Controlled Chaos

QUOTE(Steff @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 09:47 AM) Why don't you ask the ticket guy rather then the marketing guy... ? Tom Sheridan is his name. Ahhh Steff, I was waiting for you to come on here and give me a name.... Thanks!! I didn't know who to talk to. I just know I have written Brooks a few times in the past and he has always responded in kind. So I figured I'd go with who I knew. He wrote me back and is looking in to it. He's not in the office today. As for purchasing extra tix, this is in the 'single game ticket' thread above: 1/24 is when full season ticket holders get to buy them, 1/25 split season ticket holders can, 1/27 general public can. Hence my bewilderment when they say they have no more tix available. The extras haven't even gone on sale yet.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 09:01 AM) All of the season ticket requests, including partial plans, plus extra requests from season ticketholders have demolished any supply of tickets that did exsist. I thought the season ticket base was under 23,000, and the park holds over 40,000. According to this, "1/24 is when full season ticket holders get to buy them, 1/25 split season ticket holders can, 1/27 general public can", the extra tickets available haven't even been sold yet. So where the heck are almost 20,000 tickets?? It all is very confusing to me....hopefully Brooks can at least shed some light on it.

QUOTE(Iwritecode @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 08:49 AM) Opening day has been sold out for a little while now. maybe I'm missing something then....if tickets haven't gone on sale yet...how is it sold out?

QUOTE(mreye @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 08:35 AM) But, blatant disrespectful, stereotypical bigotry is quite another: I'm not faint of heart and I'm more than willing to get into a heated argument, but does this mean I should have to put up with this? Could I, as a male, white Catholic, say the same type of things about Jews? Blacks? Women? Does that fall under "heated argument"? You're Catholic, white, and republican, pretty much everything you say is racist. Even asking if you can say something is racist...so please stop with the offensive questions/comments.

I'm not sure how this happened, but we were told yesterday that our request for group tickets could not be fulfilled for opening day. "How about Tuesday?" was suggested. I wrote a letter to Brooks, only because he is a great guy to deal with and if he can't help, hopefully he can tell me where to go. I just don't get it...We finally win the world series and I can't be there for the first game.... Here's the letter... Brooks, I have found dealing with you to be a pleasant experience in the past and others I have talked to feel the same, which is why I am coming to you with this problem. I hope you can be of some help. I have been a White Sox fan my entire life. As a little kid I lived in the apartments above Jimbo's, so this team has been with me since birth. I have been going to opening day for the past 17 years. For the past 8 years we have organized a group outing for opening day. We we're very excited to see the letter last October stating that we were a preferred group organizer and would be allowed to order tickets for Opening Day 2006. The Sox were just entering the playoffs and I knew they'd go all the way and this would be our most memorable opening day ever. We we're told to fax our order in by November 1st, which we did, and we would be able to get the same amount of tickets we got the previous year, which was 23. We were told the invoice would be sent in December. All was well. Then we won the world series and my friend and I received calls from all of our friends asking about opening day and we told them everything is set already we sent the order in over 2 weeks ago. Since the Sox won it on the road, excited isn't a strong enough adjective to describe how all of us we're feeling about that game. Then we get a phone call today stating our ticket request could not be honored. How is this possible? At first I thought the call was that we couldn't get all 23 tickets in the same section, but then when it turned to "We can't get you any tickets on opening day, how about Tuesday's game?" I was in absolute shock. I know the season ticket base is hovering around 20,000 and since single game tickets haven't even gone on sale yet...how is this possible? I follow the Sox every day on soxtalk.com. It's a passion to read and write about the team. The Sox had an outing for us last year and I was very appreciative for the loyalty shown to us die hard fans. Now I'm asking for some of that same loyalty and for the Sox to honor our group tickets, so we can celebrate the start of the championship season. Hopefully we can rectify this issue. Thanks!!

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 03:05 PM) For any red meat loves, a brazillian steakhouse has to be a must see. When you feel like you need a colon cleansing when you're walking out the door you know you had some good meat!!!

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 02:57 PM) YEP. There are too many spin offs now and most of them suck, but Fogo kicks ass. Well I've had Fogo and Sal & Carvao and thought they were both pretty comparable. I still say Finley's in Downers Grove will hook those of you that try it!!!

Here's one many of you have probably never heard of, but the steak I had there was TOP notch and it's definitely worth a shot. My wife also raved about the Cedar Planked Salmon. Finley's Grill Room I've been to all the big ones, Ruth's Chris, Mortons, Gibsons, Smith and Wollensky, Sullivans, Wildfire. I won't knock those cause to me a steak is like sex. Even if it's not great, it's still pretty dam good, but Finley's is my new favorite!!

QUOTE(Steff @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 09:52 AM) I don't think anyone is misguided or was taking way from the real tragedy here. Just commenting on the reporting. Oh, I didn't mean to imply that at all here. I just meant the news I heard this morning, and articles I've read and even the people interviewed in that town, seemed more pissed that they were misinformed about the deaths rather than the deaths themselves.

Scrubs is a hilarious show. You definitely have to give it some time if you've never seen it before. Once you get to know the charaters, it's great. There's really no other show I know of that's filmed like it.

The real tragedy here is the death of the miners...not how it was reported. Nobody really knows how to react in that situation unless you're in it. Hours and hours of hoping and praying for everyone to be alive. Then some unofficial info was released and the media was there to catch it and the mayor was there to catch it. I'm sure it was hard not to be joyful and believe in it, when that's what you were hoping and praying for the whole time. I just don't like to blame people for saying the wrong things during times like this. It's hard to have the right words or composure in that situation. It could have been handled better by the govenor and the media, but they're not the ones responsible here. Whenever there is a tragedy like this all kinds of erroneous stories come out. They need to find out if the company was at fault here or if this was just a tragic accident cause everyone is looking to point the finger somewhere. Right now, fingers are being pointed at people that were just hoping for the best and following the lead of others when they shoudn't have. Tough situation and wrong course of action, but that's not the cause of peoples sorrow, it's the death of their loved ones.

Happy Birthday dude!!!!!!!!!!

QUOTE(dmbjeff @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:20 PM) it is $139 with drilling included I called Fox Bowl in Wheaton and it's $149 with drilling included. I'm going to tell them about St Charles price and see if they honor it. The place in Chicago is $139 too. Fricken Fox Bowl trying to rip peeps off!!!!!!!!

FACT: You can never have too much starting pitching!! FACT: People will b**** here no matter what!!

dmbjeff How much is it at St. Charles Bowl??

Sox announcement up 12/28/2005 1:11 PM ET White Sox agree to terms on three-year contract with pitcher Jon Garland CHICAGO -- The Chicago White Sox have agreed to terms on a three-year, $29-million contract with pitcher Jon Garland, avoiding arbitration. Under terms of the deal, Garland, who was eligible to become a free agent following the 2006 season, will receive $7 million in 2006, $10 million in 2007 and $12 million in 2008. Garland, 26, estabished career highs in virtually every category in 2005, going 18-10 with a 3.50 ERA (86 ER/221.0 IP), three complete games (all shutouts) and 115 strikeouts in 32 starts. The 6-foot-6, 215-pound right-hander led the American League in shutouts and ranked among the leaders in wins (T2nd), quality starts (T2nd, 22), complete games (T4th), IP (8th), ERA (9th) and walks per 9.0 IP (10th, 1.91). Garland was named to his first AL All-Star Team, throwing 1.0 scoreless IP at the Midsummer Classic in Detroit, after going 13-4 with a 3.38 ERA (45 ER/ 120.0 IP) in the first half of last season. He became the first White Sox pitcher since John Whitehead in 1935 to win his first eight starts in one season. Garland's 10-game winning streak spanning 2004-05 is tied for the fifth-longest by a White Sox pitcher since 1970. The native of Granada Hills, Calif. was named American League Pitcher of the Month for April after going 4-0 with a 1.80 ERA (6 ER/30.0 IP), and he threw 23.0 consecutive scoreless IP from April 20-May 6. Garland made two postseason starts for the World Champion White Sox, going 1-0 with a 2.25 ERA (4 ER/16.0 IP). He recorded a complete-game victory at Los Angeles in Game 3 of the ALCS, giving the Sox a 2-1 lead in the series, and posted a no decision in Game 3 of the World Series at Houston, allowing four runs (two earned) over 7.0 IP. Garland is 64-61 with a 4.42 ERA (496 ER/1,009.0 IP) in 181 career games (159 starts) over six major-league seasons, all with the White Sox. Over the last four seasons (2002-05), he ranks fifth among the AL pitchers in both IP (822.1) and games started (130) and tied for ninth in wins (54). Joe Crede and Rob Mackowiak are the White Sox lone remaining arbitration eligible players.

any where I can find a list of pictchers salaries for next year??

QUOTE(dmbjeff @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:18 PM) thats the ball, its pretty.....hopefully it helps me pick up the dreaded 10 pin me too!!!!!!!!!! I hate that f***in pin. I either go in the gutter or hook by it. I probably get it 2 out of 10 times. It's the biggest fault in my game. That is a sweet looking ball. Where is the pic from?

Great News!!! I wonder if the AJ signing had anything to do with it. They work great together!!

The New York Times vs. America Dec 28, 2005 by Michelle Malkin ( bio | archive | contact ) 2005 was a banner year for the nation's Idiotarian newspaper of record, The New York Times. What's "Idiotarian"? Popular warblogger Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs and Pajamas Media coined the useful term to describe stubborn blame-America ideologues hopelessly stuck in a pre-September 11 mindset. The Times crusaded tirelessly this year for the cut-and-run, troop-undermining, Bush-bashing, reality-denying cause. Let's review: On July 6, Army reserve officer Phillip Carter authored a freelance op-ed for the Times calling on President Bush to promote military recruitment efforts. The next day, the paper was forced to admit that one of its editors had inserted misleading language into the piece against Carter's wishes. The "correction": "The Op-Ed page in some copies yesterday carried an incorrect version of an article about military recruitment. The writer, an Army reserve officer, did not say, 'Imagine my surprise the other day when I received orders to report to Fort Campbell, Ky., next Sunday,' nor did he characterize his recent call-up to active duty as the precursor to a 'surprise tour of Iraq.' That language was added by an editor and was to have been removed before the article was published. Because of a production error, it was not. The Times regrets the error." Carter told Times ombudsman Byron Calame: "Those were not words I would have said. It left the impression that I was conscripted" when, in fact, Carter volunteered for active duty. Funny how the "production errors" of the Times' truth doctors always put the Bush administration and the war in the worst light. Not content to meddle with the words of a living soldier, the Times published a disgraceful distortion of a fallen soldier's last words on Oct. 26. As reported in this column and in the news pages of the New York Post, Times reporter James Dao unapologetically abused the late Corporal Jeffrey B. Starr, whose letter to his girlfriend in case of death in Iraq was selectively edited to convey a bogus sense of "fatalism" for a massive piece marking the anti-war movement's "2,000 dead in Iraq" campaign. The Times added insult to injury by ignoring President Bush's tribute to Starr on Nov. 30 during his Naval Academy speech defending the war in Iraq. After Starr died, Bush said, "a letter was found on his laptop computer. Here's what he wrote. He said, 'f you're reading this, then I've died in Iraq. I don't regret going. Everybody dies, but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we're in Iraq; it's not to me. I'm here helping these people so they can live the way we live, not to have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. Others have died for my freedom; now this is my mark.'" Stirring words deemed unfit to print by the Times. The Times did find space to print the year's most insipid op-ed piece by paranoid Harvard student Fatina Abdrabboh, who praised Al Gore for overcoming America's allegedly rampant anti-Muslim bias by picking up her car keys, which she dropped while running on a gym treadmill: " . . . Mr. Gore's act represented all that I yearned for -- acceptance and acknowledgment. . . . I left the gym with a renewed sense of spirit, reassured that I belong to America and that America belongs to me." I kid you not. In June, Debra Burlingame, sister of Charles F. "Chic" Burlingame III, pilot of downed American Airlines Flight 77, blew the whistle on plans by civil liberties zealots to turn Ground Zero in New York into a Blame America monument. On July 29, the Times editorial page, stocked with liberals who snort and stamp whenever their patriotism is questioned, slammed Burlingame and her supporters at Take Back the Memorial as "un-American" -- for exercising their free speech rights. Yes, "un-American." This from a newspaper that smeared female interrogators at Guantanamo Bay as "sex workers," sympathetically portrayed military deserters as "un-volunteers," apologized for terror suspects and illegal aliens at every turn, enabled the Bush Derangement Syndrome-driven crusade of the lying Joe Wilson, and recklessly endangered national security by publishing illegally obtained information about classified counterterrorism programs. So, which side is The New York Times on? Let 2005 go down as the year the Gray Lady wrapped herself permanently in a White Flag.

A couple of articles Lecturing liberal lion of the old media Dec 28, 2005 by David Limbaugh ( bio | archive | contact ) "You can call me anything you want, but do not call me a racist," said an indignant President George Bush on Dec. 12, commenting on the despicable, opportunistic suggestion that any inadequacies in the federal response to Hurricane Katrina were due to racism. But veteran network media giants Ted Koppel and Tom Brokaw don't quite see it that way. Indeed, they don't appear to see eye-to-eye with President Bush on much of anything if their joint interview with Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press" is any indication. Russert was uncharacteristically tame toward these two, offering them repeated softballs concerning the past year's main stories. But the relaxed atmosphere gave us a clearer picture of the worldview these men share, which is doubtless representative of most of the Old Media players. From race and taxes to health care and Iraq, they spoke in a monolithic liberal voice, accented by its familiar air of moral superiority. Koppel began by vigorously defending the media for introducing the issue of race into Katrina. "But the question had to be asked," said Koppel, "if that had been a section of a city that was populated by middle-class white people, would the response have been the same? … I think there was just a feeling that you didn't have to be as engaged as I think the federal government would have been." Brokaw agreed. "I think Ted is correct when he says it was not overt or active racism." But it sure must have been subconscious racism, huh, Tom? It bothers me deeply when race hucksters play the race card on Katrina for political gain, knowing it is outrageously unfair. But I think it troubles me more to hear these two supposed paragons of 20th-century journalism smugly level the charge and, apparently, really believe it. Superficially distancing themselves from the allegation that racism was directly involved didn't mitigate it in the least. In fact, if President Bush's alleged bigotry were so deeply rooted as to affect his actions without even stirring his moral impulses, he would probably be a more consummate racist than the guy who consciously considers race while discriminating. Isn't it ironic that in their sanctimony against perceived racism, presumably because of the evil of one group feeling superior to another, these two sermonizers reveal their absolute certitude of moral superiority over those who reject their liberal worldview? And their self-righteousness wasn't limited to race but included almost all other issues they discussed. On Iraq, Brokaw talked about "this disconnect between those people who are in uniform and fighting this war over there and a large portion of our population because no sacrifice is being asked of anyone at home. The president is not asking us to conserve oil or to ration gasoline or to push hard for alternative sources of energy in this conflict." Then Koppel eagerly chimed in, "Or to pay a nickel more in taxes." Let's not allow the inanity of their analysis to obscure the thrust of their message: "We are better people than average Americans, especially conservatives, because we care more, even if we don't personally sacrifice more than they do." On health care, Koppel observed, "You can get the best medical care in the world. … I can. Most Americans can't. And there are 43 million Americans who aren't getting any medical care at all. That is a scandal." No, what is scandalous is that Koppel so glibly equates lack of insurance with no medical care. What is repulsive is his implication that we have so many uninsured simply because we don't care enough. And what is intolerably hypocritical is that he probably gave Bill Clinton a pass when he didn't put a dent in the number of uninsured despite campaigning on the issue. Clinton was excused because he pretended to care. It was amusing to witness the elitist duo adopt the Democratic Party line on other issues as well, from President Bush's reputed refusal to admit his "mistakes" to his unwillingness to reach across party lines. And let's not forget his failure to give inspections "a little more time" and "to reach out more" to other nations before attacking Iraq. But why all the fuss? These venerable heavyweights aren't liberal. They just see the world through clearer lenses and operate on a higher moral plane. Reporting, even editorializing, from this perspective doesn't betray a liberal bias but defines objectivity. And those who deviate from their worldview are simply flawed, and racist, sexist, homophobic, greedy, uncompassionate and -- oh, yes -- conservative. _______________________________________________________________ 'Meet the Press' summit reveals elite media's flaw Dec 28, 2005 by Jonah Goldberg ( bio | archive | contact ) Watching Tom Brokaw, Ted Koppel and Tim Russert this past Sunday wasn't quite like seeing dinosaurs asking each other what's happened to all the tasty fronds, but the year-ending edition of NBC's "Meet the Press" offered an excellent glimpse at why the elite mainstream media as we know it is facing extinction. No doubt intended as a grand treat for the viewing audience, "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert invited NBC's Tom Brokaw and ABC's Ted Koppel to ladle out some observations from their deep wells of wisdom for all of the world to imbibe. These three giants of television journalism tut-tutted about one government failure after another, from the Katrina response to the government's inability to provide health care for everybody to our dismayingly low taxes. Brokaw agreed with Koppel, Koppel agreed with Brokaw. Russert nodded as one newsman repeated what the other one just said. For example, regarding the Hurricane Katrina episode - in which the media collectively broke all chains of objectivity in order to preen with outrage over the plight of the downtrodden - Brokaw asserted "there were no gray areas in Katrina." By this he meant the media was 100 percent right for portraying the federal government as 100 percent wrong. This elicited nods all around. Brokaw even quoted Aaron Broussard, the Jefferson Parish president who openly wept on "Meet The Press" about the tardy federal response: "They didn't come. They promised they would come and they didn't come." Alas, Brokaw left out the fact that Broussard had to be invited back on the program to clarify various untruths (aka "lies") in his original version of events. Russert let this fact fall by the wayside in this no-gray zone. And on and on it went. Now, it's fair to say that Brokaw, Koppel and Russert are three of the very best journalists the elite mainstream media have ever produced. Respective flaws notwithstanding, they are generally respected by viewers of various ideological outlooks for being tough and serious. Indeed, one of the most overlooked reasons for Russert's success at "Meet the Press" is that conservative viewers respect him enough to tune in. (Right-leaning eyeballs provide television ratings points too, you know.) But in the same way the rules tend to break down when cops are asked to investigate other cops, elite journalists see themselves as above the standards they apply to everyone else. So while Russert wouldn't devote a whole show to nothing but softball questions for a politician or CEO, he turns into Larry King on Prozac when interviewing his colleagues. A thick cloud of nostalgia hung over the set. Why couldn't politicians trust journalists like in the good old days? Why must we have a sound-bite political culture? Why don't politicians follow the agenda set by media muckety-mucks? Such nostalgia is understandable given the culture these men grew up in. In the post-World War II era, television journalism was almost a quasi-governmental institution. There were only three networks, and their news broadcasts set the national debate and drew the nation together in a way that had never happened before. Eventually, the establishment felt entitled to this arrangement. They forgot that this system was the unintended offspring of WWII and the Cold War and the advent of television. Before TV, American journalism was more boisterous and less revered. Today's technological glitz notwithstanding, we are returning to the norm, and the guild-mentality consensus we've "enjoyed" this last half-century is evaporating and will likely never return. When asked to name an underreported story in '05, Brokaw suggested the downsizing of General Motors. Well, GM is a good illustration of what's happening to the elite media. One of the main reasons GM is in such trouble is that it has never won the allegiance of post-WWII consumers. The "greatest generation," as Brokaw calls them, loved their Oldsmobiles, and they've been buying GM cars for 60 years. But that generation is dying, and GM's antiquated products (and pensions) are killing it in a more competitive environment in which young consumers couldn't care less about Oldsmobile. Young people feel the same way about those evening news broadcasts. Fewer than 10 percent of viewers of the major network news shows are under the age of 34. The average viewer is over 60. Haven't you noticed that all of the ads are for adult diapers, denture cream and Viagra? There's nothing wrong with that, but it's a sign that the old system cannot last. Meanwhile, the one institution that has been immune to the media's prying eyes is now being scrutinized itself - not by a journalistic priesthood but by bloggers, independent media and consumers. Rather than embrace the new era, which recognizes that the elite media's power qualifies them as worthy of scrutiny, the elite media circle the wagons. As Ted Koppel asked at the end of "Meet the Press," "When are you getting to the tough questions? Come on, Tim."

I think it's awesome!! I'll be getting it for my spares!! Thanks a lot dmbjeff!!! I also have a white sox bowling pin so I can use it for display purposes if I want too!!

I thought so too.

QUOTE(Confederate_48 @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 08:01 PM) Do they still make the black and gray World Series Champion hats ?? Ive been looking for them but I dont see it on the Sox site anymore in the shop. I saw about a hundred of them at dicks in Lombard this past Monday.

awesome!! Thanks man!! I looked all over for it