Frances Bavier

It could be my left thigh ... Frances

That's some pretty good work, HHSDad. When I was a younger lass, my grandmother had one of these on the back porch. I can remember putting the clothes through the wringer after they had been cleaned, and before you hung them on the line, in the sun. Ah yes - the good old days... You know - I looked at the picture more closely, and I would swear that the blue emblem on the front is one of the early versions of the FOX News Network logos... Frances

I'm proud of you, Rockmom. I envy your self control. Frances

Don't be silly, cshs81. Everyone knows that all spin machines are of the liberal slant. Frances

Great pictures. I love this thread. I'd like to see some of the other teams post some pics as well. Frances

Amen. Of course, if profits were to plummet to such unimaginanible lows, the CEO might still be able to find some solace in his golden parachute package. Frances

Nicely done, Strike 3. I think all of us offer our prayers for their uncertain future. Frances

LOL - I was actually using the second definition, but it would appear that the first relates better to the "spoonfed" comment. Frances

Setting the all time record for a single year. Not a bad year... http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/01/D8N0VRD80.html Thank God we gave the oil companies that tax break to help spur them on ... Frances

Last night, in the NBA, Stephon Marbury played 35 minutes and only scored 7 points, as the New York Knicks got beat by the Charlotte Hornets. I wonder how many people feel as though he isn't a "big time player"? Everyone at that game, and everyone that is reading this thread realizes that Seals didn't hang 30 points on Somerset, while leading Raceland to a win. Bottom line is that she still played hard, and as long as she gave her best effort, her coach and her teammates will be more than happy with that on any given night. One bad line score does not invalidate her worth to a basketball team - just like one off night doesn't make Stephon Marbury a "has been" in the NBA. Frances

Sting - I agree with your summation, but I feel that (unfortunately) there is a segment among us that doesn't take that last step of making judgements for themselves. There is a segment (on both sides of the aisle) that simply takes the pablum that is being spoonfed to them as if it were gospel. Frances

I know that you were pulling for them, Old Shooter. I love to see people from one 16th Region school rooting for the teams that do advance. Class move, Old Shooter. Class. :thumb: Frances

Congrats to Somerset, but I really would have liked to see the Ramblerettes move on. Frances

Congratulations to the Lady Briar Jumpers. Dang it, it sounded like the Ramblerettes had a good chance to advance in this one. Frances

A tough break for her. Like everyone posting in this thread, I hope she gets through it with no delays. Frances

Jim Valvano has the all time greatest line in basketball - In the middle of his run to the NCAA championship with NC State, he calls time out during one game in the tournament, and instead of going to the huddle to talk to his team, he approaches the ref: Valvano: "Can you give me a technical foul for what I'm thinking?" Ref: "Come on Coach - you know I can't T you up for what you're thinking". Valvano: "GREAT - cause I think you suck". Absolute classic.

I think that is a great question, HHSDad. Speaking only for myself, I can envision someone being Pro-Life and still falling into my definition of a Moderate. I think that the candidate in question would have to be open to other social issues, as well as showing some sense of flexibility on the issue of abortion. Contrast that with a candidate that is Pro-Life and staunchly conservative (i.e. Rick Santorum), and it looks like a distinction could be made. Frances

I am surprised by your use of the "laughing" emoticon. If I didn't know any better, I would swear that you were intentionally being obtuse. At no point did I say that because one team won the first encounter that the loser would be the favorite in the rematch. I can assure you that when Ashland and Rose Hill play again, Rose Hill will come into the game expecting to win, and Ashland will prepare for the game with the understanding that Rose Hill is capable of winning. Anything else would be folly. The truth is that both teams will approach the game with the same mindset - "we must play well to win, and if we play well, we have a chance to win". Of course, using your logic, it would appear that when Russell plays Ashland, Boyd County, Rose Hill, Greenup, Raceland, or Elliott County again, they will assume that the win is guaranteed, based on the previous games outcome. Let me know how that one works out. Frances

If you are talking about absolutes, then there will definitely be occasions where finding a middle ground will be hard, if not impossible. Using abortion as an example, let's look at the two extremes: Pro-Life extreme would be that "regardless of the situation", all pregnancies must be carried to term, even if the life or health of the mother is in question. Even if it costs $10 million dollars, we will force every pregnancy to be carried to term. Pro-Choice extreme would be "no matter what the circumstances, until the moment of delivery, the mother can terminate the pregnancy for any (or no) reason at all". The truth is, neither of these situations are currently the law - which means that we have already found some compromise. Now, that compromise may not be to your liking, or my liking, but that is what compromise is. It is trying to find that middle ground, where both sides can take some measure of satisfaction that their interests are being considered, if not completely met. The truth is, this world has very few absolutes. When you give someone an ultimatum, you need to be prepared for a disappointing answer. Frances

I fully understand the fact that you weight the issue of abortion so heavily when considering candidates to back, LBBC. I have no problem with that, and as you stated, we ALL have some issues that we elevate more than others. My point is that when you draw a line in the sand (on any issue), then you have effectively made the decision to not compromise. That is EXACTLY what has put the current administration in the predicament that they are in. When someone refuses to compromise (or even work toward it), they place themselves in a position where they have to validate why they refuse to budge. When you see this administration demonize everyone that disagrees with them, that is a result of having painted themselves into a corner. Essentially, the phrase "you're either with us or you're against us" is being used during what should be debates on domestic issues - and is no longer limited to the tough talk that Bush invoked when talking about the terrorists in Al-Qaeda immediately after 9/11. Compromise is not a dirty word. It is our only chance at ending this polarization that now engulfs everything we do. In all honesty, I salute the Republican candidates that are willing to stand up to the President. I say this not because I agree with all of their positions, but because I respect the fact that these men and women are willing to try to find the middle ground, rather than parroting a party line. I would feel just as strongly if the legislator were a Democrat that decided to support balancing the budget and reducing the deficit - especially if doing so included a reduction in spending. Frances

I would love to see three or four billionaires decide to collectively underwrite the beginning of such a party, with the idea of providing backing to candidates at the state and federal level. After one or two election cycles, the party would have enough press exposure to allow the candidates to raise the needed funds to campaign. To use a sports related analogy, I would compare this to the startup of the AFL in the 60's. Looking back on it, I think the Hunt brothers would say that worked out pretty well. Frances

Hearsay - From that description, it would appear that many of these young women are truly looking for a form of "inclusion" - to answer that overpowering teenage need to be a part of something. Frances

I think that such a party would have to come from a small group of people with money, in conjunction with a handful of established Congressmen that truly are moderates. That combination would have the ability to establish such a party, while weathering the initial storm of attacks from the two extreme parties. Just a thought. If you are intent on never meeting someone halfway on a given issue, then you really aren't interested in compromise. In the case of a "Moderate" party, that might mean that you would be asked to support a candidate that did not exactly represent your point of view (i.e. the war in Iraq, abortion, death penalty, etc.). The truth is, neither of the current two parties exactly represents your views (or anyone else, for that matter). In your case, you have decided to make the issue of abortion a "litmus" test for your support of a candidate. While you certainly have that right, I fear that you are dooming yourself to a string of deep disappointments in terms of your elected representatives. The truth is, when a single issue is used as a litmus test, there are going to be a great number of warts that one must overlook to see that one particular beauty mark. Frances

To be honest, I was bowled over by the idea of responding. Frances

I'm telling you - moderation is the key to our future. This age of "win at all costs" and "sell to the highest paying PAC" is out of control, and it is costing us more than we will ever know (or probably want to know). Frances