Jake

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 01:28 PM) For those that do not know what a Burpee is, it's called a Squat Thrust in the US. 1. Begin in a straight standing position 2. Drop to squat position with your hands touching the floor 3. Extend your feet back in a quick motion into a pushup position 4. Return to the squat position 5. Jump straight up/land 6. Repeat No, I don't really know where Burpee originated. I've always heard "burpee"

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 03:50 PM) And the horse he rode in on! ¡y el caballo él usó para venir!

This should bring us all together. http://littlefacemitt.tumblr.com/

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 03:41 PM) Sounds like things are going to get dicey. Turkey hit Syrian military bases. The problem is that unlike rogue elements in Afghanistan, Palestine, etc, this is the actual Syrian military hitting Turkey. It also is different because Turkey has the superior military support (part of Nato) so they can do whatever they want. You'll see how powerful these international organizations are when a country like Turkey wants the USA to save their asses and the USA doesn't want to do it. hint: no power

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 03:44 PM) He was talking about the august and july revisions. Gotcha! I was conflating "job additions" with "job growth"

A separate government survey of companies and government agencies showed they added 114,000 jobs in September. And it turns out that 86,000 more jobs were added in July and August than the government had initially estimated. Is this not an aggregate number of "companies" and "government agencies?" It also shows that federal, state and local governments added 10,000 jobs in September and a revised 63,000 jobs combined in July and August. The government’s initial estimates had shown government job losses for July and August So the government hiring 73,000 in the past three months = most? I'm willing to have read these wrong, I just don't see it It says we averaged 146,000 jobs created PER MONTH over the past three months....meaning 73,000/438,000 over the past three months are government jobs....?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 03:04 PM) So pretty much all of the job additions for July and August were governmental jobs. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-...b71a_story.html Where are you getting "pretty much all?" It looks like a small (relative to the idea of "most") portion based on those quotes to me

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 02:47 PM) what's the relevance of witesoxfan's quote? lol...no idea how that got there

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 28, 2012 -> 10:25 AM) Revised Labor Department figures find an extra 386,000 jobs QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 30, 2012 -> 07:34 PM) SHOCKING right before an election with an incumbent Democrat president. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 08:18 AM) Unemployment drops unexpectedly to 7.8% QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 09:40 AM) It's all a conspiracy http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/...l#ixzz28SGxCL10

Progress, folks

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 08:24 AM) Romney won the debate, easy correlation right there. lol

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 12:05 AM) I think it was something not related to baseball. I know what I've heard it was about, I just haven't ever seen actual evidence of such.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/10...l?smid=fb-share

QUOTE (daggins @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 07:02 PM) I tend to think that the Sox will be conservative with their best assets but that is mostly based on my own personal wishes and not in any way on reality. I'm sure it depends on how well he does in the AFL and whether he gets traded before the start of the season. I doubt we trade him unless it is for an infielder. He is a relatively close and valuable player given his position. We have two potential positions of need on the MLB roster with no players ahead of him in the system and he plays both of those positions. Unless the FO is thoroughly convinced that he can't be good, then I don't see us trading him.

QUOTE (BlackBetsy @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 11:19 PM) This White Sox team was 21 games over .500 against the Twins, Mariners and Indians (33-12). They were 13 under .500 against the rest of the American League (43-56). I think the season was a mirage - they looked good when playing crappy teams (except the Royals and Red Sox) and were less than mediocre against the rest of the league (except the Yankees and Rangers for some reason). Sure, if they split with the Royals they are in a one game playoff with the Tigers...but that just means you lose to Verlander one more time. I think your post goes to show you that breaking it down by individual team W-L isn't an accurate way to look at it. Can't beat good teams except these two good teams and only beat bad teams except these two really bad teams. Maybe there just isn't a pattern... I could easily just say that if you flipped the records against Detroit and Kansas City that we look awesome.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 10:49 PM) Normally that's true. But Hawk can't work with somebody on a steady basis. He gets threatened. So he has to have revolving color men. Remember how damn happy he was to get Wimpy back? He'd be the same way I bet if DJ came back for a series. Get Hawk the scenario I presented and it'd be awesome. Big Hurt for 20 games?? Wow. Ozzie for 20? Amazing. Wimpy and/or DJ or Huff. Bring it on. I think he really liked DJ and wanted to continue to work with. I don't know about what happened with Wimpy, but you can tell they love each other nowadays. Stone just happens to be as big of an asshole as Hawk, but he doesn't love the White Sox like Hawk does. Easy to pick who stays.

Dan Johnson isn't a good baseball player and he's only had about a month or two of appearing to be a worthwhile bench player. Let's not get crazy now. I'd be happy with finding a way to keep him on our bench next year and that's about it. If PK or Dunn get hurt next year, I'm happy to give him a shot.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 11:00 PM) No, no, and no. The only way any of this happens is if we exercise Peavy's option (which we should do at at a +14 million cost). QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 11:07 PM) Just so we get this clear Jake's option is $22M. Buyout is $4M.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 09:38 PM) Wright. I could see them picking up the $16M option and try to trade him as a part of rebuilding process. Looks like Headley might be part of this already rebuilding Padres team. Agree. The fact they extended Q made me think they want to keep some good pieces around.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 08:38 PM) He went to Harvard, Im pretty sure that when they debate you dont have one side going "Thats not my position" and "No one can comment on my position because its never been done before." He needs to watch Ted Kenendy, because thats how you beat a Romney. Simple nonsense like "Oh Governor Romney when did you become a Democrat" will cause him to just completely implode. My guess is Obama thought thats to low brow. Well see if he changes his stripes now. That Ted Kennedy debate is funny because so much of it is Ted Kennedy bullying the s*** out of Romney and taking advantage of the crowd being on his side. There were times, even while I dislike Romney, that I felt like Kennedy was just blowing smoke and Romney wasn't given a chance to say more or clarify his position, which was already clear to me.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 08:54 PM) So, I think the two big spots we can expect the Sox to fill are RHP and 3B, and I kind of expect it to be a free agency splash. For pitcher, I think Peavy at 12M/2yr would work (essentially $14M due to his buyout). I'd also not be shocked to see Kenny continue his former Royal love and making a play for Greinke (despite his hating US Cellular). Then for 3B, I see them going hard for Wright. I couldn't speculate the price, but I just see it happening. How do we know Wright will be available?

I doubt the plan was to be received as a loser. I didn't actually see the debate, but from the parts I've seen, it seemed like something was up with BO. It was as if he had missed out on sleep or something...probably just part of being a President instead of just some random rich guy politicking around.

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 10:25 AM) Hawk should be given a nice severance package, and they should get a new PBP guy in there....and not a former player. Isn't it possible that Hawk is part of the problem with attendance? He turns so many people off that they have a hard time attracting new fans. And he also is so down when the team loses, it makes the fans they have so negative, they don't want to watch them in person. I know the attendance issue is very complex, and it's not the main reason why the Sox don't draw. But I don't think Hawk helps the situation...I think he hurts the team in a lot of ways. That makes no sense. Every marginally interested baseball fan I've ever known loves Hawk. He makes a boring sport interesting. Do you think a casual fan would rather have someone like literally every other broadcast (you never hear a word they say) or someone that actually calls for your attention, as if it was something more than a silly, boring game on TV? The only people he pushes away are people that are already firmly attached to another team or dislike baseball too much in general. QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 03:40 PM) Hawk attracts more fans if anything. ^^ QUOTE (danman31 @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 05:12 PM) That's the same thing people say about Dick Vitale. Vitale has done great things for college basketball, but people outgrow him. That doesn't mean he's still not bringing people into the game. I don't understand how so many Sox fans can hate Hawk Harrelson. He IS the White Sox as far as I'm concerned. Vitale isn't a bad comparison. Vitale says blatantly biased things sometimes (odd for national TV, but what the hell) but he's extremely entertaining -- he helps replicate the intensity of the stadium with his own intensity. This is what Hawk does too.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 03:28 PM) They may be two different people, but they're both businessmen that look at the bottom line much in the same regard. By and large, Bain was known was a job shipper/outsourcer...which is exactly what GE has become in recent years under Immelt's lead, and he's just one of the many Obama appointed to advise him who are HUGE on outsourcing jobs, because it helps their bottom lines despite the fact it kills American jobs. There are plenty of successful businessmen he could have appointed to advise him that DON'T outsource, but he didn't do that...he played politics and doled out favors to what will result in huge campaign contributions. If he doesn't think Romney was a very sound businessman in what he did with Bain regarding American jobs, then he shouldn't be taking advice from people who do business exactly like Romney does when better alternatives exist and could have just as easily been appointed to said advisory board. If you want to stop outsourcing, you talk to those that outsource. How else do you find out what kinds of things would stop them from doing so? It's kind of simple. If all they say is "billions in tax cuts," well you don't have to listen. This is the nice thing about having an advisory board. These assholes AREN'T the President.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 03:04 PM) Edit: To make it a finer point -- it's not that he's dealing with unseemly people as part of politics, this is a given -- in this case, it's that he says Romney has no idea how to fix the economy, yet he appoints and takes advice from people exactly like Romney on how to do the same thing. I, for one, find that VERY interesting, even if you don't. Well that's different. I don't think BO is trying to say that every big businessman is like Mitt Romney, necessarily. This is more "Mitt Romney's ideas, as stated by himself, are bad and I believe these bad ideas originate in his business background." This means GE may have different ideas (since this person is from GE and is in fact a human being) or perhaps that incorporating certain nuances that Barack, as a non-businessman, may not have known about can still be useful even if the general plan on the whole sucks. But it is important to make sure we consider Mitt Romney and any particular corporation head as two different people.