Controlled Chaos

The Sox have 109 HR compared to the Twins 56 HR, yet the Sox have scored only 2 more runs than the Twins. To me that's just mind boggling.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 27, 2008 -> 06:42 PM) Actually he said that is nine, because that was the 9th grand slam hit in the crosstown series. And he said Steve Swisher because he was playing on his father's name and his father playing for the cubs, which was kind of dumb. But the nine thing made perfect sense. I don't know if it was a play on his fathers name or what, but not only the couple times during the game did he say it, after the game he showed the higlight and said something like the big damage coming from Steve Swisher with the grand slam. Not funny, but who gives a flying f***. Great f***in win Steve Contreras and awesome f***in defense Steve Dye. Good hustle Steve Cabrera and nice 4 hit game Steve Quentin. Oh Steve Wise grab your parachute your about to land.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 27, 2008 -> 03:59 PM) For those of us following on gameday...what happened? Radio said ball went thru Patterson's legs...

nice...there goes whitesoxbrians 1 wish 2. Score 2+ runs by racking up hits, not home runs.

OCAB with the magic stick

so much for Dempster gettin that pitch count up.

f*** yeah!! Now slap Jose around in the dugout. THROW STRIKES...

Frustrating as f***!!!!!!!!!!!

Come on COUNT!! MUTHAf***...THROW STRIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WOW>..Uribe kinda being patient

Come on now Swish...start it up!!!

WTF OCab

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Jun 27, 2008 -> 01:45 PM) If we do these 3 things today, I'll be satisfied: 1. Drill Aramis Ramirez. 2. Score 2+ runs by racking up hits, not home runs. 3. Win. :fthecubs :fthecubs Shouldn't #3 be #1?

Anyone in the loop going anywhere to watch the game?

<!--quoteo(post=1673591:date=Jun 26, 2008 -> 10:01 AM:name=Controlled Chaos)--> QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 10:01 AM) <!--quotec-->There's some pretty good clips on TDK on ONDEMAND. Show's some of the shooting in Chicago, how they made the clown masks and has the trailers. I can't wait to see this movie. Here's some of the stuff on comcast.... Filiming in Chicago Filming in IMAX Clown Masks

QUOTE (KyKyGruber @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 05:29 PM) what exactly happen to Cooper? i seen him throw something then pull his hamstring. Then all the guys were watching it again on the camera in the dugout. f***IN HILARIOUS... He pulled has hammy thowing the balls and strikes clicker when he got ejected from the game. Then he tried walking it off acting like nothing happened.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 06:59 PM) I have read a few excerpts of The Dark Knight reviews. Not a bad word yet. There's some pretty good clips on TDK on ONDEMAND. Show's some of the shooting in Chicago, how they made the clown masks and has the trailers. I can't wait to see this movie.

The Imitators: Part III Thomas Sowell Thursday, June 26, 2008 Some of the people who are most adamant against outsourcing economic activity from the United States to other countries often seem to think we should outsource our foreign policy to "world opinion" or act only in conjunction "with our NATO allies." Like so many things that are said when it comes to public policy, there is very little attention paid to the actual track record of "world opinion" or of "our NATO allies." Often there is a blanket assumption that European countries are just so much more sophisticated than American "cowboys." But there is incredibly little interest in the track record of those European sophisticates whom we are supposed to consult about our own national interests-- including, in an age when terrorists may acquire nuclear weapons, our national survival. In the course of the twentieth century, supposedly sophisticated Europeans managed to create some of the most monstrous forms of government on earth-- Communism, Fascism, Nazism-- in peacetime, and to start the two World Wars, the bloodiest in all human history. In each of these wars, both the winners and the losers ended up far worse off than they were before these wars were started. After both World Wars, the United States had to step in to save millions of people in Europe from starving amid the wreckage and rubble that their wars had created. These do not seem like people whose sophistication we should defer to. Between the two World Wars, European intellectuals-- more so than ordinary people-- completely misread the threat from Nazi Germany, and were urging disarmament in France and England, while Hitler was rapidly building up the most powerful military force on the continent, obviously aimed at neighboring countries. During the Cold War, many European intellectuals once again misread the threat of a totalitarian dictatorship-- in this case, the Soviet Union. When they finally recognized the threat, many saw the question as whether it was "better to be red than dead." They were no more prepared to stand up to the Soviet Union than they had been ready to stand up to Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Worse yet, much of the European intelligentsia objected to America's standing up to the Soviet Union. Many of them were appalled when Ronald Reagan met the threat of new Soviet missiles aimed at Western Europe by putting more American missiles in Western Europe, aimed at the Soviet Union. Reagan, in effect, called the Soviet Union and raised them, while many of the European sophisticates-- as well as much of the American intelligentsia-- said that his policies would lead to war. Instead, it led to the end of the Cold War. Are we now to blindly imitate those who have been so wrong, so often over the past hundred years? Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

How Can a "Fellow Black Republican" Oppose Obama? Larry Elder Thursday, June 26, 2008 Mr. Elder, I am shocked that you oppose Barack Obama and belong to the Republican Party. We must get over ourselves and realize there is room at the top for everyone and we must get there by helping each other -- instead of agreeing with policies and old politics that are proven not to work. To endorse John McCain, a person who will not make it easier for the underprivileged, is just too much. How can a fellow black American feel this way? Your Former Supporter Dear Former Supporter, Do you have any Republican friends, let alone black ones? If so, how many of them want to make it harder "for the underprivileged"? You also might want to familiarize yourself with the history of the Democratic and Republican parties, and see which party has stood up longer for the rights of people of color. Do you know that Democrats opposed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution -- abolishing slavery, granting citizenship rights to newly freed slaves, and guaranteeing the right to vote (at least on paper) to blacks, respectively? Do you know that most of the politicians who stood for segregation were Southern Democrats? Do you know that the Ku Klux Klan was founded by Democrats, one of whose goals was to stop the spread of the Republican Party? Do you know that, as a percentage of the party, more Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Do you know that inner-city parents want vouchers -- the right to determine where their children go to school? Do you know most Democrats, including Barack Obama, oppose this? Republicans, for the most part, support vouchers. Where vouchers have been tried, kids appear to perform better, with higher parental satisfaction. You tell me, how many things are more important than a child's education? Do you know that 36 percent of babies aborted are black, while blacks make up 17 percent of live births? Do you know that polls show blacks are more pro-life than are whites? Yet the Democratic Party -- to which over 90 percent of blacks belong -- is the party of Roe v. Wade, requiring states to legalize abortion on demand. Do you know that Margaret Sanger, the founder of the organization that became Planned Parenthood, believed that poor blacks were inferior and that aborting their babies made our society better? Look it up. Do you know that blacks stand to benefit more than whites through Social Security privatization, a position opposed by Obama but supported by McCain? Are you even familiar with the issue and what a powerful income-generating vehicle it would be for blacks? If not, take a look at the research done by the libertarian think tank Cato Institute and the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation. Porous borders enable illegal aliens to enter our country and threaten the jobs and lower the wages of Americans, many of whom are unskilled people of color. Which party is more determined to deal with this -- Republicans or Democrats? Obama called the foes of the House anti-illegal immigration bill "ugly and racist." I did not support the bill, but vehemently object to characterizing those who did as "ugly and racist." You speak of policies that have "proven not to work." What about the "war on poverty" that began in the '60s, the policies that Obama and his party want to continue and expand? Do you know that today 70 percent of black children and over 50 percent of Hispanics are born outside of wedlock? The welfare state -- which Democrats want to expand -- has played a huge role in discouraging marriage and destabilizing families. Speaking of helping the "underprivileged," I'd suggest you read a book called "Who Really Cares," by Arthur C. Brooks. A non-Republican professor raised by Democrats, he examined the charitable spending habits of Democrats and Republicans. The results surprised him. Brooks found that Republicans give far more of their money and time for charitable purposes than do Democrats. And the giving is not confined to their churches or other houses of worship. This, by the way, has nothing to do with income. Poor Republicans give more than poor Democrats. Compassion is not about making people dependent on government. Compassion is about encouraging personal responsibility, and getting people to understand that life is about making choices. Poverty does not cause crime. Crime causes poverty. Poverty does not cause a child to have a child. A child having a child causes poverty. Finishing high school is a choice. Not joining a gang is a choice. Not having a child until you have the maturity and the means to raise that child is a choice. You ask how can a "fellow black American feel this way"? Quite a statement. You may disagree, but it doesn't make me less caring and compassionate than you are. I'm sure you truly consider yourself open-minded and tolerant. But based on your letter, tolerance ends -- especially with "fellow black Americans" -- if someone has an opposing point of view. Larry

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 10:32 PM) So aside from idol speculation and a whole mess of guessin' what exactly I'm I reading here? Instead of making assumptions why not do a little research and tell us what the other contending teams are doing in similar situations? What's Boston's record this season when they score 3 runs or less? How many times have the Angels scored under 4 runs? These questions are easily answered. What you're telling me is you're passionate enough about the topic to start a thread but don't particularly care enough to do the work. Speculation is worthless. Damn K, a little harsh.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 03:39 PM) Getting your 1000th K is kind of like hitting your 200th HR. Its kinda a big deal to the player, but in terms of baseball it's meh. kinda like getting your 50,000 post

From Alito's dissent.. The Court provides two reasons for this sweeping conclusion: First, the Court claims to have identified a national consensus” that the death penalty is never acceptable for the rape of a child;second, the Court concludes, based on its independent judgment, that imposing the death penalty for child rape is inconsistent with the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society. Lets take a consensus of the nation and see what's acceptable for the rape of a child. I think the Court would find the only thing they've "identified" is they're own agenda.

Just got this in an email and it reminded me of this thread. A lot of the stuff below is why the coverage is lacking. People being responsible for themselves and dealing with this situation the best way they can doesn't make as good tv as looting, blaming the government, or racism charges. As you watch the flooding in the Midwest, have you noticed that there are no farmers or farm hands running around with stolen plasma TVs or holding stolen liquor over their heads. There's no looting or yelling, 'Where's Bush?', 'Where's FEMA?, 'Where's my check?', or 'Why isn't the Government out here saving me and my farm?' Likewise, I've also noticed there are no reports of any other country coming to help, or sending aid. And just where are Reverends Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton? Shocking contrast isn't it???!!!! Edit: After going back and reading some of this thread...I see AlphaDog could have been the actual writer of the email above.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jun 24, 2008 -> 06:37 PM) Four words: "Jay Mariotti Morning Show" Just read this an hour ago.. Mariotti a natural for radio show Phil Rosenthal Media June 25, 2008 Those taken aback by Chicago Sun-Times columnist Jay Mariotti's criticism of his colleagues and the rest of the local sports and media establishment missed the real revelation of his verbal jousting with John Callaway on WTTW-Ch. 11 the other day. Mariotti absolutely belongs on local radio. It wasn't anything particular that he said, although the mental image of a prepubescent, squeaky-voiced Jay arguing with his dad that the hometown Pittsburgh Steelers should stick with then-young and erratic quarterback Terry Bradshaw was entertaining. Anyone who has ever spent time around Mariotti—and I logged a couple years as one of his fellow Sun-Times sports columnists back in the 1990s—has heard most of his criticisms before. Specifics change, but, as his fans know, his targets and overall complaints rarely do. It was the passion and absolute certainty with which he expressed himself that should have been a wake-up call to the program director and general manager of every talk or sports radio station in town. His unwavering sense of outrage and righteousness, which might grow wearying day after day online or in print, is thoroughly energizing when broadcast. Check out the video on WTTW.com. This guy should be venting over the air on a daily basis. On sports, on media, the price of gas, City Hall, the presidential race, the "Sex and the City" movie, the European Union, whatever grinds his gears. Despite whatever success he has enjoyed in print and on television, radio is Mariotti's most effective medium. He has had gigs before, and for a variety of reasons, they haven't lasted. Pity. He has an opinion on everything and, as Callaway found out, there isn't a question or subject he can't bat back at a longtime listener, first-time caller. Or a longtime caller, first-time listener, for that matter. Mariotti writes his column the way Rocky Balboa went at sides of beef and, after 17 years at the Sun-Times, readers pretty much know what his take will be in response to any given occurrence, even if it's not necessarily the same take he has pounded home earlier. ESPN's "Around the Horn," an exercise in fending off other sportswriters trying to out-Jay Jay, has the feel of oral pro wrestling. It has raised Mariotti's national profile but hardly shown him to best advantage. The format of a daily radio program demands he not dwell too long on any one subject, and even the most forceful opinion vanishes into the ether almost as soon as it is uttered. It's a far better match. A reasonably deft and confident sidekick would be a plus—not to push his buttons, which tend to come pre-pushed, but to keep things moving along. A helpful co-host also might prod Mariotti to take calls he doesn't want to take and into confrontations he mostly steers clear of in other media, including with those he has criticized and those with opposing viewpoints. Clearly, the guy can handle himself, no matter what those who would squelch opposing viewpoints in print and shut down online rebuttals to his columns might think. Mariotti just got a three-year contract extension from the Sun-Times, so he's probably going to be around for some time to come. If you own a radio station, don't be discouraged by his willingness to rip his co-workers on Channel 11. Whether you hire him or some other outlet does, you run the risk he'll cause you headaches; you might as well profit from them. FTC says OK: The Federal Trade Commission said Tuesday it found no antitrust objection to Cablevision Systems Corp.'s $650 million deal for control of Newsday, Chicago Tribune parent Tribune Co.'s newspaper on Long Island, N.Y. The transaction, announced last month, will give Cablevision 97 percent of Newsday Media Group. The last word: "If I were to watch the news that you [have] in the United States, I'd just blow my brains out because it would drive me nuts." — CBS News correspondent Lara Logan, during a visit to "The Daily Show." Phil Rosenthal's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. To read recent columns, go to chicago tribune.com/phil. Mariotti Video

The Imitators Thomas Sowell Tuesday, June 24, 2008 If anyone suggested that Tiger Woods should try to be more like other golfers, people would question the sanity of whoever made that suggestion. Why should Tiger Woods try to be more like Phil Mickelson? If Tiger turned around and tried to golf left-handed, like Mickelson, he probably wouldn't be as good as Mickelson, much less as good as he is golfing the way he does right-handed. Yet there are those who think that the United States should follow policies more like those in Europe, often with no stronger reason than the fact that Europeans follow such policies. For some Americans, it is considered chic to be like Europeans. If Europeans have higher minimum wage laws and more welfare state benefits, then we should have higher minimum wage laws and more welfare state benefits, according to such people. If Europeans restrict pharmaceutical companies' patents and profits, then we should do the same. Some Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court even seem to think that they should incorporate ideas from European laws in interpreting American laws. Before we start imitating someone, we should first find out whether the results that they get are better than the results that we get. Across a very wide spectrum, the United States has been doing better than Europe for a very long time. By comparison with most of the rest of the world, Europe is doing fine. But they are like Phil Mickelson, not Tiger Woods. Minimum wage laws have the same effects in Europe as they have had in other places around the world. They price many low-skilled and inexperienced workers out of a job. Because minimum wage laws are more generous in Europe than in the United States, they lead to chronically higher rates of unemployment in general and longer periods of unemployment than in the United States-- but especially among younger, less experienced and less skilled workers. Unemployment rates of 20 percent or more for young workers are common in a number of European countries. Among workers who are both younger and minority workers, such as young Muslims in France, unemployment rates are estimated at about 40 percent. The American minimum wage laws do enough damage without our imitating European minimum wage laws. The last year in which the black unemployment rate was lower than the white unemployment rate in the United States was 1930. The next year, the first federal minimum wage law, the Davis-Bacon Act, was passed. One of its sponsors explicitly stated that the purpose was to keep blacks from taking jobs from whites. No one says things like that any more-- which is a shame, because the effect of a minimum wage law does not depend on what anybody says. Blacks in general, and younger blacks in particular, are the biggest losers from such laws, just as younger and minority workers are in Europe. Those Americans who are pushing us toward the kinds of policies that Europeans impose on pharmaceutical companies show not the slightest interest in what the consequences of such laws have been. One consequence is that even European pharmaceutical companies do much of their research and development of new medications in the United States, in order to take advantage of American patent protections and freedom from price controls. These are the very policies that the European imitators want us to change. It is not a coincidence that such a high proportion of the major pharmaceutical drugs are developed in the United States. If we kill the goose that lays the golden egg, as the Europeans have done, both we and the Europeans-- as well as the rest of the world -- will be worse off, because there are few other places for such medications to be developed. There are a lot of diseases still waiting for a cure, or even for relief for those suffering from those diseases. People stricken with these diseases will pay the price for blind imitation of Europe. The United States leads the world in too many areas for us to start imitating those who are trailing behind. Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved. The Imitators: Part II Thomas Sowell Wednesday, June 25, 2008 It must be a bitter disappointment to those in the media and in politics who have been dying to use the word "recession" that, for the second quarter in a row, there has been no downturn in the economy, though growth has been slow. Alarmists have been reduced to quoting other alarmists on the supposedly impending recession but that is still not the real thing. The definition of a "recession" is very clear and straightforward: Two consecutive quarters of negative growth. We have not yet had one consecutive quarter of negative growth. The fault-finding brigades of critics of the American economy and society are among the reasons why there is so much talk about how we ought to do things that are being done in Europe. We need to understand America first, before we start imitating Europe. The American economy produces the largest output in the world-- more than Japan, Germany, and Great Britain combined. Measured by purchasing power, output per capita in the United States is the highest of any large nation. There are some very small places like Luxembourg or the Cayman Islands with higher purchasing power per capita but, as Professor Benjamin M. Friedman of Harvard put it, places like Luxembourg are "technically countries but are more like large suburbs." Luxembourg's total population is about the same as that of Long Beach, California. Wal-Mart has more employees than the total population of Luxembourg. Some other small places like the Cayman Islands are tax havens that attract the wealth of people who are not really Cayman Islanders. Among countries at all comparable to the United States in size or population, none has achieved as high an output per capita. New Jersey produces more than Egypt. California produces more than Canada or Mexico. Desperate efforts to depict all the prosperity and progress in the United States as being monopolized by "the rich" have led to all kinds of statistical mumbo jumbo, such as comparing the changing ratios between statistical categories over time and ignoring the fact that most of the people in those categories move from one category to another over the years. Studies that follow given individuals over time show the exact opposite of what is being said in the mainstream media and in politics. That is, most of the working people in the bottom fifth of the income distribution rise into the top half, and the rate of increase of their incomes is greater than that of most of the people initially in the top fifth. Those individuals in the top one percent, as of a given time, actually have an absolute decline in income over time. As they drop out of the top one percent, they are replaced by others, so the statistical category can be doing great, while the flesh-and-blood people who pass in and out of that category are by no means gaining on those further down the income distribution. None of this is rocket science. But most people in politics, in the media and in academia still insist on using statistics based on the fate of abstract categories over time-- households, families, income brackets-- even when other statistics, based on following specific individuals over time, are available. Households and families vary in size from group to group and are generally declining in size over time, but an individual always means one person. Income per household or family can be stagnant, or even declining, while income per person is rising. That has in fact been a general pattern in recent decades, which may be why the nay-sayers are forever citing household and family income statistics, while ignoring statistics on income per person. Amid a general undermining of American economic performance, it is hardly surprising that so many people think we should imitate what the Europeans are doing-- whether in the economy, in foreign policy or in other areas. We can always learn particular things from other countries, whether in Europe, in Asia or elsewhere. But imitating Europeans when they are not doing as well as Americans makes no sense. Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.