kapkomet

He's neither a midget, nor mental, but he's a mental midget. There is a difference when the words are used together.

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 03:01 PM) Since Dye has said nothing regarding his future contract desires - per the request of his employer not to negotiate contracts during the season - I guess we should wait until he does so we can offer up realistic suggestions and not be poopy to those who chose to remain optimistic about him. With the exception of early this year, as I mentioned earlier, this guy has been damn good in a Sox uniform. Considering that he was injured, maybe that was a lot of the bad start. I like the guy, as long as he isn't too bitter watching the "thou shalt not talk contract extensions during a season unless your name is Mark" crap unfold. It sounds like he got pretty frustrated being told that he was not to talk contract extension per "company policy" but then watching just that happen with Buehrle.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 03:03 PM) Why is putting Contreras out there every 5th game just giving the game away, and putting Floyd out there something different? As bad as Contreras has been, Floyd is just as if not more awful. At least Contreras has a history to suggest he may someday find success again. Putting Floyd out there sends the wrong message to others in the organization. Reward younger pitchers for results, not because they were part of a deal for a popular pitcher. How do you get results, if you don't put them out there to try and get results? Floyd is bad... but what if he's told you are going to get your shot, it's now or never, you have the rest of the season to put it together, mental midget... get it right, or get DFA'd. By the way, what is his contract status?

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 02:47 PM) What does "get it right" entail? According to your camp, getting out now. Since the easy answer is to "get out", what would you suggest, other then that, seeing as how I never see ANY answers from people like you. No, you first. Then I'll answer.

QUOTE(Yossarian @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 03:01 PM) That is truly a depressing prospect. Please think it over. Floyd, in addition to being a really lousy pitcher, is sensitive and weak mentally. The truth is two years after nirvana, we're looking into the abyss. The team is swiss cheese like with holes all over the place. Gavin Floyd? Please, no. I feel like we're in 2003 and 2004 hell again - the dreaded 5th starter clusterf***.

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 02:49 PM) He's not working well anywhere at this point. Though I am not in favor of tossing $10mil out in the pen to rot - because that is what will happen if he's put out there. Examine him... and hope he's got MINOR soreness somewhere. Give him some shots, rehab him, something, anything! But to give away a game every 5th day is bulls***, and that's what's happening now. QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 02:52 PM) Fine, shut him down, or do what Steff said. I was more getting at the point that Floyd or Haeger should be the #5 for the rest of the season (and not just one or two starts either - I mean all of August and September, a real legitimate look). Nah, I hear you... that's sort of what I was getting at. I think I put that in another post somewhere else.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) Put Jose in the pen for the remainder of the year - they need the help anyway. And let Floyd start. If we are going to have a crappy starter, let's at least let it be Floyd the rest of the year, so we can see if he has the mental stuff do get it done. This year should be a tryout anyway, at this point. He doesn't work well out of the pen. He pretty much just needs shut down at this point.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 07:17 AM) I agree. Floyd really makes me sick. Oh well, we tried. I honestly wish Cooper would take away all the damn arm angles and just get Jose throwing over the top again. And let him throw the damn forkball every other pitch for all I care. I think the reason he's not is because either he's got a hammy (leg) injury or a back problem - he can't push off to get over the top like he was before he went on the DL last season.

I know the conventional wisdom was that Kenny HAD to make trades to set the table for next year - but really, I'm not so sure after all this played out. Kenny got rid of some pieces that weren't crucial going forward. We won't see Pods or Erstad next year (yea, I know we joke, but there's no way). JD is here for about $8MM for one season, or he walks and we get two picks. Either way, I think we're ok there, assuming the Apr-May-Jun 2007 Dye doesn't show up - other then that, he's been solid. I personally think he'll walk after the arbitration offer anyway, and we'll end up better off then what we would have gotten for a trade now. What else? Garland... I personally think we will get a better package for him in the offseason then we got offered now. JC = POS that NO ONE wants. JV = the pitcher we thought he could be when we got him. He's really done well this year, all things considered.

I see your point... yet, there's just not a candidate that stands out. They all play the same parts in political theatre. It's just who says it a little different. There's no "mainstream" message, one that can bring people together on common things to get things done. It's all pandering (read: acting) for the extremeists in each party. I do realize that the message becomes more centered after you get your party nomination, but who these people really are, IMO, is who they play for to get the nomination. There's no "refreshing" candidate out there that says what most middle of the road Americans want. -Fix Social Security - quit robbing Peter to pay Paul -Fix healthcare, and not socialize it - there are tort reforms and other "caps" that can be implemented to lower and streamline health care costs -Win the war in Iraq without fear of "political drama" -Keep taxes low so reinvestments continue -Get a real immigration bill out there without amnesty - you can have a worker program with those already here and not offer citizenship - or they have to apply just like everyone else -Get government spending down by REAL fiscal conservatism -Keep social programs from inflating said spending above, it's not the government's job to run everything I would argue that most Americans would generally agree on these general ideas. But, each of these ideas above have to pander to the fringe elements of their party, which makes it virtually impossible to compromise down the road.

First, Stevens is a dirty assbag (not a clean one mind you). However, the one thing that I don't think should be messed with is a Senator's ability to travel to his home state, even if it is the farthest from DC (Honolulu not withstanding). That kind of reeks. Kind of like Stevens.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2007 -> 05:19 PM) I think that was exactly my point...that keeping the electoral college around vastly increases the likelihood that an error in counting in 1 state can have a major impact at the national level, so the thing you'd want to do to prevent that is make the pool as large as possible. When you sub-select into 50 groups smaller groups, each with a certian margin of error, it's much more likely that one of those states will simply wind up being wrong than it is the full national vote. This is going to sound weird, but I think that's exactly what you want in a national election - because now those smaller districts all of a sudden matter. So we agree... Do you see what I mean, though?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 12:52 PM) Eh, its a better field than I can remember seeing in my voting lifetime. Yeah, they are all flawed, and most are less than stellar. But I think we actually are taking a step forward this cycle in terms of available talent, compared to the last few cycles. Really? Who stands out, as far as talent? I think most of them are made from the same recycled idiots that we have grown to all *ahem* love over the last 20 years.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 04:17 AM) Actually Kap, exactly what has stopped the administration from making this a success? They've had every tool and dollar they've wanted available to them. Because they have tried making this a "political" thing... that's the real reason why things haven't gotten done over there like it needs to. And that's squarely on this administration. Stop the pansy ass waivering back and forth because of "poltical consequences", get it right, and THEN get out. But not until then.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 12:50 PM) trash? I think that was one of the most well-written, well-reasoned posts regarding the war I have seen yet. I think he makes soem excellent points, especially about the cost and scale, and what else we could be doing with that money (like saving millions of lives, or, getting off foregin oil, for example). That part, yes. I should have been more clear. The other part is what I was talking about (the last half of the post about the UN and France and all of that).

Newt's got a HUGE damn closet, bigger then just about any other candidate not named Guiliani. I really loathe our "presidential material" these days... these candidates SUCK.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 1, 2007 -> 02:07 AM) So basically the argument is that: a. We should accept it being bad, because it might become worse if we got ourselves out of the way. b. 4.5 years into this, it's time for a plan. c. Because some people hold up Bush=Hitler signs, everyone who is vocally against this war is therefore wrong and has no standing on anything. Now here's my counterpoint: Is it worth $125 Billion a year and 1000 American lives per year, plus however many hundred thousand Iraqi lives, to make sure things might not get worse? $125 billion could save several million lives per year if it was put into sanitation, malaria nets, and anti-malarial, anti-AIDS drugs, just as an example. This is a monstrous undertaking, and I think that context is important. So, it's time for a plan. Ok...I'll be willing to say it's time to wait if someone can explain to me one thing; how exactly our presence there is going to be able to accomplish something significant and positive that is worth $4,000 a second and about 2-3 American lives per day. I refuse to accept the argument that it is worth that sort of expenditure on our part because things might be worse than the absolute disaster they are now if we leave if there is no evidence whatsoever that our efforts will make things better. Every step of the way, it has gotten worse and worse. Wiht every life lost, things have been made worse. So just saying "if we leave things will get worse" doesn't argue a thing to me, because every year we've stayed, things have gotten worse and worse. And an additional point: for 4+ years, the military and this administration have gotten EVERYTHING, every single thing, they could have possibly wanted. The Republicans in Congress gave them everything for 3 years, and the Dems caved on the funding bill earlier this year. The Administration had absolutely no one to account with for 3+ years, and somehow it is politics that is holding us back from a successful plan? Seriously, tell us what it is the French or the U.N. have done to stop the U.S. in the last 4 years. Has there been a resolution opposing the U.S.? Have the french sent troops in to fight us? Have we done something to appease those organizations (other than showing up there and begging for help?) The only thing that has encumbered this administration at any point in this war is basic humanity; because no one else has done jack to stop them. And I'm just going to say the fallacy phrase "Group guilt" and ignore the continued bashing of the people who were right before this started. Where's that rolly smilie? Come on Balta. Even from you, this is trash. Go back and re-read this, and you'll hopefully see what I mean. If not, I'll explain... but you're better then this crap.

Welcome to your 2008 Chicago White Sox - you know, the ones who suck in 2007.

I use F-secure. No, it's not free, but it's pretty good. It's stopped some stuff that disable Norton and MacAfee.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2007 -> 04:55 PM) I may as well point out that virtually every bill brought before Congress gives at least 8-9 months before withdrawal needed to be complete. And I'll absolutely guarantee you that if Mr. Bush came out and said "give us a few more months, make it some time in late 08 or even in 09" the Dems would pass that exact date in a quarter second. Of course because you tell the nutjobs over there to just sit and wait a year and then they take over. You can't do that.

WHAT A SPLASH BY KENNY! WOOT! So this must have been it, because it was 4:00 Eastern time, right?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 31, 2007 -> 03:18 PM) No one is suggesting getting rid of the Senate, or history - just the electoral college for the purpose of Presidential elections (sorry of that was not clear). Its purpose was quite good at the time, but is useless today (again, in regards to the national election). I know we've debated this ad naseum around here... but I still think it's so short sighted to just do away with the electoral college and go to a popular vote national election.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jul 31, 2007 -> 02:59 PM) Here's an aside. How much positive news could there be? The standard of living for most Iraqis is not getting better? The amount of electricity that the average Iraqi had is not just down since Saddam left power, its down since the beginning of the year. So much so that the US government won't report those figures anymore. The star of the Iraqi national Soccer team has asked for refuge in another country because he fears for his life in Iraq. Iraqi refugees make up double digit percentages of the population in Syria and Jordan. The Iraqi government still hasn't passed any legislation that might lead to peace in the region, like issues regarding oil revenue sharing. And they just took another one month vacation without acheiving any of the benchmarks that we've asked them to tackle. Even if the violence cuts by half between now and September, how is it acceptable for us to sit there and prop up a failed state? So it's better to leave NOW (or in the next 60-90 days, depending on what Democrat you talk to...), right? I do agree that we can't babysit their government - they need to get off their ass. But I think the cost is too great to just pull out.

Not against you, longshot, or NSS - or anyone personally... but the shortsightedness on getting rid of the electoral college is amazing to me. Most of you do realize that there is no senate (from a historical perspective) without the electoral college?

:puke I like Newt's views on things - to a point - but his smugness irritates me.