Centerfield

On May 21, after years of debate, the Minnesota legislature finally approved a new stadium for the Twins. Since then, the team has been nearly unbeatable and has made up 10 games on Chicago in the wild card race. (Detroit remains out of reach.) It has been a nice couple of months to be a fan.

Posted by: Todd Pearson at July 25, 2006 01:12 PM

In Seattle, Starbucks owner Howard Schultz and the rest of the ownership group, sold the Seattle Sonics to an ownership group from Oklahoma City who once promised they bring an NBA team to their home town but now are saying they won't as long as the Seattle City Council and the state legislature agree to build a new arena or drastically improve the current one within twelve months. Not having much faith in the Seattle City Council or the state legislature, if the Hornets go back to New Orleans I predict you will hear the name the Oklahoma Sonics within two years. It has been a crappy couple of weeks to be a fan. On a good note, the Mariners are three games out and just took two from the mighty Red Sox. Thank you Manny Ramirez.

Posted by: Mathew at July 25, 2006 01:34 PM

Arena blackmail is one of the oldest games in professional team sports. Give us bazillions in taxpayer subsidies, or we move away....

Posted by: Tully at July 25, 2006 02:27 PM

Of course it's quiet. Simple, really: it's too darn hot! Here in northern California, we're breaking temperature records day after day. And having Stage 1 and Stage 2 power alerts every day . . . with no help from Exxon this time!

The only consolation we get for 155+ temperatures is, in the words of the folks in Phoenix, "but it's a dry heat." Granted, if we had the kind of humidity I got in New Jersey last week, it would be totally unlivable; but even dry it's too hot to move. Even moving fingers to type is best done slowly.

Thank goodness global warming is merely a theory!

Posted by: wj at July 25, 2006 04:21 PM

I've lived in Phoenix and Jersey. It's hard to say which is worse - a dry 115 or a very humid 98. I will say that 100 in Phoenix is better than 90 in NJ.

And now for something completely different: The "make poverty history" campaign going on really bugs for the simple reason that it sounds like someone wants to be the poorest person ever.

Posted by: WHQ at July 25, 2006 04:29 PM

"make poverty history" is nonsense on its face. The way poverty is officially defined, a set percentage of the nation's population MUST be "in poverty" at all times. If 90% of the population made more than $100,000 per year (in today's dollars, mind), someone making $95,000 would be "in poverty."

Compared to our ancestors of barely a century ago, pretty much everybody in the country is living in the lap of luxury. Compared to two centuries ago, anyone who isn't actually homeless today is better off than all but the very tiniest elite then.

Making poverty history can only happen one way: change the definition of "poverty" to something that is objective and independent of what other people happen to be making at the moment. Otherwise you can say that, since I don't have a cell phone, _I_ must be "in poverty -- which is just silly. (An example I picked because I have heard one of our esteemed state legislators use exactly that is "proof" that certain people were living in poverty.)

Posted by: wj at July 25, 2006 05:16 PM

Poverty is both relative and definitional. The vast bulk of America's "poor" would be middle-class or wealthy in most of the world. I'm speaking in terms of food and possessions and living standards, not cash money.

Posted by: Tully at July 25, 2006 05:47 PM

Oddball news story of the day...

Ireland Worker Finds Ancient Psalms in Bog

Cool enough in itself--a 1000 year old Book of Psalms pulled intact out of a bog! But this part caught my eye...

The book was found open to a page describing, in Latin script, Psalm 83, in which God hears complaints of other nations' attempts to wipe out the name of Israel.

Given current world events, the portent-seeking millenialists will go to town on that one.

Posted by: Tully at July 25, 2006 06:10 PM

The vast bulk of America's "poor" would be middle-class or wealthy in most of the world.

That doesn't make it right.

Compared to our ancestors of barely a century ago, pretty much everybody in the country is living in the lap of luxury. Compared to two centuries ago, anyone who isn't actually homeless today is better off than all but the very tiniest elite then.

I find such comparisons bizarre. What does that have anything to do with our problems today? If you are suggesting that the American poor isn't really poor, I would encourage you to research this issue further. Poverty in this country is a bigger deal than we make it, largely because I suppose we would rather pretend it doesn't exist. That doesn't change the fact that there are those in society that are caught in a cycle that is self destructive, nor does it lessen our obligation as humans to do something about it. What is most sickening about this fact, in my view, is that it is a fixable if we had the political will to do so.

Posted by: Mathew at July 25, 2006 06:25 PM

OK, Mathew, what would constitute evidence that we had fixed it? In your opinion. Until you define your ends, we can't create a path to get there.

As for the cycle of self-destruction, no question that it is a problem. But is it a problem of poverty (however defined)? Somehow, I don't think so -- more likely, poverty is a result rather than a cause. (Although I will admit that sufficient wealth might HIDE the fact that someone was self-destructive.)

Posted by: wj at July 25, 2006 06:40 PM

Funny one Tully,

Here's some interesting items:

Pakistan less dangerous than Hezbollah?

Other reasons for this? I wonder why the Times doesn't run with this story.

Comment that brings up Psalm 83 in a political context

more surprises due soon from those complaining to God.

Posted by: Maxtrue at July 25, 2006 07:04 PM

Until you define your ends, we can't create a path to get there.

In the short term I agree. This is one of the problems with welfare reform, not that I am opposed to it, because I wasn't. Anyhoo, we measured it's success dependent solely on how many welfare recipients got off the books, but what the numbers don't show is that just because one who used to be on welfare has a job, doesn't neccesarily mean life is much better. Nor does the program talk about why welfare reform has failed the 20-30% of recipients who cannot work for whatever reason or the class of society that makes just enough to never have been on welfare but also is not progressing in life. Sound metrics as a way to measure public policy goals in the short term I can agree with, and those who speak in such broad terms shouuld do a little better telling us what it is they mean, no doubt.

In the long term, the answer is that it depends of course. You are in part correct that poverty levels are dependent on the success of society. I would argue that that this is a good thing because it helps us keep in mind the gap between rich and poor. Short term measurements would obviously need to be adjusted over a longer period to reflect changes in income levels, etc. In other words, yes, making poverty history is not completely probable. However, we can change the way this country thinks about this issue and we can do a better job of making sure that our government institutions create public policy on behalf of the entire population, and not just those who vote. It is obviously a difficult place to lay out a plan to abolish poverty, but for instance, I like the direction John Edwards has gone since the 2004 campaign with his "One America Committee". Sure there is a lot of rhetoric coming from someone whose agenda is to be President, but I appreciate the issue at least being raised.

Posted by: Mathew at July 25, 2006 07:05 PM

Arena blackmail is one of the oldest games in professional team sports. Give us bazillions in taxpayer subsidies, or we move away....

So several years ago the worst team in the NFL (for not just the past 10 years but the past 40 years) makes that very threat. You'd think the local electorate would say "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out". Instead they bought this. Cool stuff but still the same team. Reminds me of that great scene from "Blazing Saddles" where a cornered Cleavon Little holds the guns to himself and shouts "one more step and ** dies" Posted by: c3 at July 25, 2006 08:32 PM

That doesn't make it right.

Heh. Define "right." You're not complaining there about poverty at all, but about unequal income distribution.

If you are suggesting that the American poor isn't really poor, I would encourage you to research this issue further. Poverty in this country is a bigger deal than we make it, largely because I suppose we would rather pretend it doesn't exist.

Does having spent a fair amount of my adult life "poor" count as not ignoring poverty? As well as not being even remotely "rich" now? Working for years in the low-income community? I've spent a fair amount of time in third-world countries as well, and I don't mean in posh resorts. I've sat down to rat dinners in shanties, and smiled and eaten what was offered rather than offend. Hell, I've helped hunt and kill and clean the rats. (Tastes like squirrel, BTW. Squirrels are rats with fuzzy tails and good PR agents.) I've seen real honest-to-God gut-grinding non-relative poverty close-up and personal, and I've seen the American equivalents close-up and personal, and I stand by what I said. America's poor would be middle-class many places. In a few, they'd be upper class. Their "poverty" is indeed relative.

That doesn't change the fact that there are those in society that are caught in a cycle that is self destructive, nor does it lessen our obligation as humans to do something about it. What is most sickening about this fact, in my view, is that it is a fixable if we had the political will to do so.

Absolutely! But with some people there is not a damn thing you can do about it, because they put themselves in that cycle and work very hard to stay in it. That's not "fixable" any more than alcoholics are "fixable," unless you're advocating forcibly "re-educating" them. We should definitely help out those in bad circumstances, especially those in such circumstances because of things entirely beyond their control. The truly disabled pop immediately to mind. But there are also many who are in those circumstances because they refuse to make any effort to get out of them, because they enjoy (if that's the right word) being in them. And that's not "fixable."

I see that over and over again working with the hardcore homeless. Many if not most of whom are exactly where they want to be, living the lives they want to live. Wihout forcibly "curing" them against their will, you cannot "cure" them. The pathology of poverty may be lesss severe, but is of the same nature.

Posted by: Tully at July 25, 2006 08:35 PM

LOL, Chris. Exactly. Taxpayer-funded sports venues make little or no economic sense. OTOH, they can make a lot of "community" sense. But don't buy the econ arguments. Just know what you're buying.

It's still blackmail.

Posted by: Tully at July 25, 2006 08:37 PM

As Tully noted, you're not objecting to poverty, per se, if you are going to adjust the definition to "reflect changes in income levels." What you are objecting to is disparities in income, which is a whole different subject.

To address that, you can either, a) come up with an "acceptable" difference and legislate that, or b) legislate zero difference. The difficulty is that the empirical evidence indicates that neither one works. Not to mention that trying it ends up with most of society worse off. About the best you can do, without trashing the economy, is a progressive income tax (assuming you have the wit to tax all income, regardless of its source, equally) and a major estate tax.

Posted by: wj at July 25, 2006 08:54 PM

interesting news So Iran isn't involved in Hezbollah? So according to Kerry it's time to take out Iran?

Posted by: Maxtrue at July 25, 2006 09:14 PM

Tully! The local nutcases are embarrassing our state again...

Posted by: Blue Jean at July 25, 2006 11:36 PM

If any baseball town deserves a new stadium, it's the Twins with their disgraceful Baggiedome. And I expect this new stadium will lead to a much stronger franchise, both economically and sportswise. So if you are a Twins fan, then Yahoo! [and that's a great franchise by the way. My fantasy team has Santana, Liriano, _and_ Radke, and I'm cleaning up.

But I agree with Tully that the numbers don't add up. I find it grotesque that states are willing to subsidize ball fields when some of a given states towns can't get enough local aid to get school class sizes below, say, 30. If any sort of spending by cities and states should be regarded as optional or discretionary, it otta be spending on pro ball fields.

The mayors of major cities and governors of the same states otta get together on a pact whereby the agreements offered to any team all come with similar strings attached...the city or state deserves either part team ownership or a substantial share of the revenue stream based directly on the amount of non-team dollars invested.

At bare minimum, it aught to go to a state or city referendum, and people should get to vote directly on it while at the same time voting for whatever tax increase will be needed to pay for such an optional lifestyle expenditure.

If I were to get my wish, every pro sports team would be owned by its fans, like Green Bay.

Posted by: bk at July 26, 2006 10:38 AM

I'm glad I sparked such an interesting discussion on poverty. I don't know if anyone got my point. If you rushed for 300 yards in the Super Bowl, people would say that you "made Super Bowl history." Now, maybe if you managed to live solely by eating the flies buzzing around your face, people would say that you "made poverty history."

Posted by: WHQ at July 26, 2006 11:02 AM

Thanks WHQ, because I wasn't sure what you were on about... :-)

BTW, I agree with Tully's points on poverty. Notice how there's an evaluation dynamic here that mirrors what you see in virtually all testing. There's assessing and grading on a curve, which is norm-referenced and comparative, and then there's assessing against a fixed standard, which is criterion-referenced or standards based testing.

IMO, any really useful definition of poverty would have a primary basis in concrete needs (criterion referencing). Mazlow's hierarchy of needs would be a good place to start. Suppose you can count on having food, clothes, and shelter, as well as decent access to education, social services, and emergency medical care. Well that's not perfect, but as Granny said on the Beverly Hillbillies, "it's better than well doggies."

IMO, if wish to regard ourselves as a humane Christian society, we have a responsibility to help the less fortunate and less able survive and see that they do not suffer physically. But do we have a responsibility to make sure that everyone thrives? To what extent? Is it even realistic to expect that if we make sure everyone survives, that all who therefore survive are even capable of thriving?

When we move from doing our best to help all survive withlout physicall suffering to trying to guarantee that all thrive, we necessarily move into the land of the comparative, into norm referencing. As all reach some level of thriving, the bar has to rise. And biggest problem here is the problem of motivation. I have yet to see good answers around this obstacle. Not all people are motivated to thrive. Provide the basics of physical survival and mitigate the most serious of physical suffering that are reasonable mitigatable, and for many the motivation to achieve beyond that is simply not there.

I wish this were not true, but every year that passes seems to tell me it is. I don't belive many people have a burning desire to truly thrive if it requires focus, intensity, drive, and hard work? Why? Because evolution has quite appropriately engineered us all to be motivated most strongly by fear.

Posted by: bk at July 26, 2006 11:57 AM

Matt, why does Manny get to be the punching bag? Coco Crisp is the guy who overran a catchable ball by 5 feet. And then after Manny bobbled it, Coco was the guy who missed the cutoff man, ruining any shot of catching Beltre at home.

Plus, the game went extras. That wasn't even the winning run. Great game though, eh?

Posted by: bk at July 26, 2006 12:00 PM

Saw that, Jean, and already booked a family stay there next month on our New Mexico/Texas trip, taking the family suite. I like the way that Knight fellow thinks. Having been to Meade, I think I can say that any drop in restaurant business won't last long. The Lakewood has the only decent non-burger-diner food for miles, and harvest checks will be coming in soon. I bet the extra publicity has already boosted his bookings for hunting season. Lessee, nice comfortable B&B with great food, or fleabag motel with Burger King? Decisions, decisions....

Trying to economically justify massive tapayer spending on sports venues relies on a process of very selective citation. The promoters will always pimp econ-impact studies that are optimistically inflated and completely ignore and fail to mention the negative econ-impact of the taxation involved. With good reason--they tend to be in mathematical balance, flip sides of the same coin, leaving the real impact benefits negligible to negative due to the required ongoing upkeep. You can still make an honest case with "civic pride" or just plain old "because we all want it." But be aware of what you're buying--intangibles.

Posted by: Tully at July 26, 2006 01:26 PM

This sports-arena discussion reminds me of the discussions now going on around Philly regarding hosting the 2016 Summer Olympics. The people in charge of bringing the Olympics here make lots of claims about the positive economic benefits of doing so. They cite the reported positive impacts to LA and Atlanta from the same.

My suspicion, as I don't claim to know what the real impacts were, is that these cities, having spent lots of PR time and effort convincing everyone in the city that hosting the Olympics was such a great idea to gain support beforehand, are not going to perform an anymore honest analysis afterwards. "Remember how we spent all that money getting the Olympics here and how we told you all how much it would help the city and surrounding region. Well, as it turns out, we were completely wrong about that. Sorry."

I was in Atlanta in 98, two short years after the games were held there. The Olympic village downtown was already an aging, neglected, semi-post-apocalyptic-feeling, useless place. A co-worker of mine said the same thing about the stadium build for the Mexico City games - tall weeds and graffiti were its defining characteristics.

At least the pro-sports arenas some decent useful life, if at a net cost to the city.

Posted by: WHQ at July 26, 2006 04:09 PM

LOL! I must say I'm proud of you, Tully, and I hope you and your family have a great stay. This B and B owner sounds like a nice fellow; he deserves all the custom he can get. It's too bad that Meade's a little out of the way; all the pro-tolerance folks I've told this one to say they'd love to stay there. :-)

But still it must be said, (to paraphrase Freud) "Sometimes a rainbow flag is just a rainbow flag."

Posted by: Blue Jean at July 27, 2006 12:52 AM

Her's an anecdote on Olympic costs....We visited Montreal 5 or 6 summers ago. Fabulous trip, by the way. Great city, lots and lots to do and see. The botanical garden is simply out of this world, You need a whole day to see it.

Anyway, as I was listening to the clock radio for local news, one report made a sidelong mention of the fact that Montreal was STILL paying off the debt they incurred from when they hosted the Olympics in... wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... wait for it...1976. And they too had a series of aging and underutilized complexes.

Bottom line...hosting the Olympics will indeed provide some economic benefits to some...but is it a net black ink generator for the host locale's bedget? Highly unlikely.

And I agree that there's A rationale for a public stadium, it's just not the one that always gets plumped. And here's the thing, someone on the taxpayes' side needs to mind the store. If no one does, then what happened is that everone buys the economic impact argument, and then we all watch a big back-patting party while the gov't gives away the store to clever businessmen. At the least, I think a better dynamic would be one where it's clear to the team owners that if they want the taxpayers to pay, then they have to get in bed with us. Owners should undertake such a relationship with some reluctance, and limit taxpayer exposure. For example when Kraft got Gillette built, the state kicked in for infrastructure, but most of the financing was not from the state, and now Kraft has a venue that he owns, and the taxpayers have modern access with an improved design, and much improved amenities. Going forward, the team pays for upkeep and so on.This means that the team isn't going to hold the state hopstage by means of an expiring lease. #0 or 40 years from now, the old stadium will again be the problem of BOTH the team and the people.

Posted by: bk at July 27, 2006 09:12 AM

Brian;
You have drunk the koolaid

If any baseball town deserves a new stadium, it's the Twins with their disgraceful Baggiedome. And I expect this new stadium will lead to a much stronger franchise, both economically and sportswise.

Following that logic most expansion teams should be quickly successful. Now I would agree that a new stadium TEMPORARILY increases attendance but team performance is going to be a better driver.

And if the SF Giants can privately fund their new stadium, why can't other teams?

Posted by: c3 at July 27, 2006 10:00 AM

Jean, it's right on the way to Albuquerque unless you're determined to stay on interstates, and Albqq is our first destination, though we'll also stop in Taos on the way there. Then from Albqq east through Amarillo and on into Dallas to see more relatives, and south to San Antone to see more relatives, then back via Dallas and the Nations on the way home. Though I might swing south and go through Lubbock and the "other" Abilene on the Albqq/Dallas leg.

Yep, sometimes a flag is just a flag.

Posted by: Tully at July 27, 2006 12:05 PM

The obvious--if the team OWNS the stadium, their incentive to pick up and run is minimized. If they don't have equity ownership of their venue, they've got no reason not to blackmail the taxpayers.

Posted by: Tully at July 27, 2006 12:13 PM

C3 I think you missed my points. The Twins deserve a new ballpark because the current one an awful site for baseball. Circa the current day, I think that's virtually indisputable. I wasn't speaking to the financing issue, just noticing that the baggiedome is possibly the awfulest major league ballpark

I wouldn't dispute for a second that fielding a good team is important for sustained attendance. But the team is still more likely to thrive in a new ballpark with increase attendance and revenue. As we know, fif you want to field a good team, revenue helps. There's good reason why the Red Sox and Yankees have been perennial contenders as revenue gaps between teams have grown, while many smaller market clubs like Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and Kansas City have struggled. Sure, it's possible to field a very good team with a small payroll if you are really shrewd, really careful, and a little lucky. But it's MUCH harder with a smaller payroll. There's so little margin for error.

Following that logic most expansion teams should be quickly successful.
Hmm. Do expansion teams usually start out with brand new stadiums? To my knowledge, the answer to that is generally "no," although many start with a promise of one on the way. And while we're on the topic of expansion success, let's notice that the D-backs have won a championship and the Marlins have won 2. These 3 examples all count as pretty quick success.

Since you somehow missed it, I am not in favor of substantial public financing for ballparks unless it comes with serious strings attached. Here in MA, the Patriots Gillette field was a combo effort where the state kicked in I think 100 million for infrastructure that included a nicely remodeled highway, and the people got the benefit of much better access to a much nicer place to watch a game. I'd prefer any such effort be entirely private, but it doesn't seem like we gave away the store.

Posted by: bk at July 28, 2006 12:59 PM

Great job http://snow.utoronto.ca/cgi/wbbb/gen_forum/config.pl?read=37424 snowutoron14

Posted by: snowutoron14 at July 30, 2006 07:09 AM

Great job http://phentermine-online.cq.bz/ phentermin20

Posted by: phentermin20 at July 30, 2006 07:10 AM

Great job http://nclub.info/ nclubinfo12

Posted by: nclubinfo12 at August 16, 2006 05:20 PM

I want to say that I find your site enough interesting for me home business [url=http://www.blogas.lt/businesss/]home business[/url] Good luck!

Posted by: home business at September 6, 2006 04:58 PM

Great job, webmaster! Thank you very much! http://lingerie.xhostar.com/gallery-lingerie-model.html gallery lingerie model [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/gallery-lingerie-model.html]gallery lingerie model[/url]

Posted by: lingerie see thru at September 10, 2006 05:37 PM

I want to say that I find your site enough interesting for me. seiko watches Good luck!

Posted by: replica rolex at September 10, 2006 08:34 PM

Usefull information and all is good arranged. [URL=http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/swiss-army-watch.html]casio watch[/url] Thank you for your work. I will visit your site more ofter from now and I bookmarked it.

Posted by: seiko watches at September 10, 2006 08:34 PM

It's so interesting to read this gb) http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-video.html lingerie video [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-video.html]lingerie video[/url]

Posted by: lingerie woman at September 10, 2006 08:59 PM

Luogo interessante. Persona fine! Vada su me;) http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lace-lingerie.html lace lingerie [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lace-lingerie.html]lace lingerie[/url]

Posted by: chest lingerie at September 10, 2006 11:36 PM

Wirklich interessanter Aufstellungsort. Dank Sie für Info. Sie sind gut, daß, so bleiben Sie. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-photo.html lingerie photo [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-photo.html]lingerie photo[/url]

Posted by: asian lingerie at September 10, 2006 11:39 PM

It's my first visit to your website. After just a quick browse, I'm really impressed! http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-plus-size.html lingerie plus size [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-plus-size.html]lingerie plus size[/url]

Posted by: lingerie slutty at September 11, 2006 12:48 AM

Hi this is a very informative site! It's nice on the whole but it seems that the navigation system is a little bit confusing. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-model-teen.html lingerie model teen [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-model-teen.html]lingerie model teen[/url]

Posted by: erotic lingerie at September 11, 2006 04:07 AM

It is healthy, I shall come on your site more often, thank. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-mature.html lingerie mature [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-mature.html]lingerie mature[/url]

Posted by: lingerie silk at September 11, 2006 04:07 AM

What the hell is happening here?! http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-sexy.html lingerie sexy [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-sexy.html]lingerie sexy[/url]

Posted by: costume lingerie at September 11, 2006 05:19 PM

Keep it going, thanks. I found exactly the information. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-model-sexy.html lingerie model sexy [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-model-sexy.html]lingerie model sexy[/url]

Posted by: lingerie pokemon at September 11, 2006 06:26 PM

That's boian! Write more! http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-man.html lingerie man [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-man.html]lingerie man[/url]

Posted by: man in lingerie at September 11, 2006 06:40 PM

Keep it going, thanks. I found exactly the information. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/asian-lingerie.html asian lingerie [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/asian-lingerie.html]asian lingerie[/url]

Posted by: gallery lingerie at September 11, 2006 10:40 PM

Take care of it and keep it on the road! http://lingerie.xhostar.com/fine-lingerie.html fine lingerie [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/fine-lingerie.html]fine lingerie[/url]

Posted by: honeymoon lingerie at September 11, 2006 11:31 PM

? good site, good short contents of the good work. ?ongratulations ! http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-risque.html lingerie risque [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-risque.html]lingerie risque[/url]

Posted by: fetish lingerie at September 12, 2006 02:21 AM

Page interessante, il est tres satisfait qu'il soit tombe ici ! Je volonte heureuse arrive toujours) http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-xox.html lingerie xox [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-xox.html]lingerie xox[/url]

Posted by: lingerie party at September 12, 2006 04:02 AM

look forward to participating and hope to do more teaching, writing and research in the future on the topic of sacroiliac joint dysfunction. I am the developer of the Hesch Method of treateing sacroiliac joint dysfunction. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/leather-lingerie.html leather lingerie [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/leather-lingerie.html]leather lingerie[/url]

Posted by: lingerie stripper at September 12, 2006 05:56 AM

Interesting site. You surely much worked at it. So it's nice) http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-satin.html lingerie satin [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-satin.html]lingerie satin[/url]

Posted by: lingerie plus at September 12, 2006 06:49 AM

This is one of the best sites I have ever found. Thanks!!! Very nice and informal. I enjoy being here. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/girl-in-lingerie.html girl in lingerie [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/girl-in-lingerie.html]girl in lingerie[/url]

Posted by: lingerie man wearing at September 12, 2006 08:10 AM

Actually interesting site. Thanks to you for info. You are good that, remain so. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-woman.html lingerie woman [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/lingerie-woman.html]lingerie woman[/url]

Posted by: bowl lingerie at September 12, 2006 09:37 AM

Wir sind froh, Sie auf unserem neu zu sehen! Wir hoffen, da? Sie das neue Design und die Bequemlichtkeit der Benutzung bewerten Sie. http://lingerie.xhostar.com/ lingerie [url=http://lingerie.xhostar.com/]lingerie[/url]

Posted by: man in lingerie at September 12, 2006 11:27 AM

? good site, good short contents of the[url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/fake-rolex.html]fake rolex[/url]good work [url]http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/fake-rolex.html[/url] ?ongratulations !fake rolex

Posted by: fake rolex at September 13, 2006 09:30 PM

swiss army watch swiss army watch Good luck!

Posted by: movado watch at September 15, 2006 05:52 PM

What the hell is happening here?!stock market

Posted by: stock prices at September 15, 2006 07:36 PM

I want to say that I find your site enough interesting for me.rolex watches

Posted by: invicta watches at September 15, 2006 07:56 PM

I want to say that I find your site enough interesting for me.freestyle dive watch

Posted by: casio dive watch at September 15, 2006 07:56 PM

Prevedfreestyle dive watch

Posted by: rolex at September 15, 2006 10:39 PM

stocks Good luck!

Posted by: stock prices at September 15, 2006 11:49 PM

I want to say that I find your site enough interesting for me.nixon watches

Posted by: rolex watch at September 17, 2006 04:23 PM

Prevedinvicta watches

Posted by: movado watch at September 17, 2006 06:48 PM

Prevedpocket watches

Posted by: swiss army watch at September 17, 2006 06:49 PM

stocks Good luck!

Posted by: stock quotes at September 18, 2006 12:32 AM

Wir sind froh, Sie auf unserem neu zu sehen! Wir hoffen, da? Sie das neue Design und die Bequemlichtkeit der Benutzung bewerten Sie. http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex-watch.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/replica-rolex.html]replica rolex[/url] replica rolex

Posted by: replica rolex at September 18, 2006 03:35 PM

Great job, webmaster! Thank you very much! http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex-replica.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex-watch.html]rolex watch[/url] rolex watch

Posted by: rolex watch at September 18, 2006 05:50 PM

Really enjoyed exploring this site. Hope to return some day http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/movado.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex-replicas.html]rolex replicas[/url] rolex replicas

Posted by: rolex replicas at September 19, 2006 12:09 AM

Hi all! I really like this great site! http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/movado-watch.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/movado.html]movado[/url] movado

Posted by: movado at September 19, 2006 02:30 AM

I have just found your website great http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/replica-watch.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/movado-watch.html]movado watch[/url] movado watch

Posted by: movado watch at September 19, 2006 04:49 AM

Son contento verle en nuestro sitio nuevo! Esperamos que estimen el diseno nuevo y la comodidad del uso del sitio. http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/nixon-watches.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/replica-watch.html]replica watch[/url] replica watch

Posted by: replica watch at September 19, 2006 07:09 AM

Fantastic website you have here http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/replica-watches.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/nixon-watches.html]nixon watches[/url] nixon watches

Posted by: nixon watches at September 19, 2006 09:31 AM

This is one of the best sites I have ever found. Thanks!!! Very nice and informal. I enjoy being here. http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/seiko-watches.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/omega-watches.html]omega watches[/url] omega watches

Posted by: omega watches at September 19, 2006 04:32 PM

Very good site! I like it! I just wanted to pass on a note to let you know what a great job you have done with this site..Thanks! http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/seiko-watches.html]seiko watches[/url] seiko watches

Posted by: seiko watches at September 19, 2006 07:01 PM

look forward to participating and hope to do more teaching, writing and research in the future on the topic of sacroiliac joint dysfunction. I am the developer of the Hesch Method of treateing sacroiliac joint dysfunction. http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex-watches.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex.html]rolex[/url] rolex

Posted by: rolex at September 19, 2006 09:12 PM

I haven't been up to anything these days. So it goes. I can't be bothered with anything these days. http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/casio-watches.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/rolex-watches.html]rolex watches[/url] rolex watches

Posted by: rolex watches at September 19, 2006 11:27 PM

Hello there! Just want to say that I find your site enough interesting for me. Usefull information and all is good arranged. Thank you for your work. I will visit your site more ofter from now and I bookmarked it. http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/diamond-watch.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/casio-watches.html]casio watches[/url] casio watches

Posted by: casio watches at September 20, 2006 01:48 AM

It's my first visit to your website. After just a quick browse, I'm really impressed! http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/replica-rolex.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/bsdlsaiw/diamond-watch.html]diamond watch[/url] diamond watch

Posted by: diamond watch at September 20, 2006 03:57 AM

http://tornatmico.cpl.upc.edu/Members/inv/money-investing.html [url=http://tornatmico.cpl.upc.edu/Members/inv/investing-online.html]investing online[/url] investing online

Posted by: investing online at September 20, 2006 06:11 AM

rolexes

Posted by: mens watches at September 20, 2006 11:15 AM

watch replica

Posted by: rolexes at September 20, 2006 07:40 PM

I think your site is very good and complete, but the information you have here http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/watch-replica.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/replica-watch.html]replica watch[/url] replica watch

Posted by: replica watch at September 20, 2006 10:31 PM

Wirklich interessanter Aufstellungsort. Dank Sie für Info. Sie sind gut, daß, so bleiben Sie. http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/invicta-watch.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/watch-replica.html]watch replica[/url] watch replica

Posted by: watch replica at September 21, 2006 01:24 AM

pocket watches

Posted by: invicta watch at September 21, 2006 04:41 AM

invicta watches

Posted by: citizen watch at September 21, 2006 07:59 AM

Interesting web page is, i'll see you later one more time http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/invicta-watches.html [url=http://hometown.aol.de/b323jkwatch/pocket-watches.html]pocket watches[/url] pocket watches

Posted by: pocket watches at September 21, 2006 10:44 AM

casio watch

Posted by: invicta watches at September 21, 2006 01:52 PM