NorthSideSox72

If it helps, my car has a Honda engine (though the car is not a Honda), and it kicks some serious butt. And its been very reliable.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 02:58 PM) http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/stor...5626615,00.html Glad to see some change happening, and I'm glad the US is taking the initiative. And I agree with Bolton (can't believe I said that), the geographic rotation is sort of ridiculous.

So I still didn't hear anyone with an answer to the announced attendence question (unless I missed it) - which one is the "official" one you see announced, and in the box score, etc.? Paid or gate?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 12:31 PM) If one of the Moderators thinks that's important they can change it. Not that big a deal, I was more just pointing it out as part of framing the discussion.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 12:25 PM) Dude, have ya ever hung around the Filibuster? Seriously though, yes there is a significant increase in the cost for the Hybrid system on the order of a couple thousand dollars, however, as gas prices keep going up, the impact of that additional 15-20 mpg (depending on how and where it's driven) is getting closer and closer to being cost-effective. Also out here in CA you get to drive in the carpool lanes without carpooling. And many hybrids, including Honda's, actually perform better in acceleration than their regular counterparts. They are quicker. And, you get a federal tax brak for buying one (some states also have rebates additionally). So its not just the environmental reasoning - its fuel effciency, financial and performance as well.

Yeah, I'd say that this warrants some serious investigation. I'm not ususally one to hold bias against a country like this, but in this case, I think its prudent. UAE, at best, can't get itself secured, and at worst, may be complicit in terror. A UAE government-run company managing 6 of our ports? Bad idea. One clarification, Balta - the thread title is misleading. The port isn't being bought - its management organization is being bought. The physical place still belongs to the US or private interests, as far as I can tell. Just a small thing, but worth noting.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 12:09 PM) Go for the Hybrid! ^^^^^^^^ And in general, Hondas are very, very reliable. Solid cars.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 11:47 AM) The only way it makes any sense to me is if maybe Raines' lupus is flaring up again and he is experiening discomfort that can be dealt with on the bench but not standing at first. That is the only explanation that seems logical to me, unless there is some other x-factor at work here that none of us are aware of. Maybe Raines wants to manage a team sometime soon, and he thinks this will advance that career track? Who knows?

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 12:04 PM) How exactly do you misprint an entire article? Gonzales isn't exactly the best sports beat writer of all time. He could maybe pull it off.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 11:32 AM) So in your mind, a tourist who runs a red light in the US is equivalent to an Afghani running around Pakistan or Afghanistan with an AK-47 trying to kill our troops? please explain that one to me. here's my opinion on the difference: one is a terrorist, and the other is not. in response to all those network news claims about over half the detainees not bineg involved in violent acts: funding terrorists makes you a terrorist. theres no difference between those two crimes, both make you a terrorist (analogy: charles manson was convicted of murder even though he did not actually kill anyone). for the record, and contrary to what i am getting from your post impliedly, i do not support the indefinite detention of even terrorists without a trial. however, i could give a rat's ass how long it takes for that to happen. you all know my position on this from my previous posts in this thread. these terrorists have no protection under the geneva convention or the US constitution, and as far as im concerned, they should consider themselves lucky they were not simply executed when they were captured, as our military had the legal right to do under the geneva convention. why are the liberals in this thread stretching so far to hold the hand and wipe the ass of people that, given the chance, would kill you and celebrate it? just because you hate the president you hope to implement policies that would result in more troops dying. so lets release all the terrorists in guantanimo. Your first paragraph is ridiculous hyperbole. I pointed out "criminals", not traffic violators. I was dealing in reality - you seem to want to deal in polarization. Your third paragraph is self-contradictory. You say you do not support indefinite detention of "even terrorists", and then in the same paragraph, you say you could care less how long they are there and be lucky they weren't executed. Good thing you aren't part of our justice system. And as for your last paragraph, you have got to be kidding. Try sticking to a legitimate point instead of insulting me. You think I'd want more people to die? You think I like these people? You think I hate the President? Come back to earth, please, if you want to discuss this issue rationally. The answer to all those questions is such an obvious "no" that I didn't think I needed to point it out... but there you go. Being the United States, the purveyors of freedom, means being just and right. And yes, you better believe I think that means we give all people in our custody some degree of fair process, even if they are terrorists.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 11:20 AM) So did the bombing of the Air Force barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and the Cole bombing in 2000. I don't believe such a perception exists. I think their perception is in fact the opposite - they expect us to respond, or they wouldn't do it.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 10:56 AM) The next question will be the difference between paid and actual. How does that work again? What number is used for announced attendance - paid or gate count? Paid would include some seats not filled, but also be reduced by freebie tickets.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 10:53 AM) The perception that the US wouldn't respond started in, iirc, 1968 with the USS Pueblo incident with North Korea. Of course, the bombing of the Beirut marines barracks and the Iran hostage crisis just added to that perception. I don't think that these extremists are using terrorism because they think the US won't respond. In fact, I think they WANT us to respond. The reason they use terrorism is that it is the most efficient means available to them. They have no standing army, as they are not a nation-state. And those nations that would like to harm us don't have the resources to do so.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 10:04 AM) Oh that's right. Because I have never seen a bumpersticker that said when Clinton lied, no one died. Or no one has ever said why is lying about a blowjob impeachable, when lying about a war isn't. No one ever brings up the past in the other light... Give me a break. Its also shortsighted to think that two similar things never get compared and contrasted. Are you telling me that kids in the same household never say well when Joey stayed out late, you didn't ground him... Or hell even in the city of Chicago, that the Sox and Cubs never get compared on the basis of what they did? The entire court system is based on precedent of previous rulings. I heard 8 years of Vast Right Wing Conspiracy bulls*** everytime Clinton was critisized for anything. And now we are just supposed to forget about the past when our current President gets blackballed for the samekinds of things? I couldn't tell you how many times I got told that his and Monica's affair, because it was between two consentual adults was none of my business, and that because no law was broken, we didn't deserve to know. Well guess what... Dick Cheney had a hunting accident. Why is that now my business? It happened on his personal time, with other consenting adults, and the biggest ACTUAL crime committed was that he didn't have a stamp to be hunting quail. Oh s***, start the impeachment hearings. You are welcome to make comparisons, but that isn't what is happening here. What I see happening is a pattern of right-wingers defending any criticism of Bush as being "typical left-wing drivel", followed immediately by pointing out what an a**hole one Clinton or the other is. That isn't comparison, its flaming. And I can't speak for everyone, but when I criticize Bush or anyone else (including the Dems) for something here, I don't throw in the extra insults and taunts, and I try to back it up with some evidence and thought. That is what I am seeking here. Less attacks, more substance. Less of the "he did it, I can do it" bulls**t. More discussions on how to make it better.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 09:59 AM) You know, I never EVER have heard Republicans while the last Democrat was in office og to foreign countries and slurp them like there's no tomorrow during a time of 'war'. For example, when Clinton 'attacked' Iraq, most were very supportive. The only exception about this is when he withdrew from Somalia, which IMO set the precedent for modern terrorism, because the Americans became 'cowards' at that point, and when the 'wag the dog' crap came up with the Bosina stuff. I thought that was tasteless then and I do now looking back on it. Here, though, in today's times, people on the 'left' can't wait for the next opportunity to throw stones on the glass house. It's all they do. They sit back, wait for something to pick apart, scream, b****, yell, throw two year old temper tantrums about how much our president sucks and WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH, instead of offering real alternatives to our problems of today's time. I'm going to say this again. I really don't like Bush, but I will defend assinine attacks and provide alternatives to what I think are endless, classless assults on the presidency. Modern terrorism didn't start becaue we screwed the pooch in Somalia. It started out of a combination of corrupt Middle Eastern governments, poverty, the creation of Israel and the manipulation of the region by the Soviets and the US. And with the Soviets no longer a factor in the region, the US becomes the biggest target. And I think you are experiencing selective memory of the Clinton years. Gingrich and the gang were foaming at the mouth to bring down Clinton, and so were many talking heads, some even Dems. But Clinton was a lot better at bargaining and compromising with Congress than Bush is (also better than the current Dem and GOP Congressional leadership at those skills). Also, and this is coming from someone who did not vote for Clinton either time but voted for Bush in 2000, I think Bush has thus far made a lot more mistakes and gotten us involved in a lot more contentious events then Clinton ever did. That latter part isn't necessarily a negative, its just reality. So I am afraid I can't agree that this is the left suddenly doing something no one else did, or that they are somehow much more petty than the right was under Clinton. I just don't buy it.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 10:49 PM) It just seems weird to me they would hold him without bond because of an allegation of stalking. People shoot people dead for no reason and get bond. Its not like Albert is going to be able to hide anywhere, he's pretty well known. He is also a flight risk, probably (assuming he still has a lot of money). And if he supposedly threatened the victim's life, that would also be factor of aggravation that may result in no bond for protective purposes.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 08:40 PM) Are shotguns seriously considered small caliber? I never knew that. The shotgun he was using was relatively small guage (26 or something odd).

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 06:00 PM) Doesn't attacking the sitting president in that manner have that effect? Surely he knows this. I didn't see him "attacking" the President in the text of that speech. I saw him pointing out what he saw as mistakes.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:58 PM) As I alluded to earlier, these people are simply not treated as horribly as some would have us believe. They are allowed to worship freely, get better health care than a good many American citizens, eat better than they probably ever have and on and on........ Once again, our people should be so fortunate to be treated that way. When they get a hold of one of ours it usually ends with the person in question starring on an Al Qaeda highlight reel. I didn't question their treatment - I questioned their detention. And yeah, we treat our prisoners better than them, as it should be. We cannot use their violence and hatred as an excuse to make our treatment less humane. We need to uphold the highest of standards, regardless of what the enemy is doing.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:54 PM) I think Al Gore is still bitter he lost the 2000 election. This I agree with, and he can be very petty at times. QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:54 PM) All he's done since his defeat is run off at the mouth about how horrible America is. He will say or do anything to make the government of this nation look bad. I think this is maybe a stretch. He certainly likes to make Bush look bad, but he isn't going to intentionally make the US as a country look bad.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:51 PM) Terrorists. I agree. Terrorists are criminals. And like all criminals, US citizen or not, we have an obligation to treat them with some manner of justice when we have them in our custody. Indefinite detention is not justice - its Soviet-style muscle law.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:50 PM) Funny how you think it let out and that we're not all in the same room typing instead of speaking. LOL

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:42 PM) Funny how you think human rights and being forthright equals coddling. QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:44 PM) Funny how you think terrorists who want you dead are saints or something. QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:45 PM) Funny how you think that even a majority of the people at Gitmo are actually terrorists. When did Kindergarten let out? :rolly

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:38 PM) You know why that happens? Because it was ok for that asshole to do the EXACT same s*** GWB is doing, and it's an OUTRAGE when GWB does something, but the Clintons were "different". It's simply noted to point out the hypocracy of jumping on every negative bandwagon possible about this president. It gets old, and the defense, at least for me, is to point out your own damn party does the same s***. IMO, they're all assholes, current president included. I hate our government as it exists today. I love our country but I hate the political hackery and bulls*** we are subjected to on a daily basis from both sides of the fence. Pick and pick and pick and pick against the current administration, and turn a blind eye to the same bulls*** that was pulled 8-10 years ago, and it's hypocracy at its best. We're just here to remind you that the same crap was pulled - and you all want to change history or forget that any of that happened. Remind ME? I have stated all along in this forum, very clearly, that Bush and Clinton were both wrong. Carter may have been too, though I know very little about his situation. Don't lump me in with people trying to make one OK and not the other. And I still think that what Clinton did is irrelevant when discussing current politics. The "other people did it" argument has never flown with me.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 05:37 PM) How much violence did Iran incite? Compared for example to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? I am honestly not sure. If they didn't do any (I believe they did some, just less than Saudi), then I think they handled the situation well in being above it.