Controlled Chaos

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 11, 2008 -> 08:59 AM) Well, I see what you are saying - but with that same logic, NO ONE KNEW whether or not Saddam had WMD for absolute certainty. What I did know, and what I thought was quite clear, was.... 1. The war was never, ever really about WMD 2. The evidence of WMD was incredibly weak 3. The UN effort was not very good, but was also not given any sort of chance to adjust 4. The excuse they most primarly relied on for WMD and the war was the combination of two "inside" sources who practically screamed "you cannot trust me" Basically, the case for the war looked to me to be paper-thin and not even in the ballpark of enough to go to war. ETA: Its up to you if that means I "KNEW", or "THOUGHT". I agree with whats below 100%(you and Balta can read the entire article and then tell me how it's all right wing BS) You make your points above now, but if you want to tell me you were preaching that same list above back in March of 2003...sell it somewhere else. Maybe you were against the war, but you didnt know anything about the evidence of WMD's. The only thing we all knew was Saddam had chemical weapons in the past and he said he destroyed them. You believed Saddam...good for you. I'll stop making my comments now in the GOP primary thread. I think we all know everyones sides on the issue. The reason for war, in the first instance, was always the strategic threat posed by Saddam because of his proven record of aggression and barbarity, his admitted possession of weapons of mass destruction, and the certain knowledge of his programs to build more. It was the threat he posed to his region, to our allies, and to core U.S. interests that justified going to war this past spring, just as it also would have justified a Clinton administration decision to go to war in 1998. It was why Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, William Cohen, and many other top officials had concluded in the late 1990s that Saddam Hussein was an intolerable menace to his neighbors, to American allies, and ultimately to the United States itself, and therefore had eventually to be removed. It was also why a large number of Democrats, including John Kerry and General Wesley Clark, expressed support for the war last year, before Howard Dean and his roaring left wing of the Democratic party made support for "Bush's war" untenable for Democratic candidates.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 10, 2008 -> 02:15 PM) If I could get it right... To you and NSSox...you didn't know anything. You guessed.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 9, 2008 -> 11:22 AM) Isn't that a shame? I agree with your assessment, but God help us for judging a candidate for reasons unrelated to their abilities in fulfilling their Oath of Office. It's sad, but such ridiculous things have always been the basis for a lot of ignorant voters. Some vote based on a canidates exposure. Some vote based on a canidates appearance. Some vote based on how they speak. Some vote based on religion. Some vote for a canidate just because someone told them to. Some will not vote for Obama just because he is Black. Some will vote for Obama just because he's Black. Some will vote for Hillary just because she is a woman. Some will not vote for Hillary just because she is a woman. It's all the same load of crap and has been going on forever. If I had to give my own guesstimate I'd say maybe 50-60% of voters vote with an informed mind.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 9, 2008 -> 10:30 AM) First thing. It should be well known around here by now that I can't stand Hillary. I don't think she faked it. Just saying. Second thing. If you think the iron my shirt thing is a brilliant plan, that says you think it's a good idea to degrade women and place them in a subserviant role. You are making your party proud, I'm sure. Third thing. I can't believe I'm even half ass defending Hillary. Brilliant planT YAS, not plan. As in they put him in the audience. And I respect your right to not believe she faked it, but their whole strategy was for her to show her softer side in NH and all of a sudden she loses it? We are talking about Hillary Clinton here...everything she does is calculated and thought out? She didn't even lose it when her husband was playing hide the cigar with his intern and she isn't going to lose it now in the biggest event of her life unless she wants to. She did what she needed to do...and maintained enough composure to get her digs in....well played I say.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 11:35 PM) So does anyone think her breaking down a little yesterday actually helped her win this primary? I mean just going on the polls and the talk on here, you would have thought Obama was about a 75% favorite going into tonight, with the momentum all on his side from Iowa. I guess the 2 idiots who suggested for her to "iron their shirts" didn't really do Obama a favor either. Of course it helped her. First you have the people that believe she faked it(me)...well those people we're never going to her side anyway so she loses nothing with them. The other people...be it people on the fence, people wanting to see her soft side, women feeling her plight(I also love the guy that had a sign saying iron my shirt and started chanting it in her speeech, brilliant plant IMO) and also the people that just don't care about politics, but now felt bad for her....that breakdown could have swayed any of those groups. Hell her senior adviser said this: Asked if that tearful moment helped win the women's vote in New Hampshire, Clinton's senior adviser Ann Lewis said: "I know it, but I can't prove it."

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 08:46 PM) What's this I hear about him getting out early if he undergoes drug treatment? So did he intentionally get caught during his release so he could qualify for this program? I wouldn't be surprised if a smart lawyer cooked that thing up.

Put me on the list with a huge crush!! http://ginacarano.proelite.com/

Put on some music and shake your tailfeather!!! Cost = Free

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jan 6, 2008 -> 09:56 PM) Where have we seen Wolf before??? Funny thing is...The referee on AG is the same one from Dodgeball. haha

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jan 5, 2008 -> 01:42 AM) I saw Charlie Wilson's War tonight. Apparently conservatives have some problem with the historical accuracy but I still thought Hanks and Hoffman made this a really fun movie to see. I saw it and also enjoyed it, but this is why some have a problem with it.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 02:02 PM) http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...t&p=1552776 Thanks to both you and Balta....

QUOTE(bmags @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 01:23 PM) i see your point, but i'm not talking about his own personal opinions, i'm talking about the scouting reports collected by the scouts, and how he explained them. We are all excited about ramirez and he shows us a scouting report that has him in the possible starter to platoon player range, it puts it in perspective. Can someone point me to one of this guys posts?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 01:09 PM) Fair enough, Rock. Still, I'd hate to see some attitudes run him off. Who is this Bureau guy?

One reason I like this trade is because Swisher is a good character guy. I know that flys in the face of many opinions on this board, but I enjoy cheering for a player I like. I don't like arrogant assholes with a load of talent, yet are still arrogant assholes. Many people here don't give a s***...it's win at all costs, but for me personally...I'd rather cheer for a guy like Swisher than a guy like Manny or Bonds. They may have more talent, but IMO their antics and pompusness overshadow that. Sure I would take their homeruns and ability to help the Sox win, but I would curse them under my breath and not feel good about it. I know stat guys and paper roster guys never look at s*** like that, but as a fan I do. When Swisher hits a homerun for the sox, I will feel dam good about it. Guys like Swisher mean something to a team and it isn't always in the numbers. So yeah I really like the trade.

Clinton/Favre analogy In a news conference Deanna Favre announced she will be the starting QB for the Packers this coming Sunday. Deanna asserts that she is qualified to be starting QB because she has spent the past 16 years married to Brett while he played QB for the Packers. During this period of time she became familiar with the definition of a corner blitz, and is now completely comfortable with other terminology of the Packers offense. A survey of Packers fans shows that 50% of those polled supported the move. Does this sounds idiotic and unbelievable to you? Well, Hillary Clinton makes the same claims as to why she is qualified to be President and 50% of democrats polled agreed. She has never run a City, County, or State. When told Hillary Clinton has experience because she has 8 years in the white house, Dick Morris stated "so has the pastry chef."

QUOTE(yoyozuna @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 02:13 PM) Just an FYI, I called my buddy in SF (He's a die hard A's fan). He didn't hear about the deal yet. I told him and he was pissssssssssed. He loves Swisher and says that they better have gotten some "studs" in return. I chuckled and told him they were! lol I always think its good to get another teams perspective. Like when we traded Jon G. and there were some UPSET fans but not as upset as the fans in LAA. I cheked out the A's boards and none of them are thrilled with this deal and all have great things to say about Swish.

So if we go out and grab Roberts and Bedard it's world series 08

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 01:11 PM) Who is DLS? Fautino De Los Santos

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) He certainly looks like a grinder!!!

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 01:00 PM) just heard on 670, more details to follow. Gio gone, Sweeney gone more details to follow

I really enjoyed Charlie Wilsons War. I went in knowing nothing abut the film or the man. It was very interesting, especially his quote at the end. Quote below

Great news Mike!! Congrats!!!

QUOTE(Texsox @ Dec 20, 2007 -> 01:36 PM) Thank you, got it. Good for you...it's back up to 128 now.

QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 09:31 AM) I agree. If I sign Prior though I insist on an option, then if he pans out you can trade him next offseason or before the 09 deadline. If not you both walk away at the end of 08. With the arms that we have returning in the rotation we are going to need someone who can come in and spell one of the starters or likely take one of the rotation spots if someone does not live up to expectations, which is a likelihood between Floyd, Danks, and Contreras. If you can sign him for Isn't this the reason he didn't stay with the cubs? They wanted an option and he didn't.