HuskyCaucasian

QUOTE (Sockin @ Sep 10, 2008 -> 09:08 AM) Sun-Times says the Sox are now calling it a "slight right knee sprain", could be back as early as Friday. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/wh...o091008.article sweet

This is of interesting note. http://www.wsaz.com/political/headlines/28118604.html Many people think Obama didnt have a shot in hell of winning WV. Might be in play. Hillary... where are you?

QUOTE (scenario @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 11:29 PM) Prognosis for Konerko positive :pray

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:42 PM) Hopefully it's not like the definition Halas Hall uses, for a "knee sprain." Remember a few years ago when that was basically the Bears saying "Player X tore his ACL and is out for the season?" I think it depends on how you feel the "Day after". If he's mobile today, my guess is it was just a sprain. I havent seen anything yet that says how he's feeling today (but I havent had time to look either)

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:36 PM) And if you don't think that injury is just a killer to the clubhouse morale, then you haven't followed the Sox the last few years. club house killer is absolutely right. no doubt there.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:35 PM) .356/.474/.656/1.130 in his last 114 PA He's been our best hitter over that timespan. He's been white hot of late. hmmm... interesting. Guess I never really noticed he was doing that well. Maybe his suckyness earlier this year had a hangover on me. I sadly stand corrected.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:32 PM) possibly RIP 2008 white sox earlier in the game thread i had hoped for more Wise at bats, now i'm feeling pretty silly b/c it's gonna happen but it's not good. I thought Wise did very well earlier this year.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:31 PM) Well since about 98% of your posts have been political I'm guessing you been paying attention to the Sox over the past 6 weeks with 2% of your time. he's been good. but not over the top.

Suit me up. I'm ready to play!

Am i the only one that actually thinks this year we're better without Paulie? I know that sounds bad... but....

Call me crazy. That dont look good.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 06:55 PM) I can agree it's a fair point that the expression can be judged as sexist. Perhaps it's one of those that should be retired. The problem is that when you look at the whole paragraph of what he said, it isnt even in the vicinity of sexist. He CLEARLY was referring to the policies, not the people. Yes, should he tread more lightly these days? Yea, unfortunately. Like i said a while back, ANYTHING that is even in the ballpark of possibly seeming if you squint your eyes looks kinda sorta like sexism, the McCain campaign will pull out the card. Obama aide Anita Dunn responds to the McCain campaign's claim that Obama compared Palin to a pig: Enough is enough. The McCain campaign’s attack tonight is a pathetic attempt to play the gender card about the use of a common analogy – the same analogy that Senator McCain himself used about Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s health care plan just last year. This phony lecture on gender sensitivity is the height of cynicism and lays bare the increasingly dishonorable campaign John McCain has chosen to run.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 06:38 PM) UH OH http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/090...k_on_a_pig.html Obviously, I don't actually believe he meant it in the way it'll be portrayed. "Pig" more than likely refers to current Bush policies. It's just not an intelligent choice of words. I read, albeit through the comments on a conservative blog (so I don't know if it's true), that Biden claims Palin as VP would be a "step back for women." Not good. Quick follow up: Context is everything folks, but I'd expect context doesnt apply to the McCain Campaign. The WHOLE quote: "John McCain says he’s about change too and so I guess his whole angle is ‘watch out George Bush - except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education, policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove style politics – we’re really gonna shake things up in Washington.’ That’s not change. That’s just calling something the same thing, something different. But you know you can’t put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.”

talk about dead on, this projection was made in the middle of august:

Bound to happen sooner or later:

I tend to think this is slightly more news worthy: What they DONT mention is in essence, Obama supported "age appropriate" sex-education for children as a means of teaching them what was proper or inproper touching, as well as to protect them against pedophiles. Obama quickly responded: "It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls - a position that his friend Mitt Romney also holds. Last week, John McCain told Time magazine he couldn't define what honor was. Now we know why," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton. So, the McCain groupies have now mocked community organizers and teaching kids how to avoid pedophiles. Classy. Honorable.

WashingtonPost-

I know the GOP here will take this with a grain of salt given the source, HuffingtonPost, but i think it is worth a read. Poll Madness: McCain Takes Lead Even As Democrats Out-Register Republicans? The synopses of the article is this: Even though the most recent round of national polls show a tie or McCain lead, that might be significantly misrepresenting the real "mood" of the electorate. Polls are conducted using weighting. And it used to be fairly heavily weighted democratic for the better part of the spring and early summer. Now that we are in September, all of a sudden post-GOP convention, it's now 48% Dem - 48% Rep, which is a fairly sizable shift. They also point out that voter registration is states that track party show that registered democrats out number republicans 42 million to 31 million. And they add that polls often dont reflect newly registered voters. They do point out that it is entirely possible it really is 48-48, but that just doesn't seem very likely given the current political climate.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 12:57 PM) Pretty soon the GOP ticket will need to tell us what their policies are. "We're mavericks and eat moose burgers" isn't going to cut it. what policies? This elections isnt about issues, remember?

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) Is 312 nights spent at home (about 16 a month) not a question. She was home roughly 55% of the time. I am not really well versed on political work hours. oh interesting. so if the math holds up, she spent 55% of her nights at home 560 miles away from the capital.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 06:30 AM) Ozzie can't plan on having him back. He has to assume he won't have him, and be surprised if he does. exactly. You work with what you have and if you get a surprise? Awesome. all the better. The Sox CAN win without him, but they cant limp along hoping he comes back.

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 10:46 AM) I travel, but have never sought or received reimbursement for lodging or meals in my own home. My home = my dime. Isn't that the main point of the Post article, that Palin billed tax payers for nights spent at home? I mean, we all have to live and eat somewhere. Not everything can be on the employer's dime. And when your employer is the state, billing taxpayers for the room and board you are going to consume anyway may not be "wrong" in the sense of being illegal or unethical, but it certainly doesn't jibe with an image of reform. exactly my point, but far better written.

That thread topic is priceless

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 10:31 AM) As Glenn Reynolds noted, the New York Times and USA Today noted that Palin "ordered state transportation officials to abandon the ‘bridge to nowhere’ project that became a nationwide symbol of federal pork-barrel spending... She directed the State Transportation Department to find the most 'fiscally responsible' alternative for access to the airport." http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31...idge_to_Nowhere the problem is it wasnt HER saying "thanks, but no thanks" it was the congress who told the people representing Alaska "thanks, but no thanks". She herself even said that there were a lot of misconceptions about the bridge, but it wasnt worth the battle. In my book, saying you lost the battle isnt saying you pulled the project. It's admitting defeat. And you cant be defeated if you weren't for it.