[Sox pitching prospects traded since 2000]

Saw this on Scott Reifert's blog... thought it was interesting.

 

"Here is a list of minor-league pitchers traded by the White Sox since October 2000:" (any missing?)

 

2000

Mark Roberts

Brian Schmack

Aaron Myette

 

2001

Gary Majewski

Mike Williams

Orlando Rodriguez

Andre Simpson

Matt Dewitt

Derek Hasselhoff

Daniel Mozingo

Josh Fogg

 

2002

Matt Guerrier

Joe Valentine

 

2003

Eddi Candelario

Jason Aspito

Delvis Lantigua

Edwin Almonte

Royce Ring

Frankie Francisco

Josh Rupe

Tim Bittner

Scott Dunn

Jake Meyer

 

2005

Ryan Meaux

Daniel Haigwood

Gio Gonzalez

 

2006

Jeff Bajenaru

Javier Lopez

B.J. LaMura

Daniel Cortes

Tyler Lumsden

 

2007

Dwayne Pollock

 

2008

Gio Gonzalez

Fautino De Los Santos

 

Jon Rauch?

[Homosexuality, Choice, and Hormones.]

Good to see that things haven't changed much around here. No contributions from that juggernaut clown? That's a bit surprising, unless he's been banished or took his all-knowing box of crap elsewhere.

[Another Month........Another Patronage Scandal.]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/104486,...day2-20.article

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/103096,...ledex19.article

So tell me. When are we going to throw out Daley and his crony and corruption infested political machine?

 

This City government is one of the most unabashedly corrupt entities in the history of politics and nobody so much as bats an eye. The fact that this sort of behavior is allowed to continue, for years and years on end, at the cost of millions of taxpayer dollars makes me ashamed that Im from Chicago and is a big reason why I'll never reside within the city limits again.

 

 

I've got some news for you, this type of thing is going on in EVERY large city in this country, bar none. Probably occurs in most small cities too, just on a smaller scale. Since this limits the number of places in which you can reside with civic pride, I might suggest a visit to ol' Mr. Rourke and his dimunitive sidekick.

[High gas prices.]

It's available in Canada, but modifications are required to make it fit US standards of something or other IIRC.

 

That's what they've always claimed, but it's a bunch of crap if you ask me.

 

But, the CEO of Daimler is on record recently as saying the fortwo model will be here in mid-to-late 2007.

[High gas prices.]

DaimlerChrysler recently announced that they'll bring the SmartCar to the US in mid-2007-- www.smartusa.com, and Tangos are right around the corner -- www.commutercars.com. Both have brighter futures than traditional hybrids, IMHO.

[ACLU gets prayer banned at a HS graduation ceremony.......]

If i were that one kid, I would have brought a big sign that said "I Graduated! Thank You Satan, Dark Lord and Master!" And held it up while the Our Father was being recited. You exercise your freedom of religion, I'll exercise mine, and in short time we'll see that Christian value system in full effect.

[Chili Peppers Use Petty's Music]

This happens all the time in rock/pop music, it's just usually nobody picks up on it. I don't think it was intentional. Another example of this sort of thing I actually just noticed recently. I was listening to Green Day's Nimrod album(ok, stop laughing jerks) and the song 'Scattered' sounds almost exactly like the old America song 'Sister Golden Hair.' You can find hundreds of examples like this, if you had the time and resources.

[The DaVinci Code]

Do yourselves a favor and watch the History Channel special on Decoding the Davinci Code and read the books of the authors they interview. Guys like Richard Leigh who wrote Holy Blood, Holy Grail are way better books than this.

 

 

Both Angels and Demons and Holy Blood Holy Grail are better books than DVC. Another good one if you're into the whole knights Templar thing is The Second Messiah. Kinda drags during the chapters where the authors go into the history of the freemasons, but overall pretty interesting stuff.

[iPod Question]

The computer I had iTunes on crashed, and with it went all my iTunes and music files.  Obviously, the songs are still on my actual iPod, but if I were to plug it into the computer they would all be erased.  Is there a way to get the songs from iPod and put them back on iTunes?

 

 

Download the Ipod Agent. You can safely transfer your songs without losing them that way

[You think your phone bill is bad?]

If there was a monthly charge to post on Soxtalk, SS2k5 would top $215 trillion easily.

[WTH....? Mom LET son be abused..]

At least she's a heterosexual mother. That's what really matters.

[Do car manufactures have input..]

On child safety seat laws...?

 

The lobbyists they associate with sure do.

[HAPPY BIRTHDAY KAP!!!]

Happy Birthday Kap!!!

[Caption fun]

 

This picture has so many caption options, I want to see what you guys can do with it

 

 

Ms. Phelps was later horrified to learn that the man she embraced that afternoon was NOT, in fact, Billy Dee Williams, and that her autographed replica Millennium Falcon was, therefore, a fake.

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

What's wrong with that?  Religious texts clearly tell us that we shouldn't steal or kill and our laws are founded on Judeo-Christian values.

 

What's wrong with it is that you can't use it to back your point UNLESS you agree that all of the bible is literally true. You can't pick and choose which parts are indisputably true and which parts aren't. This debate has nothing to do with whether or not the bible contains any good ideas regarding morality and social interaction.

 

 

Both know vastly more than you or I.

 

Well, since you didnt answer my question about Dr. Ruth's position, you're talking about one person here. And I'm really not convinced that Dr. Phil 'knows' more about this subject than a lay person interested in the subject. What is his doctorate in anyways?

 

I'd "be willing to bet my bottom dollar" that many psychologists and sociologists already have.  The concept of "open marriage" isn't exactly a novel one.

 

No, but in order to study this type of arrangement you have to have subjects on which to study. I don't know the answer, but I question the existence of substantial data that supports the claim that polygamous relationships do not work based on studies of people actually in them. I'm not saying they work, I'm just again stating that I'm skeptical much research has been done thus far. If you have data to prove me wrong, I'm very interested in reading it.

 

You're painting with too broad a brush.  I know quite a few who are very open about their sexuality.

 

Sure, but homosexuality is much more socially acceptable now than it was 40 years ago. And it's definitely more acceptable today than polygamous relationships. Therefore, you hear more gay people comfortable discussing their sexuality than someone with 8 lovers for example. Who knows, maybe in 40 years polygamous marriages will be as common as "out" homosexuals.

 

I never implied that homosexuality is "wrong".  So typical of a liberal to throw out the "prejudice" card.

 

Well, since you refused to answer my question(again I might add) if I am mistaken then please explain what this statement meant:

 

"Right, just like homosexuals keep their "practice" private, yet everybody seems to know at least one or two. "

 

 

I simply don't believe that the vast majority of human beings could stay committed to a long, loving marriage if both are openly sleeping around.

 

You may be right, but I refer to one of my earlier posts in which I questioned if a child wasn't raised to feel like a monogamous relationship was expected, would he pursue one or not? I think the answer to this question holds a lot of keys.

 

Why do you think that the "free love" movement in the '60s died out so quickly?

 

I think that was a very small movement to begin with, and it didn't change the fact that even those that participated in it were raised in a culture that instilled monogamy as an ideal.

 

Sure you did:  I don't personally know any couples engaged in an open marriage because they're so few in number.

 

As of now, yes, but that doesn't mean it is inherently wrong or can't work. And I reiterate that even if you did know a couple in an open marriage, based on what I'm seeing here you'd be the last to know about it-- you know?

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

Then why the raging urge to murder the cheater?   

 

LOL, you have a point there!

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

No, you just implied that much of it is irrelevant in today's society.

 

Again, I did no such thing. You were attempting to use religious texts as evidence that monogamous relationships is what people are "supposed" to be in. I argued that you can't do that unless you were willing to accept everything found in the bible. You(nor I) would have any right or basis for determining what content found in the bible should be taken at face value, at what should not. Therefore, if you're using it as proof, you have to accept all of it as literal truth. If you do, I think you're nuts, but to each his/her own. And if you are saying that, then this part of our debate has to end, because it's at that point where either you believe or you don't.

 

Certain core values obviously are not and I believe that monogamous marriage is one of them.

 

Fair enough, and to be honest I'm not sure whether or not it's necessary. I guess that's one purpose for debating the subject.

 

That's possible, but it's quite a Malthusian prediction.  And we all know how correct Malthus was about everybody starving to death because of the rate of population growth.

 

But did he say WHEN the starvation would begin?

 

I don't believe that you can have have successful marriage without monogamy and many of the "experts" (Dr. Phil, Dr. Ruth) seem to agree with me.

 

I don't put much stock in Dr. Phil as any kind of "expert," and are you sure about Dr. Ruth's position? In any case, I don't think anyone has done enough research on this specific topic to really be called an expert yet.

 

When money and child cutody come into the picture, it's a whole new ballgame.

 

Agreed, and that's a large part of the cause for my indecision on this subject.

 

Oh, really?  Where do you get YOUR information?

 

True, I can't prove it, but I'd bet my bottom dollar on it.

 

Right, just like homosexuals keep their "practice" private, yet everybody seems to know at least one or two.

 

The only time homosexuals discuss their sexual orientation is when they're questioned on it. Not one gay person I've ever met(and I know a bunch) have ever brought up their orientation unless it was absolutely necessary. In any case, what was this statement of yours supposed to mean, anyways?

 

Zero.  Thanks for proving my point.

 

I didn't prove your point, but I did gain more proof to support my stance that I surely know more people engaged in alternative lifestyles than you do, and based on your statement implying that homosexuality, for example, is wrong, I doubt you'd know it if your best friend was in an "open" marriage. It seems obvious you are completely against even accepting that others could find happiness in such an arrangement, so why would they discuss it with you?

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

Oh, you mean like "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not steal"?  Yeah, nobody cares what those stupid books say anymore.

 

That response is completely irrelevant. I never said everything in religious texts is hogwash. However, if you want to take it as all or nothing, then I expect you'll be chopping off the family jewels right soon, no?:

 

"For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12)

 

 

Good point, but I also said that "aspects of marriage can and probably will change (such as gay marriage)" in my last post.  But I seriously doubt that monogamous marriages will eventually give way to polygamy or "open" marriages.  So far, history has proven me correct on that one.

 

What history(taking into accounts current events as well) is telling us is that while marriage doesn't seem to really be evolving into a polygamous institution, it seems to rather be evolving into possible non-existence. The average age that people first get married goes higher and higher every year, and the divorce rate is now at 50%. If those trends continue, how long will it be until nobody is married in the Victorian sense? Years, for sure, but if the trends continue, it's pretty hard to deny that the end of marriage will be the end result.

 

Try opening your eyes and looking around.

 

Hmmm, well, I'm POSITIVE I'm more exposed to those in alternative lifestyles than you are, and I only know 2 couples that are openly in "open marriages." One couple seems happy, one I don't think will make it. That's only 2 examples I have to go on, probably in large part because many who practice this sort of thing keep it very private. How many people in open relationships do you know? So I ask again, where do you get your information?

[Who wants to live to be 1,000?]

Aging Process

 

Kind of crazy stuff.  They want $3 billion per year to try and slow or completely remove the aging process.  Just need to bring yourself in every 40 years for a tune-up.

 

 

I'm in!

[Jessica Simpson...]

She works for a charity called Operation Smile. Had a chance to get private face time with the President. Turned it down. Why? She would have had to make an appearance at a GOP fundraiser. Says she doesn't want to politicize the charity.

 

Got respect for that.

 

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle....PSON.xml&rpc=22

 

I agree, but there ain't no way I believe she used the word 'politicize.' Wayyyy too big of a word for her.

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

Um, in the texts of most major religions.

 

Um, that's really not anything you want to use as proof of your position, because religious texts contain a whole truckload of "rules" that are deemed a bit off by modern standards.

 

Marriage has been around forever and doesn't appear to be going away anytime soon.

 

Wrong. Marriage as we know it has been around for only a few hundred years. Certainly you're not equating what marriage means today with the "our families arranged our marriage to build alliances and the woman had no say in the matter" days of say the 1500's?

 

 

While cheating has also been around forever, polygamist and official "open" marriages have been relatively few in number and have failed miserably in the long run.

 

They have? Where do you get your information? Where does such information even exist? Is there a national database of open marriages on file somewhere?

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

Right, because running away from our marital problems is a better course of action than trying to deal with them!

 

This quote provides examples of some of the worst trends of our society today: moral relativism, selfishness, irresponsibility, and the never-ending desire for instant gratification.  :headshake

 

 

Well, where is it written that people are "supposed" to be in marriages in the first place?

 

Social traditions constantly evolve, some evolve into extinction. Sex with siblings is illegal or at least frowned upon, whereas once it was commonplace. Women used to stay home and not work.

[Pffft, WHERE are these women??]

http://lifestyle.msn.com/Relationships/Cou...99661>1=7909

 

This is an interesting topic that I get into a lot of debates about. One question I always bring up is if a child is NOT raised to think a monogamous relationship is what they should aspire to, would they naturally move towards it, or would they hump everything that moves. I don't think it's biologically natural for humans to be monogamous, but I'd also be lying if I said it wouldn't bother me if I had a significant other decide she wants to screw other guys. Fascinating subject matter, IMHO.

[Mexico may have hit the Crude motherload]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060315/ap_on_...xico_oil_find_1

 

 

".....and the kinfolk said, "Juan, move away from there!" They said, "California is the place you ought to be...."

[Teenage "Buddha" missing]

OK, has ANYONE checked Sardo Numspa's house? I bet $1000 that's where you'll find him. Get me Chandler Jarrell's number, I'll have the kid back by tomorrow.