bmags

I doubt there would be talent consessions but monetary seems possible, but unlikely. More likely - draft pick penalties vs pads and front office penalties.

I regret defending Rose and will in the future not acknowledge or be supportive of him.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 15, 2016 -> 03:44 PM) I get that the Sox are ultimately responsible, but if a team is intentionally withholding information that is a pretty big deal. Was that actually being said of the Sox and Sirotka? I believe Toronto accused us of knowing Sirotka was injured. But anyway, I agree, you don't allow teams to purposely mislead. Unfair to player/league/fans.

I'm just trying to be consistent with my stance as a 14 year old regarding Sirotka.

I understand this is frowned upon but we do get a chance to give physical so we should be more upset with ourselves.

QUOTE (TheTruth05 @ Sep 15, 2016 -> 01:39 PM) What did you give up for Fuller? Roughly 1/5th of my waiver budget.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 15, 2016 -> 11:55 AM) Didnt they move Riotfest so that this problem would be reduced? They moved riotfest from humboldt due to community complaints. It is bye and large a lot easier to get to humboldt park than douglas park.

I elevated the conversation.

I say this as someone who paid way too much for fuller - people are putting way too much emphasis on week 1.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 15, 2016 -> 12:23 PM) I get that the numbers have a fair amount of slop built into them, both because of the size and scope of them, and the fact that the true numbers aren't known for a period of time after the numbers are published, but even in a big picture sense, the economy doesn't really agree with a decent amount of the numbers. It is such an odd period of time in terms of economic history. Numbers that should converge aren't converging.

Haha, I kinda feel bad there.

People forget that 24 teams passed on Mike Trout

people are going to love that well actually from me.

I mean, that's not accurate. The accurate thing is that Hillary has supported force in middle east conflicts, not every failed nation state. But I don't recall her advising us moving in on Venezuela.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 15, 2016 -> 11:07 AM) Yeah, see this is what I mean, so income is up 5%, savings is basically unchanged, but nothing else is growing, in fact key indicators fell last month Retails sales -0.3%, after +0.1% in July GDP up 1% in the first half of the year Gas sales down 0.8% Auto sales down 0.9% PPI flat Where is the money going? Couple things to keep in mind: - US should really let our data depts use things like IRS returns. We could have an actual very accurate number but instead rely on survey data - I wouldn't put so much stock that the real time monthly numbers based off survey data re accurate and the annual survey data is so different.

Is Anderson really faster than Eaton? I'd bet Eaton is faster from home to first, though his swing probably plays a bit into it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 05:07 PM) Heck of a job, brownie shows the problem of incompetent patronage But is this a patronage issue? Seems like a "put people who care about the job" issue it sounds like we are having an institutional issue that we are blaming on actors. If we cleaned this up would outcomes be better? Isn't deeper issue our institution requires 75% fundraising time, not that people spent all this time fundraising, not this appointing fundraisers?

Great thread. I hear the white sox are listening to offers on Sale. You think they'll fit anything before the trade deadline?

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 04:46 PM) Its not even just ambassadorships, huge donations also bought Chairman of the FCC, a Secretary of Commerce and deputy attorney general. Is that not a problem to you? I guess no. I don't see it as a problem, because I assume the way to fix it is that a new administration would not be able to appoint anyone who had raised or donated money to them. Are we saying any of these people are unqualified for the position? What is the solution that would make you happy? Do you think there are some huge pool of really deserving commerce secretaries sitting around that don't get a shot because they don't have money to pay to get in? For better or worse, fundraising is a huge part of our political process which we have decided is okay, and if that is the case, the fundraisers are a pretty large part of the political team that we vote in. Look at this guys resume: http://www.allgov.com/officials/s%C3%A1nch...fficialid=29202 Seems like a pretty appropriate choice. Changing our constitution would solve the look of impropriety here, but I would guess the outcomes we receive are minimal. We all would probably just move to HEY LOOK HOW CORRUPT THEY ARE THEY ARE APPOINTING PEOPLE WHO GAVE SPEECHES FOR THEM.

Yuck.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 04:33 PM) Im not an expert in this stuff so of course Im not gonna be the one to find a smoking gun, but to act like this stuff isnt relevant is kind of ridiculous. Is it that big of a deal to you that people discuss this because youre a Clinton fan? I guess I'm confused what you are talking about. I thought you are talking about the DNC leak. The DNC is a political organization that raises money for party candidates. It can provide baseline strategy for party politicians. It polls and provides research available to its candidates. There is also OFA, which became a lot more powerful and has caused a split. You are saying there is something really bad about fundraising and then setting up high fundraisers with ambassadorships, and I don't think that there is. It is less threatening then lots of fundraising with the explicit agreement thta you would not actually pass a bill you promised. Or agreement that you would never raise taxes, to that like. But our patronage laws largely work to keep people out of important appointed positions. I would like if Clinton is elected and the country finally does implement a public financing system and amended first amendment to say that free speech does not cover political contributions. But it is not illegal or controversial for a political group to try and try to implement communication plans to media anymore than PR for any other group. Pay to play: Hey, man, I'll support and pass through this new hospital plan if you give me 2500 and fundraise for me Hey lady, I'll appoint you as new US senator if you drop charges against me Not pay to play: Hello, thank you for supporting my campaign, I think you'd be great at a posiiton as ambassador to Trinidad. Controversial communication plan: Hello, off the record, here are a bunch of complete lies showing this country has nuclear weapons and are threatening to use it. really urgent Non controversial communication plan: We plan to show off how our candidate is a champion of the working class. Context is important. Actions are important. Actual impropriety and not the optics of impropriety are important.

If you can't prove impropriety after hacking the communications of an org and then just saying it's "implied" then that is the most incredible execution I could imagine. A full org, never putting anything to paper, executing a grand strategy to pull wool over the eyes of the country. I'd like to know what people think would happen if they took your work organizations emails with the assumption you did something wrong. And took every out of context phrase or frustration and assigned absolute malice to it. You would be the guiltiest person of all guilty. These are remarkably tame.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 04:15 PM) Also, Im not trying to make this partisan. I dont for one second think the GOP isnt doing this s*** too. Im just surprised it doesnt bother more people. This system is so rigged and it is only going to get worse. There are some pretty serious claims of insider trading, pay to play and election fraud implied in these leaks and we cant even get the media to investigate it because they are also implicated. I don't understand why you think that is inappropriate. Should we ban our political orgs from interacting with media orgs?

Not sure Eaton is far off either. I think eaton is probably faster than both.

boo hoo he ran on the field back in my day i would have been working and wouldn't have even been at the game! Nobody ever ran on the field when I grew up, we all wore suits and said hello gentleman, enjoying the sporting game? Yes sir!