Taro T

WSJ has been speculating that JL will be McCain's Secretary of State. That seems more likely to me than having the Presidency change parties should McCain win and then become incapacitated.

In my original post, which got merged into this thread, the title line was something to the effect of Ra-cha-cha locals finally in HD on DirecTV. Syracuse is supposed to go HD sometime in September. Linky

They switched over some time this evening. Just in time for the Bills season.

Actually it was more like 7 houses and one closed restaurant along one of the Finger Lakes that were part of Syracuse's TV market when the switch to CBS getting the AFC games occurred. A year later, that sliver of land was redesignated as part of the Ra-cha-cha TV market, but somehow the Bills still got the Syracuse blackout to stand.

Had Cavic been competing against a norrmal mortal he did finish correctly. (Although I'm sure he wishes that his last kick was a smidge stronger.) Too bad for him he was going against Phelps.

I would want to see the draft rule before saying anything definitive about it, but IF it proposes what the Chronicle writer claims then I think someone in HHS REALLY doesn't want McCain to be President. As that might actually spur a few of the "Obama has dreamy eyes" crowd into actually finding out where to vote and when (heck, it might even get a few 20 somethings to register to vote so they might actually vote).

I don't follow your reasoning. If the legislation the dems want really is for what's best for the country and what the citizens want, shouldn't they pass the legislation and find out whether Bush will really veto it? If they are right, shouldn't they fight the battle and let the public create an outcry for the veto to be overridden if the legislation is in fact vetoed? It's very hard to make changes when you decide to not even try. Either the dems know their ideas are bad and think they will fare better in the next election by crying about the mean President preventing them from enacting their ideas rather than letting people see the results of their ideas being enacted, or they have absolutely no stones. (I guess it could be a combination of the 2.) Either way, it isn't very impressive "leadership". Not that I'm complaining about them not doing much, the less Congress does (regardless of party in control of it) the less damage it does.

Primarily to keep from making the Erie County School District stretch from Hamburg to Clarence.

Did you realize that splits on the 1st leg are typically slower than other splits because the racers are going off the sound of the starter's pistol and not the visual of their teammate touching the wall? Which is why individual records can be set on the 1st leg of a relay but no other leg. Phelps beat the French team's expected 2nd best swimmer by 4/10ths of a second. He actually was 6th out of the 8 swimmers you mentioned in that particular race. He beat the French lead man and he beat Jones and he had the handicap of starting 1st. I'd expect the way Bernard trailed off, Phelps would have been very close to Bernard and the 3rd French swimmer if all had had relay starts. If Phelps were expected to be the weakest of the 4 US swimmers he would have raced the 2nd leg. It turned out the weakest link on that day and in that race was Jones who was expected to be the 2nd weakest of the 4. (Random aside: it strikes me very odd that we are discussing "weakest links" regarding men that can swim 100 m in ~47 seconds.)

If Phelps being #5 in the world in the 100 free makes him the US's weakest leg of the relay, wouldn't they have said the US has 4 of the top 5 times, not 4 of the top 8?

If they were saying that I doubt the US coaches would agree. Phelps swam the 1st leg of the race which is typically where the 2nd strongest swimmer races.

Not joking at all. The NHL may be unsuccessful at expanding into Europe at present, but hockey has a huge presence in Europe. Don't confuse a lack of interest in hockey in the south in the US with a lack of interest in the sport in Europe. Where in Europe outside the countries that border the Mediterranian does basketball rank higher than either soccer or hockey? It also lags behind rugby in many countries. In the countries where basketball is popular, there are already existing leagues that won't take kindly to an interloper league trying to set up shop. In the countries where it isn't as popular, what's the point of trying to set up shop? Those have been the primary reasons that the NHL hasn't been able to expand there (there are already well developed leagues in many countries) and why the NFL hasn't been able to successfully expand there (football is only a fringe sport at best in Europe). Where is the market for an American sports league in Europe? I don't see how it drums up support where it doesn't exist and I don't see how it comes across as anything but American "imperialism" (for lack of a better word) in the places that support for the sport does exist.

You, sir, are welcome.

I never said whether I thought you were a better or worse person than I. I simply stated that your posts make you appear to be daft. Your last posts don't sway my opinion.

The candidates couldn't campaign there, but yet Hillary was on the ballot. Why didn't Obama stay on the ballot if he knew his closest competitor was on the ballot unless he either knew he'd get his butt kicked or she had agreed to get off the ballot? Either way, it's a pretty weak argument on your part (which is not terribly surprising).

That's why you "still don't care" whether they can be blackmailed or not. Again, I realize this is a rhetorical question, but are you really as daft as you appear to be?

How does the NBA expand into Europe when the NFL has been unsuccessful and the NHL has been looking at it for 20+ years, also unsuccessfully? Basketball is popular along the Mediteranian but not particularily away from it. I'm not certain how they can capture a market that doesn't appear to exist.

How was it expected of all candidates to be off the ballot in those states? Did Obama have an agreement (verbal or written) from Hillary and the others that stayed on the ballot to leave and they reneged on the agreement? If he didn't, how was there an "unfair situation that favored Clinton"? It was pretty clear at the time, that Obama expected to lose both states and asked people that favored him to vote undecided.

So, politicians should be given a pass on doing painfully stupid things because they'll get dinged on other things? Again, I realize this is a rhetorical question, but are you really as daft as you appear to be?

I realize this is essentially a rhetorical question, but are you really as daft as you appear to be?

No, because if no one knows how anyone is voting then management will clearly coerse the employees into voting the union down. It's only by having every single person having to state publicly in front of all the people they will have to work with every day whether or not they want a union that a coersion free environment can be obtained. What the h*ll was I thinking joining this "discussion".

The provision I quoted specifically states that secret ballots are not necessary. As a matter of fact, w/ the little preamble of "(n)otwithstanding any other provision of this section" it specifically states that as long as a majority sign their union cards then the union is in. If that paragraph were removed, then the rest of the bill MAY be worth considering. But that paragraph CLEARLY provides opportunity for pro-union coersion. Not only does it provide the opportunity for it, but I'd almost guarantee it'll happen. Would you still support this bill minus that paragraph?

Wrong. From the text of the bill: So, since unions can't get a majority of workers to vote for them in secret ballot elections, simply having a petition signed by a majority of employees will now force a company to unionize if this bill is passed in its present form. Gee, I'm certain that there would never be any intimidation or strong-arming tactics used to get people to sign the petitions, right?

Back in the late '80's / early '90's Bennigans had THE WORST SERVICE anywhere. I can't believe it took this long for them to go under.

Scott, It looks very good. Is there a way to let someone skip to a particular date / article for the archived news items? Having them going back to 1999 is pretty cool, being able to look at something from 2003 without scrolling through 1000 pages would be even cooler.