Squirrel

Are these available now for purchase? Christmas is coming! I want a 'Killer' shirt ... my baseball hero growing up.

Good. My condo purchase will not be for nothing.

I think the ACLU certainly walks a fine line. They do a great job fighting for rights even when they are unpopular, but I think it's hard not to argue that many members of the ACLU slant towards the left. They also have become a bit more active in rights than defensive of those that exist. At least it seems that way to me. Still ... I don't call them a special interest group. It's not like they are dumping tons of money into campaigns, or are single-issued.

I wouldn't exactly call the ACLU a special interest group unless defending people's Constitutional rights and freedoms is a special interest.

Heh. I'd say he's the smarter and more enlightened of the two.

That's kind of what I think about you claiming to be a libertarian independent when I really think you are a republican. Maybe it's just that you feel it necessary to play devil's advocate to Pseudo's democrat but I've really heard nothing from you that doesn't reek of republican. It's all a matter of perspective and I don't think Obama is as liberal as you claim.

I still have my Homer Hankie from '87. Wasn't able to go to any of the games but a friend of mine got me one. Does anyone remember going to a 'spontaneous' rally at the Dome after the Twins won the AL against the Tigers? All of it, fun times.

Seems reasonable. Glad they are staying there ... it's a good spot. Expanded seating and expanded concourse are definitely needed.

There are more success stories out there than you may think. It's just that the 'Welfare Queens' stories are the ones that are repeated over and over and over again until that's all people think of welfare. Do you remember former Minnesota Secretary of State Joan Growe? She had 3 small children when her then husband up and abandoned them all. She went on welfare, put herself through school, became a teacher, etc. People DO use welfare as it's intended and do succeed. And, as Brock said, drastic cutting without thinking does a lot of damage, especially to the children involved.

Me either.

The point is he shouldn't even still be around. Period. Imo.

I really don't get the love for Ullger. If it had been me, he'd have been gone after the 3rd base coaching experiment. His 'windmilling' guys around when they had no chance was just bad on so many levels. I will SCREAM if he is around, still, because he's going to be Gardy's replacement some day. I hope they aren't that stupid.

I've heard people say they will support Mitt because they don't like Obama, to which I reply, "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't." We won't know who we'd be getting until it's too late. Not that I would've voted for him anyway. Still not sure who I'll vote for but likely for the devil I know.

Some of my White Sox fan friends here at the time of the trade said that the trade was made because Cooper likely saw something fixable in him. Riiiiiiiight.

I'm sure I threw the demographics off the most on that one ... but hey, maybe you'll get sponsors from some girl places now.

Then you're listening to what is being said in response and not what is actually being said. I'm not defending Romney - I'm disagreeing with the scope of the interpretation. It's not this thread ... it's every political thread back to BYTO.

Quite frankly, it's hard for we libertarians to get much traction when we're being morally demonized by both sides. You are a Libertarian??? wow ... I am truly shocked. The way you argue I had you pegged as a died in the wool, to the core, Republican. Not trying to offend here, if you are offended, I am just really shocked at this revelation.

Most religions are exclusionary. You need to join, and participate and believe in a specific way. Sure, I could attend services most places (not all) and be welcomed in the door, but in most of most it wouldn't be truly acceptable for me to participate in certain aspects, i.e. communion. This is why I do not participate in any organized religion and why no religion should be a part of governmental policy. No denomination, let alone the whole group as a whole, believes in the same way and leads to greater conflict, imo.

and in the end, you get nothing but an evil candidate. Since your vote won't change anything anyways, why not spend it on someone you actually like? I think I answered that in the next paragraph of my original post.

The irony here is astounding. hahahaha

This is all kinds of awesome on so many levels.

Of course it got derailed. It's a political thread. You should still try and vote (or is it too late to get an absentee ballot), even if it's for a 'lesser of two evils.' Or write in someone. Or find another candidate. Exercise your right to vote even if it's a vote in protest. When there are voter suppression laws being passed all over the country, mostly by one party to suppress voters from another party, it's even more important that you vote because you can, even if disillusioned. Just my opinion. Also ... consider the possible appointments you'd want made to the courts and who you'd want to make them. That's where my thinking tends to lie these days. For me, I do not want anyone on the court who cannot separate their religious ideals from the laws of the court.

I've often considered my vote as one of the lesser of two evils. It seems that if you want to vote for the person most 'for' the things you want you are just giving a vote to one you least want. The pitfalls of a two-party system. So I end up voting for the person who is most likely going to beat the one I find most reprehensible.

lol

Correct. And 70-75% of the country is not GOP or conservative. Thus, those continually insisting that this is a GOP only issue AND claim to know that the true GOP intentions are nefarious -- those folks are either political hacks and/or insufferable drones. The Democrats don't want the bills to pass because it's bad for the party and good for the GOP. The Libertarians oppose it on principle. I won't speak for the rest because I don't pay much attention to them. Sadly enough, I'm pretty sure this bill is going to pass in MN. The only hope I have is that Federal Judges will continue to shoot them down, as what happened today with the Texas bill. On the other hand, I think MN has a damned good shot at stemming the flow of anti-marriage amendments that have been sweeping the country and I'll be damned proud of the state if we do it. I'm seeing more and more of those orange "Don't Restrict Marriage" signs plunked down in front lawns (including my own). But in the case of Voter ID laws, I think that's a losing battle in the polling booth. Sigh. You know, if you ran for office I'd be very tempted to vote for you. And I'm fairly socialist. But I like how you stand up for the issues based on real facts, common sense and what is humanly ethical rather than twisted half-truths and scare tactics.