NUKE_CLEVELAND

Much as I despise Mariotti I despise Bonds even more. I want to see Bonds go down Dave Dravecky-style and do it prior to him breaking the home run mark. The man is a disgrace to the game and if his actions aren't bad enough, he has this kings*** attitude of his thinking that he's beyond reproach and anyone who dares criticize him is a racist. f***ing spare me. If he got hit by a bus tomorrow I wouldn't shed any tears.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:22 PM) Bloody hell, I meant months, not weeks. Damn units. Bane of my existence. 10 Billion a month still seems kind of high to me. Where'd you get that info from?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:14 PM) Germany did something like that in 1961. Just sayin. EAST Germany put up the Berlin wall to keep people from leaving an oppressive communist regime. The purpose of this is to stop people from invading our country which, by the way, is a wholly legitimate purpose.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:10 PM) I would have said the same thing about rebuilding the Levees around NOLA, but well, we gots to cut taxes, and Iraq's costing $10 billion a week now. You saying we're spending 520 billion dollars annually on Iraq? Methinks that estimate is a touch high. I had read where the burn rate over there is more on the order of 4 billion a month. That seems far more realistic, especially based on the amount requested for Iraq and Afghanistan every year. As for cutting taxes. We've been over this ground before dude. Revenues are still rising thanks to the booming economy.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:02 PM) I've posted on this topic many times in here, and I'll reiterate my points on why a serious wall/fence like that is a huge mistake... 1) Technology is always cheaper than brick and mortar. Example: traffic congestion. Over and over again, its found to be better to use traffic control systems (includes cameras, controllable lanes, etc.) to reduce congestion than adding more lanes, and for cheaper. In this case, the technology would include cameras, motion sensors, small well-equiped teams with the best military vision equipment, helicopters and planes with FLIR, etc. Those are being used only VERY sparsely right now. Those will be more effective and cheaper than a wall. Agree but that needs to be beefed up anyway. Emplacing a physical border would allow border enforcement personnel to redeploy to right on the border from the more inland locations that some of them now patrol. QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:02 PM) 2) A wall or fence like that is an environmental disaster. For one thing, every species of animal that exists across that boundary bigger than an ant will effectively be split into two distinct populations. And any species that have been pushed across one way or the other and are trying to recover their range will be thwarted. Stilted ecosystems won't be able to recover, plant species will be effected, and suddenly you have major flooding and dust storm problems in the southwest (more so than now). I think that's a little extreme of an assessment, especially considering that most of the border region is a desert wasteland. QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 12:02 PM) 3) The fence is still going to be penetrated if you don't have personnel in place for detection and interception, and people are expensive. That is why the use of technology, which can be used to TARGET the areas for response and use fewer personnel, is the better solution. There are other reasons, but those are the big ones for now. As with the 1st point. Emplacing a physical border allows you to re-deploy people down to the line as opposed to inland areas. That combined with some more funding for re-enforcements and that solves that issue. You can also leave open area's like mountainous regions. If a bunch of illegals make it over a mountain then you can have a chopper snag em up on the far side and reward them for their efforts with a trip to the pokey and a one way ride back.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 11:59 AM) Well, I'll give you 1..$$$$$. Do you have any idea how much that long of a fence, including motion detectors, surveillance cameras, people to monitor both, repairs, and so forth would actually cost? Just building the 2 barriers with a road inbetween them would probalby run $4-$5 billion, or more. Add in all that high tech stuff, and we're talking tens of billions. And even in areas where there currently is a fence, it usually is still penetrated with relative ease if you know where to go. Im sure you could slice off 5 billion from the defense budget to fund this project. Right now I think a physical border to keep invaders out is a lot better use of funds than a handful of F-22's that can be put off 1 year.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 11:08 AM) See, that's the real trick here, we actually have 2 problems to deal with, not just 1. We have porous borders and a busted immigration system, that's a clear problem, but we also have 12 million people already here, and that's another problem. I think the real reason nothing has been done at the Congressional level is that people get too obsessed with 1 side or the other. So we wind up with guys like Kyl insisting that they won't let anything happen anywhere unless we criminalize those 10-20 million folk who are already her, and that winds up blocking reforms that could at least prevent the problem from getting worse. ^^^^ I agree with ya on that one. Lets get the more modest reforms done first, the ones that are sure to pass, and then go after these people more aggressively. Carrot and stick approach and all.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 11:52 AM) What's the opposition to a fence?? I know this addresses only part 1 of the problem. I just want to hear the negatives to it. Thats very similar to.......if it actually isin't.........the Isreali border fence that they're completing even now. I've long argued we need something like that on our southern border.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 06:27 AM) In the Trib today they said that the Sox have officially sold more tickets already for 2006, than the 2.34 million they sold in all of 2005. 2.75-2.85 million maybe? Methinks they need to renovate again to add more seats.

QUOTE(Felix @ Apr 20, 2006 -> 11:45 AM) The Sox have an option for 2007. Yeah. Id say its time to get to working on a long term deal for Mark. He's been the heart and soul of this rotation for 5 years now and he deserves his due.

How much longer is MB under contract?

BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/20/immigrat...aids/index.html This is how its done!!!!!!! FINALLY SOMEONE GETS IT!!!!!

QUOTE(SnB @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 12:37 AM) No 'WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS TEAM!?!' threads No 'BLOW THIS TEAM UP' threads nothing. just pure happiness. Let's focus on how positive these past few days have been, this place focuses on way too many negatives. Just remember, there aren't many years where we can start out the season with a really bad week, and everyone just knows things are going to turn around. I told you mother f***ers not to overreact in the 1st week. IM TIRED OF BEING RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 06:32 PM) Not one White Sox player. And there are even players that arent in the major leagues on this list. What a slap in the face to the White Sox. Who needs top 50 lists? We just win championships. Meh.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 19, 2006 -> 05:02 PM) I found this and it blew my mind. It seems that Mexico doesn't want to open its own borders to immigrants. http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-mex19.html More at link... Its really simple. The Mexican government is trying to get rid of as many of its own poor people as it can by pawning them off on the U.S. Its a nice bonus also that the money they send back is the second largest revenue source for their country to boot.

SWEEPAGE!!!!!!! EAT s*** KANSAS s***TY. HANG YOUR HEADS IN SHAME AND GO HOME OR WHEREVER WITH YOUR TAIL BETWEEN YOUR LEGS. VAZQUEZ = DOMINANT OFFENSE = MORE THAN ADEQUATE WE RULE THEY SUCK. THAT .667 Winning percentage looks pretty schweet eh!? GIMMIE A HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!

EAT s*** KANSAS s***TY!!!!!!!!! I shoulda wrote this thread and posted it in the 1st inning. Was there ever any doubt?! Garland back in form................PODS even got a couple of hits. GOING FOR THE SWEEP TOMORROW...........BREAK OUT THE BROOMS KIDDIES!!!!!!!! GIMMIE A HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alright kiddies. Chat is open for business. Get your behinds in there. www.soxtalk.com/chat

The fed seems to be thinking that the tightening cycle is about over and the markets are soaring as a result. This despite $71 a barrel oil. http://www.thestreet.com/markets/marketstory/10279701.html Seems that after what is expected to be a blowout 1st quarter for growth that it will moderate into a steady and sustainable rate. Im thinking that the markets are setup for a repeat of the bull cycle that started in 1995 after the last fed tightening campaign ended.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 12:13 PM) I don't either. And while we are at it, put together an immigration program that works for American business, clearly this one hasn't. Thats what the government is trying to do but people still want to protest and wave mexican flags and demand that their criminal activity be forgotten. Thats wrong.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 12:09 PM) Let's look at that. Starting tomorrow, no one hires an illegal. What will change? Will someone suddenly apply for that carwash job? Will a high school student suddenly decide he wants to work in farm fields? Will unemployment go even lower? What will happen to millions of unemployed illegals? Tell me who will be the next generation of Americans to work as migrants in the fields. Of course if you are going to propose legal immigration, I'll agree. But if you are going to try and convince me we will have millions of kids ready to take these jobs, I just do not see it. Guest worker program. Do it legally and people like me no longer have a problem with it.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 12:02 PM) These kids are charged with kidnapping as well? WTF? Where did I miss that? Kidnapping?! Didn't that stripper go to that house of her own free will? Yeah. Thought so. What a joke. These kids are gonna have a mondo, slam dunk lawsuit against the DA's office when this is all over and they're gonna get paid big time.

QUOTE(Soxfest @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 05:14 PM) He is 100% nut job. You really want to mess with this guy? Stick him in a cell for the rest of his life and make him listen to Lee Greenwood's greatest hits 24/7 while a monitor displays a waving American flag. LOL!

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 11:18 AM) Do you think we'd be paying less taxes if there were no illegal immigrants? If so, how much? If there were no illegal immigrants receiving social services, healthcare, schooling and the like then those services wouldn't have such a big workload and we would indeed pay less in taxes. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalrelease.html According to this there is a net negative of 10.4 billion in 2002 and I think its safe to say that has grown since then.

Ok. I read where they arrested 2 of the players for their alleged involvement in this incident. Here's my question though. Why would they attempt to charge these kids with something when there is a reasonable doubt already built in ( the DNA ). Unless there's some new and highly compelling evidence linking these 2 to what happened the DA is simply grandstanding, wasting the taxpayers money, and ruining the lives of 2 innocent boys in so doing.