bmags

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 8, 2008 -> 06:55 AM) All we gave up to get Floyd was a Freddy Garcia that just about all of us here knew was broken down, and we also get Gio in that trade. Completely different situation. And I will give Bailey a chance. I'm not going to boo the damn guy, and I HOPE I am wrong about him if he's indeed coming or way. In fact, I wish I had never seen him in person and that my brother wasn't a Reds fan so I wouldn't feel so bad about this. It's easy to say this 3 years later, but at the time we all felt that we didn't get enough for a 17 game winner. And further, I feel like you saw two things that said he had a declining fastball and have therefore concluded that these are true and define the player homer bailey.

QUOTE (earthshiner @ Dec 8, 2008 -> 06:52 AM) where's the Boomer trade? for serious. I had the same problems as well, and disagreed with some of these trades rankings.

Cool news. I hope he sucks for life!!! jk.

God we have the weirdest trades progressions.

the lines on the end that are supposed to give the impression it is going fast clearly are the pubes.

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Dec 8, 2008 -> 03:13 AM) So, is the red on the logo blood? Yikes... I believe that's the vein. hahahahahaha this is hysterical

that would suck. Just when the hawks were to get on Natty TV!!! and I'm a journalism student.

well, I can honestly say I'd be happy if this deal went through, and Happy if it didn't.

I think Cowley is smart with this twitter thing. People will appreciate his quick info and develop a relationship with him.

was that article implying they were specifically waiting for the GM meetings?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 8, 2008 -> 12:24 AM) This would make sense if anarchy wasn't the most historically precedented method of governing in human history. Remember that anarchy is, by nature, a conservative idea. Oh just go f*** yourself, where have I said I'm an anarchist? All I've been saying here is that your black and white view of what holds water academically is remarkably full of crap. This stems from your hilarious notion that every group other than traditional conservatives is anti-intellectual. well you had a good run. I think this was longer than last time, no? Terrible recidivism rate.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Dec 7, 2008 -> 11:25 PM) I can't see anyway the major conferences (ACC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Pac 10) would agree to a playoff without being guaranteed one entry. Maybe they should just make sure their conferences don't suck.

hahaha alabama. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. but, i must say even after watching that disgrace last night, i still think Texas is better.

this is hilarious.

See, this is where a debate on Roger Ebert becomes stupid, I'm sorry everyone. What makes Roger Ebert a good critic isn't his damn star rating system. You have to READ his reviews. What makes him the best critic in his actual reviews, is he tells you everything about the movie, what is good about it and what is bad about it very specifically, and lets you decide if these are things that are important to you. If it's a dance movie, he doesn't grade it on the same scale as a mamet film, he'll say the dances are wonderful, or bad, but he'll let you know if it has transcended the genre for people like me, that wouldn't want to see a movie just because the dances are good, to have an actual good plot line. If you read his review without the rating system there is a lot of times you wouldn't really be able to guess accurately what his meaningless rating system has to do with it. If it's a movie like There Will Be Blood, he'll focus on how aesthetically gorgeous it is and dialogue driven to study a character, so while he'll give it a high or low rating, he'll let a prospective viewer decide if that is the kind of movie he likes, because obviously, there is no way someone is going to like every kind of four star movie.

QUOTE (mreye @ Dec 5, 2008 -> 05:47 PM) I'm glad he bashed other movies found to be riddled with inaccuracies. I think there is a rather large difference. One, Ebert was goaded into writing this review. Two, it is the basis of intelligent design that Ebert disagrees with, and in fact I'd bet that's why he didn't write a review because of that. The basis of fahrenheit 9/11, that bush is incompetent, made it easier to ignore execution. Plus no matter who you are you can probably undoubtedly state that Michael moore is a hell of a lot better than Ben Stein at making movies.

How productive to damn college educations while in all their solutions for a better america they talk about a need to get a good education.

I've never tried to pronounce a sigor ros album besides Takk, but I liked their english song and gobbledigook on that album.

I think MGMT was the year before but I could be wrong.

I think there is a disconnect in communication for sure on this front.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/wi...teins_mind.html Roger Ebert is great.

QUOTE (daa84 @ Dec 4, 2008 -> 07:41 PM) well in fairness....there was a time when pablo ozuna was a real good prospect...ranked #8 in all of baseball by baseball america...then the world found out he was two years older than listed but this was 2005, and I believe he was like 30.

I believe Gammons called Ozuna a nice young prospect when he came up.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 4, 2008 -> 07:04 AM) These Obama/White Sox things keep getting worse and worse. the first five paragraphs were painful. Why didn't someone stop him?

Elbow sucks. edit: Nouns.