly clearer conscience, is what I posted about. HE is still using power, creating pollution, but by spending some money, can CLAIM to be carbon neutral. Bull. So STFU until you can master basic reading skills yourself. As for saving the earth being a liberal idea, it isn't. But it has become a struggle for power over others. if it wasn't, and the saving of earth was of the utmost importance, why were China and other 'developing' countries left out of Kyoto? Because, at least at that level, it is all about bringing the big guys (read: US and Europe) under some sort of centralized control in a global power play. Otherwise, the rules should have been for everyone.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 04:03 PM) ...and for anything else that emits carbons, he buys them off the market. So he is just paying someone else to NOT pollute so he CAN POLLUTE. Simply buying 'carbon offsets' doesn't mean he isn't a major contributor, it just means that he is rich and can continue to live the way he wants to because he can 'purchase' his way to neutral. That is just another way for the feel-good liberals to claim moral superiority because their intentions are good.

By virtue of it being an actual contract they signed, wouldn't his covering up of steroid use constitute fraud? Unless there is some special clause for UNION contracts, the team should be able to get out of it if he misrepresented himself in the contract negotiations to the point of lying about steroid use. Either way, the club should do it just to punish the jackass. If he did it, that is.

Any bets on who will be playing Linderman?

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0429-03.htm It takes some digs at Bush, but he seems to be quite the conservationist at home,

Man, the lefty circle-jerk for the Goracle is just simply amazing.

Which 'headline' sounds more likely to occur: 1) Angry Christians Shout "Christ Is Risen" As They Beat James Cameron For Making Jesus-Is-Dead Film or 2) Muslims chant "Allah is great" while beating a director for displaying the barbaric practice of "honor" killings. (hint, it is number 2. http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/02/...-beat-with.html )

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 05:56 PM) I dont necessarily want it to be a game winning HR, but it would be extra special if it was against us especially at the cell. And to be Frank Thomas is a White Sox forever so he has a free pass for me. Unless its playoffs, than I want him to strike out everytime. Why would it be extra special? Just because the Sox would get a few extra minutes on SportsCenter with them saying how the Sox made a mistake in letting him go, and how this makes the Sox look bad, etc, etc.? Frank can kick everyone's ass, except the Sox. I want him 0-for-the-year against the Sox, and I too am a huge Thomas fan.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 07:03 AM) Now let's pause here for a second...your advice here is to make people accountable for their poor decisions. What exactly are you suggesting when you say we should make them accountable? So we have in the example we've been running with a family with 10 kids, they've clearly made poor decisions, they're living in subsidized housing while both parents work and still in pretty bad shape. What exactly is considered making this family accountable? Taking away their public housing, and tossing their family out on the streets? They've put themselves into a position where they simply can not get through the day without help. They can not find better jobs because they have no education or training and probably have health care issues as well, the state can't just seize all their children, and tossing a family of 12 out on the street puts them in even more hopeless of a situation than they're in now? How exactly can they be made accountable? What would you advise taking away from them if they don't meet whatever standard of improvement you set? I'm not sure you can make the current crop of adults accountable, but you damn well need to make sure that their kids understand that they too don't get a free house if they have 10 or more babies. At some point the generational line living in public housing has to stop. You are supposed to grow up and out of public housing, not grow up and move in next door to momma.

A better way would be to remove many of the non-violent offenders that are in jail for pot possession and such. Fine the crap out of them if you want tp prosecute it so badly, but Johnny with a half a dozen joints in his backpack doesn't need to be costing the state $20k+ a year to be housed next to Bubba the buttraper. Then you can start keeping the really violent wastes of society in for longer terms. Your solution, however good a movie it might make, would have the ACLU so up in arms that it would never even make it past the planing stages.

He needs to get those 500 HR or the fickle HOF voters will snub him for sure. I hope he makes it, he was always a favorite.

Great post for your 1000th, bro. All those views, and only me to respond.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 24, 2007 -> 02:55 PM) Also, if it is that big of a motivator, wouldn't the other side just produce some propaganda films to motivate their Troops? They don't need actual CNN coverage. Why go to thru the production hassles when you have ready-made product.

I hope he is walked or beaned at every plate appearance this year. I would never pitch to him, unless it is chin music.

QUOTE(Balance @ Feb 24, 2007 -> 02:16 PM) As opposed to the Republican mantra as it originally was spoken in Mel Brooks' History of the World Part I: "f*** the poor!" If you survey people and their 'giving' habits, would you think that democrats or republicans give more to charity? And I mean of their own money, not by appropriating taxes to fund thier pet causes.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 24, 2007 -> 02:11 PM) I do see a difference in whistleblowing and policy differences. I agree that there the military could forbid public criticism from their employees. I can't believe it makes the enemy fight harder knowing some people are against the war. I think dying might be more of an incentive. Tex, in sports, when you can see that the other guy is tired, or losing confidence, you can always find that little bit extra to try and finish him off. why not the same in war? The terrorists are in a waiting game, and the more that they see the good guys don't want to fight, the more they can convince themselves that if they just hold on a little bit longer, the burger-eating surrender monkeys will leave.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 23, 2007 -> 02:00 PM) Yeah, that's comparable. 3 PRIVATE CONTRACTORS, were "outed", in the sense that it was revealed they live within a 900 square mile around the airfield mentioned, and that they may or may not enjoy trains or have beards. No name or any other ID. This sort of thing doesn't make the MSM because its a nothing event. Just some columnist trying to say "hey, they did it too", and doing pretty poorly at it. Someone with a moderate amount of determination and the info provided could easily find out who they are. The fact that they didn't name the names just doesn't cut it. That's some pretty specific stuff.

http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electroni...9a/images/2047/ Would be better if you could program the messages, but I guess this keeps people from putting F*CK YOU on it.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 22, 2007 -> 07:42 AM) The challenges that face blacks in this country are different than for whites, Christianity has always ministered to specific audiences. I don't see that as any different as a group I respect: Promise Keepers’ mission is to ignite and unite men to become passionate followers of Jesus Christ through the effective communication of seven promises to God, their fellow men, family, church and the world. Promise Keepers’ vision is simply put in three words: “Men Transformed Worldwide.” Why just men? Probably because you can have a women's only congregation and not cause a national uproar. Try having a whites only congregation, or one dedicated to helping the 'white community'.