jackie hayes

I think this makes sense for Canada, which is really the only thing the Canadian government should be considering. If the drug companies know that a large number of Americans (note the ban would only apply to "bulk" purchases) were getting drugs at Canadian prices, that would drive up the cost of drugs in Canada. (Not on old drugs, but that just delays the effect.) This might hurt sales of drugs to Canadians, but since the U.S. is the big market, that's a profitable tradeoff for the drug companies. But by making drugs more expensive to Canadians, U.S. bulk purchases could hurt Canadians' health. At bottom, this emphasizes that the 'importing drugs from Canada' idea is just a very temporary band aid, at best. If you want to enjoy the benefits of a national health care system, you have to create a national health care system. Surprise, surprise.

QUOTE(SuperSteve @ Jun 28, 2005 -> 08:26 PM) He throws hard as hell. I never said obvious too, but IMO he will be good. I never said he is going to be great, or a Cy Young winner, but he has the stuff to be a good solid pitcher. I'd sure as hell take him. I know, I use the double quotes if I'm actually quoting someone. I just meant that you and Gammons (I hear) seem to see something that isn't in the numbers. Now, I have watched Cabrera pitch fairly often, so I'm not basing everything on his stats. And I have seen him look pretty darn good. And I've seen him melt down the next 2 times out. He's Contreras-esque, and we still don't know if we're out of the woods w/ him. So when you state confidently that Cabrera will be a good pitcher -- I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just hedge my bets. But, of course, what fun would that be?

QUOTE(SuperSteve @ Jun 28, 2005 -> 01:26 AM) Cabrera is going to be a good one. Cheap too. How do you know that? Of course, some days he has great stuff. And the next, he can't find the strike zone to save his life. Everyone was waiting for the strikeouts to come around this year. They came around, and yet he's somehow found a way to give up more runs than before. I dunno -- I like Cabrera, and I enjoy watching him pitch. But I don't see how it's 'obvious' that he'll pull it all together and become great anytime soon.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 11:57 PM) I've merged this into the ATH thread about this rumor. Posters, please take note of the big trade thread that's pinned in PHT, and if a topic's already been posted already. I thought that thread was only for Sox trade rumors, suggestions, etc, since it was in PHT. If that's wrong, sorry that this thread was out of place.

"I have elected to take a step back and re-evaluate the options available to me." Maybe he finally got that endorsement deal with the Anti-Defamation League.

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 10:29 PM) way to make a new member feel welcome... He meant that he felt stupid for asking, b/c he figured the guy probably had. It wasn't an attack.

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 10:18 PM) The article says that the Marlins would want a "left-handed hitting outfielder." That would be Sweeney if they want a prospect. If we still have Brian Anderson, he could start in RF and Dye could be converted to a 1st baseman. By the way, do you really want to trust Contreras in the playoffs? The article does say that they want "three major-league parts", which dqs Sweeney, Anderson, and McCarthy. Though Penn is just kinda sorta "major-league" anyway.

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 10:09 PM) No. The Rockies wanted Mota in a deal for Fuentes and the Marlins balked at the request. They want to keep Mota and add another quality reliever. Right. But Fuentes is a quality reliever. So you replace Mota w/ Julio as a rh setup guy, then pick up Fuentes as a lh reliever.

One further question -- if Florida gets Julio, or if they're shopping for a reliever similar to Julio, does that mean they're preparing to trade Mota? Mota's supposedly been unhappy as a setup guy, and his name came up in the Fuentes trade talks (although his was the name that nixed it, reportedly). Thoughts?

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 09:08 PM) If they would accept Beckett in there instead of Burnett, I would do it if I'm Florida. Burnett has too electric of stuff to trade. Burnett's an unrestricted fa at the end of the season, while the Marlins control Beckett for a couple more years, I believe.

Link. Basically, the trade would be Daniel Cabrera/Hayden Penn + Jorge Julio + Larry Bigbie for Burnett (+ Encarnacion, maybe) Well, that would give the O's 1 reliable starter. For Florida, that's quite a risk. I like Julio and Bigbie, but each young starter is quite a risk, each having been rushed up when the O's (predictably) desperately needed a starter. As good as Dontrelle has been, it will be tough for them to win now without an AJ Burnett in the rotation. Beckett's just a crapshoot, healthwise. The Orioles have to hope they can sign Burnett, when they haven't had much success signing free agents since Tejada. And of course Burnett has his own health issues. Plus, their bullpen has been having problems, so losing Julio will hurt. Overall impressions? My first reaction is that it's good deal for the Orioles, a risk they absolutely need to take. I think Florida could probably do better, and I'm not sure why they would want to make this deal.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 05:36 PM) I would agree except for the justification the court used: economic viability. They basically stated that if a state has a clear economic interest in annexing lands it's ok. It will be hard to uphold that justification against private citizens & not apply it to federal lands as well. It's seems like a tug-of-war will ensue. The argument was over the fifth amendment. Fifth amendment specifies "private property." Federal government property is not "private." End of story.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 03:09 PM) This thread is pointless because 75% of the Meltdown Thread was people berating anyone being slightly negative. The Meltdown Thread itself was mainly optimisitic. QUOTE(Soxnbears01 @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 04:32 PM) read it. like said above, it's mostly people yelling at the few that were freaking out. Spot on. Try actually reading it, everyone -- most of it is pretty light stuff, some discussion and some tongue-in-cheek rants (mind, sarcasm does not HAVE to be in green). We now have 2 threads dedicated to calming down all us un-riled-up people. 3 if you count the Meltdown thread itself. Mercy.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 27, 2005 -> 05:40 AM) Here is some more sick stats. We are last in the majors in doubles. This is for a supposed fast team. 2nd to last in triples We are 28th out of 30 teams in hits. But s*** we still hit a lot of homers. So basically this is the same corpseball offense as last year with some fluff at the top. The numbers dont lie. Not that it explains all the difference, but the Cell is known as a bad double/triple park, that's part of the reason. It's been said here many times that we are not a fast team, nor are we any faster than last year, really. Pods is the only "speed" guy, Iguchi's got decent wheels, but you also bring in Sloth Pierzynski and Dye for Olivo and Carlos, plus Harris sitting, etc. Point is, I don't know who "supposes" that this is a fast team. Not many posters here, anyway. Home runs are good, it's just silly to jump from that to "corpseball". In fact, we also lead the AL in sac hits and sac flies. So are those to blame too?

Are there more meltdowns here, or more people telling everyone to calm down? It's a thread dedicated to rants, and still most of the rants were only half serious, at most. Only a handful of the remaining ones were really very critical, and that's just the usual suspects, iirc. Relax, perspective police.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 09:34 PM) I said we only played 3 lefties! Okay, you mean Harris. I thought by bench player you meant Timo, who was on the bench today. Gotcha.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 09:27 PM) Against rhp, we don't have enough lefties. We played 3 lefties today, and that's including one of our benchers. A real tough righty will eat alive any team with that many righties in their order. Huh? I count 5. Pods, Harris, Timo, Pierz, plus Everett as a switch hitter who hits well from the left side.

Oh, now I understand. Crap... That was quick.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 07:00 PM) As an environmentalist the ramifications are disastrous. I've not read the particulars but I can see where this decision can be used to invoke eminent domain to skirt EPA laws & guidelines. Consider all of the property in America owned & operated by the Federal government. Can states now use eminent domain to annex Federal property? I'm certain that can't happen. It's "eminent" domain b/c governments are eminent compared to citizens. The state government is not eminent compared to the federal government.

Is this worst, or most disappointing? Can I nominate myself? I hope I'd beat Boomer in a footrace, but I wouldn't count him out.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 06:36 PM) If I understand this correctly, it is the local government that has to declare eminent domain. I don't think a business can do it on their own. No, I was thinking about a contract that commits the local government to NOT declare eminent domain. Say, for 100 years. Then 60 years down the line, new people in the government, new situation -- and they want to take the land back again, for some other purpose. Basically, I want to know if the original contract would be enforceable. The impulse is to say, well, duh, of course it is. (At least that's my impulse.) But one might argue (I guess) that a government cannot legally enter into an agreement that would prevent it from choosing the best course of action for its "public". Btw, one thing that's sad about this is that very little of the new development sounds truly creative. So much of this sounds like local governments attempting to cannibalize the business of the town next door.

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 06:20 PM) In my best Bill Cartwright voice: terrible I'm frightened just reading it. Btw, does anyone recall a radio bit from a long time ago, a commercial for "Bill Cartwright Sings Christmas" (or something like that)? I don't remember whose show...

For those who know law: Would it be possible for a local government to commit itself to not seize land by eminent domain, for example, by entering into a contract with a developer stipulating that for the next 100 years the government would not exercise its power to seize the land? Or would this be just another property right, no more sacred than the basic recognition of land ownership, that the local officials could break according to the same rules by which they seize property? Just an interesting question, in theory.

"Not only is Cruise not a doctor, I don't think he's ever played one." Oh, sweeeeeeeeeet.

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jun 24, 2005 -> 10:55 PM) Nice guy but he obviously was in the NBA because of his height. He was basically a big waste of space on the court. Yeah, but iirc he was received tons of hype when he was drafted. 'Omg, not just another big guy, he can move and shoot, will be a force in the NBA, etc.' Did the Mavs really ever hope to see a "franchise player" out of him? The impression I had was that by the time he joined the Mavs, he was already an afterthought. You knew you wouldn't get much, but hey, at least he's tall. Dunno -- am I just remembering this wrong?