Dancin'_Homer

The matter was already decided: Greatest Game of All Time

After an extensive Google search, the following possibilities were found: koo koo kachoo koo koo a choo koo koo cachoobe koo koo ga joob koo koo chakoo choo choo LaRue goo goo ga joob koo koo koo choo koo koo k'you koo koo ki choo koo koo kajoob koo koo cachoo koo koo ka chu There may have been more, but I got tired by the 5th page.

for[/b] the people, but he was definitely not a man of the people. He was born into more privilege than any president in the 20th century. Contrast that with Reagan, who truly was a man of the people, from a simple background and modest means. wasnt clinton teh same way? Absolutely. One of the great things about the American Presidency in the latter 1/2 of the 20th century is that the majority of presidents were of middle to lower-middle class origins. One of the depressing things about this year's candidates is that neither of them are.

Roosevelt was truly a "man of the people" I couldn't let this go by without comment. Roosevelt might have been a man for the people, but he was definitely not a man of the people. He was born into more privilege than any president in the 20th century. Contrast that with Reagan, who truly was a man of the people, from a simple background and modest means.

The American people should have no say in what the government does to keep them safe, since most of the people have no clue what their talking about, not to mention they just shouldn't know what our government is doing. :banghead

I'm just playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, so play along: Did you ever stop to think about how easy it would be for this adminstration to trump up charges against a supposed terrorist, finding plots were none exist and broadcasting these 'victories' to the American people in order to keep the public united in the "war on terror"? All the time, they could hide behind the Patriot Act and never produce a single piece of evidence, but allude to conspiracies and hidden threats and generally keep the public on edge and believing that the system in place works because their local shopping mall hasn't blown up yet. Such well-timed 'victories' would be welcomed fodder for election-year politics. How on earth could a prudent populace vote to change adminstrations when evil-doers lurk behind every corner, even the innocent environs of a Columbus, Ohio, shopping mall? Considering how easy it would be to commit a terrorist act against a Dillard's or Publix or Target, and considering that even an exceptional anti-terrorist bureaucracy could only expect to catch about 75% of these plots before they were executed, and considering that to date there have been no small-scale attacks . . . Well, let's just place this under the heading of "Things that make you go hmmm."

he's afraid to return to the organization because he believes it will enroll him in a drug rehabilitation program. Rehab . . . that's the last thing a drug-abuser needs. :chair

The S.C. side-stepped the issue entirely by ruling that the father had no standing to bring the case. Thus, the constitutionality of "under God" is still in question, opening the door for a spate of cases filed by parents who do not have questionable standing. While Rehnquist, Thomas, and O' Connor signed a separate opinion stating that (1) the father didn't have standing, but (2) even if he did they would still have ruled "under God" constitutional, a 5-member majority (Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsberg, and Breyer) ruled only on the standing issue. Scalia recused himself. The Court did not, in its opinion, dismiss the rights of divorced parents. However, the standing question in this case was a real concern, inasmuch as the girl did not live with her father and, therefore, does not attend school in the district where he resides. In short, it was the father's rights in relation to the district he sued and not his rights in relation to his daughter which were questioned. I've not yet read the opinions, but my sense is that the Court would not be so united on the lack of standing unless it was very problematic.

King Missile's "Detachable Penis" (lyrics)

"People sometimes tell me I should get it permanently attached, but I don't know."

Gammons comments seem pretty accurate: The Phillies can make a run for the East if the Marlins slip, but if AJ gets hot the Marlins will be pretty much unstoppable.

I'm pretty sure "fire truck" is 2 words ... but, then, who the @#$% cares?

Who's talking about moving him more than 2 spots? If you remember, Cabrera was bounced around when he was slumping.

How do you bump Lowell out of the 3 hole anyway? He's doing a great job there. As anyone who follows the Marlins knows, McKeon is not hesitant to shake things up when things need shaking up, like flip-flopping Pierre and Castillo in the one-spot as circumstances dictate. I think Lowell being the DH yesterday was an attempt to let him concentrate on his hitting and see if he could come out of his slump. Obviously, it didn't work. Bouncing him out of the 3 spot would only be a temporary move until he starts hitting again.

I don't mean to belittle your analogy, but the consequences of mistakes in a tech-manual are not of the same magnitude as those in a threat assessment report. If newspapers have fact-checkers, then surely the CIA can too.

Re: Castro and expectations Samson stated outright that he expects players to "outperform their contracts." That's fine, but it's really not reasonable. I would say on average a team can expect 1/3 to outperform their contracts and 1/3 to underperform and 1/3 to match contract expectations. The Marlins are lucky because we really do not have anyone underperforming his contract. Some teams (Mets) notoriously have bad luck with players underperforming their contracts. All in all, I'd say we were pretty lucky.

OK, it is clear the Eastern bloc collapsed due to a combination of internal and external pressures. But all of the internal and most of the external pressures were in place prior to Reagan's presidency. I guess I wonder how crucial Reagan's presidency was to the ultimate demise. Would the Eastern bloc have fallen nonetheless? In other words, I personally suspect that Reagan's presidency just sped-up an inevitable process. Any dissenters?

Top five: Perennial winners or perennial losers. How predictable is the American psyche?

The argument is not whether the Cold War ended (it obviously did). The argument, as I understand it, is whether communism in Eastern Europe ended due to external pressures (primarily applied by Reagan) or internal pressures (desire for individual freedoms).

Negotiating the discussion in that "Reagan's face on currency" post was becoming too difficult. State your case here and let's discuss.

Wow! 5 pages of posts on a topic that has been hashed and rehashed dozens of times. The wounds are still fresh all around.

Well done and well deserved! Marlins fans are indeed lucky to have an well-run BB independent of mlb.com. It's high time that be recognized.

Dick Pole? Now that's a name you can hang your hat on!

I had a hard time chosing between "Frontline" and "American Experience," but finally decided on "Frontline." The reason: "American Experience" (or some incarnation) would probably find a home on one of the free-market, educational stations. In-depth, investigative reporting of the sort done on "Frontline" is a becoming a lost art.

FF, I'm surprised this could change your opinion about Edwards (which I'm surprised to hear was leaning-positive). Sounds like pretty standard campaign fare to me. Aren't we inured to this yet? I mean, I would expect this same drivel to dribble out of Bush's mouth as easily as Kerry's or Edward's.