Mikesgirl1

Do not hold your hopes high. Next year you all will be talking about how greedy Pavano is for not taking less money with the Marlins. Face it! we don't have the money to keep most of our players, specially when we don't even have a ballpark and maybe never will. That's an unfortunate truth and it's something that will just keep feeding into itself. In order to build the solid fanbase that this team needs, we need to try to keep the players that people come to see. This in turn, leads to higher revenues which leads to higher payrolls which keeps these guys with us. Our management has to look at the long term picture in cases like this. Of course, that's easier said than done.. hopefully the new park will help raise revenue. The problem here is that most of the revenue they are getting from increase in attendance is going to the wrong packet due to the bad deal they have with Huizenga. If we don't get a new ballpark deal done by next year, this is what's going to happen: 1. Mike Lowell out the door. 2. Carl Pavano out the door. 3. Luis Castillo out the door. and any of these scenarios is also likely, so get used to it: 1. Moving the team to another city. 2. Fire Sale! :thumbdown

Do not hold your hopes high. Next year you all will be talking about how greedy Pavano is for not taking less money with the Marlins. Face it! we don't have the money to keep most of our players, specially when we don't even have a ballpark and maybe never will.

Where is the option for both?

It seems that a lot of you give too much credit to a group of people who are in the business just to make profit... Loria, Beinfest and Samson have good intentions but if you think they wanted to keep Pudge, you are sadly mistaken. We all know the "budgetary" constraints this team has and they probably thought it wouldn't be as bad having Castro instead of Pudge. Since Castro showed such batting power, they figured it would be worth the try. I sincerely think they did not offer Pudge a deal. It was easier and more convenient to give the impression they did and then dump the blame on Pudge. Just remember there are always two sides to a story and some prefer to believe Pudge didn't want to stay because of money than OMG thinking the ball club owners maybe didn't want to pay him to stay.

COOL THREAD! War Inc.

Ashcroft Sings :plain Why is this guy our Attorney General? He should be pursuing his career in show biz :mischief I'm serious the guy has a nice voice.

Try channel 210 for DTV...that's where I have the game on. :notworthy Thanks! you rule!

Damm it! I have Direct TV and it is showing the Red Sox game! Capefish... What channel are you watching it in?

This Quizz is loaded! I'm agent Smith too... :rofl "you know a crap load about computers (mostly porn).... hahahaha

Jesus has no party affiliation. Leave him alone! If he were to live in these crazy times, he would probably be aprehended, tortured and killed again. No one likes a free-spirit stirring up the masses and going against the church's silly rules.

Fidel Castro = Irrelevant

WOW. I guess the French are not as obnoxious as they say huh? :mischief I don't know what is it with Americans bashing the French, when most have not even been outside their little towns, much less traveled to France... OMG "I ain't goin' to no stinkin' France!" :mischief

Tonyi, you wanted that info... In November 2, 2000 issue of Editor and Publisher, a survey was done of endorsements by outlets and more than twice supported Bush and his agenda over Gore. Doesn't that make you think, That the editors may have a little bias just as The Liberal Reporters do, the thing is Editors have more power though. The liberal media bias is still apparent with every broadcast. I really feel sorry that there is young people who think like you out there :confused Read Rune's article above your post. You may just get the big picture... Just may be. Cut the patronizing. That attitude only pisses people off. I'm sorry we aren't as "enlightened" as you so to believe that Bush = Evil. In my world, there is no "good" Vs. "evil"... Bush is not "evil" he is just a liar who is playing with all of us and the future of this country. Stand for the right thing once in your life... Patronizing? I don't patronize, I express my opinion and when I say what I say, I really feel that way, it is sad man, really sad. THAT RIGHT THERE IS PATRONIZING. "Aww geez, I'm sorry. I can't help it if I want to stand up to the murderous liar Bush, although I never said he was evil. I'm really sorry that you can't see that, I guess you have been brainwashed too much. Geez. That must suck" Grow up and then talk to me... Now that is patronizing. :cool

agreed, we need mixed government... But I see it very difficult since this country is so polarized, comes November and may either have a Completely Republican Congress and Bush re-elected or a Democrat Congress and Kerry as president... :mischief I have my fingers crossed that if it comes to it... the latter will be the case. Don't blame me for hating this admins. policies to that extent. :hat Traditionally speaking it is very, very rare that a party carries both the presidency and control of the congress via a presidential election year vote. I don't know fish fillet, we are living strange times. People are thinking about these elections as if it was a contest of something. My team against your team. I've heard a lot people that will vote on the premise of party affiliation rather than on the issues. :confused

Preeminent Scientists Protest Bush Administration's Misuse of Science Nobel Laureates, National Medal of Science Recipients, and Other Leading Researchers Call for End to Scientific Abuses February 18, 2004 Washington, D.C.?Today, more than 60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels. ?Across a broad range of issues, the administration has undermined the quality of the scientific advisory system and the morale of the government?s outstanding scientific personnel,? said Dr. Kurt Gottfried, emeritus professor of physics at Cornell University and Chairman of the Union of Concerned Scientists. ?Whether the issue is lead paint, clean air or climate change, this behavior has serious consequences for all Americans.? ?Science, to quote President Bush's father, the former president, relies on freedom of inquiry and objectivity,? said Russell Train, head of the Environmental Protection Agency under Nixon and Ford, who joined the scientists in calling for action. ?But this administration has obstructed that freedom and distorted that objectivity in ways that were unheard of in any previous administration.? The statement notes that while scientific input to the government is rarely the only factor in public policy decisions, this input should be weighed from an objective and impartial perspective. However, the administration of George W. Bush has disregarded this principle. ?The Earth system follows laws which scientists strive to understand,? said Dr. F. Sherwood Rowland a Nobel laureate in chemistry. ?The public deserves rational decisionmaking based on the best scientific advice about what is likely to happen, not what political entities might wish to happen.? ?We are not simply raising warning flags about an academic subject of interest only to scientists and doctors,? said Dr. Neal Lane, a former director of the National Science Foundation and a former Presidential Science Advisor. ?In case after case, scientific input to policymaking is being censored and distorted. This will have serious consequences for public health.? In conjunction with the statement, the Union of Concerned Scientists today released a report Scientific Integrity in Policymaking that investigates numerous allegations in the scientists? statement involving censorship and political interference with independent scientific inquiry at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Interior and Defense. One example cited in the statement and report involves the suppression of an EPA study that found the bipartisan Senate Clear Air bill would do more to reduce mercury contamination in fish and prevent more deaths than the administration's proposed Clear Skies Act. ?This is akin to the White House directing the National Weather Service to alter a hurricane forecast because they want everyone to think we have clear skies ahead,? said Kevin Knobloch, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists ?The hurricane is still coming, but without factual information no one will be ready for it.? Comparing President Bush with his father, George H.W. Bush and former president Richard M. Nixon, the statement warned that had these former presidents similarly dismissed science in favor of political ends, over 200,000 deaths and millions of respiratory and cardiovascular disease cases would not have been prevented with the signing of the original Clean Air Act and the 1990 amendments to that Act. The statement demands that the Bush administration?s ?distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease? and calls for Congressional oversight hearings, guaranteed public access to government scientific studies and other measures to prevent such abuses in the future. The statement further calls on the scientific, engineering and medical communities to work together to reestablish scientific integrity in the policymaking process. ________________________________________________________________ Among the statement signers are: Philip W. Anderson*? David Baltimore*? Paul Berg*? Lewis Branscomb Thomas Eisner* Jerome Friedman? Richard Garwin* Walter Kohn*? Neal Lane Leon Lederman*? Mario Molina? W.H.K. Panofsky* F. Sherwood Rowland? J. Robert Schrieffer*? Richard Smalley? Harold E. Varmus? Steven Weinberg*? E.O Wilson* * National Medal of Science ? Nobel laureate LINK WTF! :mad : :blink: