Wong & Owens

Soxy, I would only do two things: 1) Make sure the tank is at least 1/2 full the entire time 2) Take the battery out, and put it in the house.(Very easy to do, would take you 5 minutes.) An '03 Taurus doesn't need to be idled, or have fuel treatment added. Modern engines are extremely resilient.

Not necessarily Contreras, but expecting all 5 starters to reach double-digit wins is pretty silly.

75-90 wins just out of the starters? Say hi to Ricardo Montalban for me Garcia 15 Buerhle 16 Hernandez 11 Contreras 9 Garland 10

Chicago's very own-- The Arrivals, "Goodbye New World"

This would be a horrible deal for the Sox. Hinske is overrated, and Batista is the hispanic Jon Garland.

Barry Larkin 2005 = Roberto Alomar 2004. In a word, no.

How do the Yanks get RJ? Do the Yanks then send Konerko and Garland to AZ?

This is from chicagotribune.com. It seems that Sox management is defintely doing at least one thing right: A family of Sox fans E-mail this story December 10, 2004, 11:28 AM CST Every baseball team is searching for the best free agents available, so Mike Wallin figured now was a good time to become one. Before wondering if Wallin has any pop in his bat or a 95 m.p.h. fastball, realize this: Wallin isn't a player. He's a fan. "I just decided to solicit for a team," Wallin said. "So I sent an e-mail to every Major League team and basically just told them we're looking for a team." Mike grew up in Buffalo and has lived in Indianapolis for 7½ years with his wife, Stephanie, and daughters, Leah, 8, and Lael, 6. They're baseball fans and made frequent trips to Cincinnati to see the Reds, but grew disillusioned. "They weren't, in my opinion, trying to win and make it the best family atmosphere possible," he said. Last month, in search of a team for his family, Wallin sent out a brief note to each of the 30 MLB teams that read, in part: "To the team we vote to cheer for, we promise our allegiance through good and bad times. We will purchase and wear only our team's merchandise and will attend as many games as possible each and every season." The response to the Wallin family's free agency was hardly overwhelming. Just seven teams responded, and one, the Philadelphia Phillies, actually wrote back to tell him they weren't interested. "They basically told me it's not their place to tell me who to root for or what team to pick," Wallin said. No problem. The Phillies didn't want him; he didn't want the Phillies. So he directed his attention to the teams that did respond, which were the San Diego Padres, Anaheim Angels, Cleveland Indians, Toronto Blue Jays, New York Yankees and the White Sox. He's still waiting to hear from the Cubs. The Indians and Blue Jays sent what seemed to be form letters, the Yankees merely directed him to their fan message boards, and although the Padres and Angels sent nice personalized letters, the decision wasn't even close. The White Sox blew everybody else away. "When I showed [their response] to my wife, I didn't say anything beforehand, just let her look it over," Wallin said. "She was like, 'Oh, my God. Eleven people responded.' " One employee wrote to the Wallins about the "South Side family tradition." Another mentioned the Dog Day promotion, where a few hundred fans can bring their dogs to a game. The best, and most honest, may have been from the employee who argued that they should pick the White Sox because, "It would be too unbearable to be a Cubs fan." The Wallins were given 47 separate reasons to become Sox fans. White Sox director of public relations Katie Kirby, who spearheaded the drive to bring the Wallins into the fold, said hundreds more have come in from other staffers. And that's how the White Sox picked up four new fans. The Wallins plan to buy White Sox gear, visit U.S. Cellular Field several times a season and also watch them play on the road. Mike Wallin knows a bit about the team and thinks he'll probably become a Joe Crede or Paul Konerko fan. "I've never hated (the Cubs), but I can see that's probably the direction I'm going to go if I'm going to be a White Sox fan," Wallin said. "You can't have them both." Especially if only one of them writes you back.

I think the scariest part of this article is the fact that this jackass clearly has the support of Idiot President bush. You got what you asked for, bush supporters, congratulations.

You look at Glaus' ridiculous numbers in 2000-2002, and then his trend downward, and I have to wonder if he isn't another juiced player. I am going on nothing but a hunch here, just to be clear.

I do, I think Rhodes is done. The left-handed Mike Jackson.

Detroit Atlanta Buffalo New Orleans. Baltimore N.Y. Jets Minnesota New England St. Louis Indianapolis Denver Oakland Philadelphia Washington Jacksonville Seattle

What about Danny Bautista? He seems like a decent option, but I believe he was hit by some injuries last year, yes?

I hope they don't run into Tim the killer rabbit. Maybe they should hook up with that guy mounting a search for Noah's Ark. Whatever happened to him anyways?

I believe he was picked up to use as compensation for this year's Roberto Alomar acquisition.

DETROIT CHICAGO TAMPA BAY CINCINNATI HOUSTON KANSAS CITY JACKSONVILLE NEW ENGLAND PHILADELPHIA PITTSBURGH ATLANTA NEW YORK JETS MIAMI SEATTLE DENVER GREEN BAY

I have to work all day today, but this is my last day here, so I don't mind at all! Have Friday off, new job on Monday

See, the great thing about fiction is that you can say whatever you want to say. You don't need facts, truth, logic, or anything! Don't knock it, it kept Dr. Seuss in business for many years.

I just spit tea all over my desk. That was a classic, Critic

Exactly. Taken to extremes, an addicition to orange juice or post-it notes would be damaging. Brownback should run for President of Mexico: Voted in 1996 to continue chain migration Rep. Brownback in 1996 voted for the Chrysler-Berman Amendment to H.R.2202. It was a vote in favor of a chain migration system that has been the primary cause of annual immigration levels snowballing from less than 300,000 in 1965 to around a million today. Rep. Brownback supported provisions that allow immigrants to send for their adult relatives. Then each of those relatives can send for their and their spouse's adult relatives, creating a never-ending and ever-growing chain. The bi-partisan Barbara Jordan Commission recommended doing away with the adult-relative categories and chain migration (begun only in the 1950s) in order to lessen wage depression among lower-paid American workers. The House Judiciary Committee agreed with the Jordan Commission and passed H.R.2202, which would have effectively ended chain migration. But on the floor of the House, Rep. Brownback helped kill the reform by voting for the Chrysler-Berman Amendment which stripped out the legal immigration reforms. Rep. Brownback’s vote was important; the reformers were only 28 votes short of approving the end of chain migration. Rep. Brownback helped continue a level of immigration that the Census Bureau projects will result in a doubled U.S. population in the next century. Tried to create massive new foreign agriculture worker program in 1996 Rep. Brownback voted IN FAVOR of the Pombo Amendment to H.R.2202. He was voting for a massive new program that would have allowed agri-business to import up to 250,000 foreign farm workers each year for a period of service of less than a year. A bi-partisan congressional commission working with the Bush Administration (1989-93) had concluded that there were at least 190,000 farm workers already in America who were out of work at any given time. The federal commission said the oversupply of farmworkers was a major reason why farm workers’ real incomes had fallen by almost half over the previous two decades. Rep. Brownback rejected the recommendations of the commission and took the side of growers who asked for a larger labor supply. The amendment -- which had no provisions for ensuring that the temporary workers did not stay in the U.S. as illegal aliens -- failed by a 180-242 vote. Voted to allow firms to lay off Americans to make room for foreign workers in 1998 Before the Senate passed the H-1B doubling bill(S.1723), Sen. Brownback had an opportunity to vote for a Kennedy amendment that would have prohibited U.S. firms from using temporary foreign workers to replace Americans. Sen. Brownback opposed that protection. The Amendment failed 38-60.

Given that Sam Brownback is involved, I'm sure the study is completely unbiased and objective, and that there was no skewering of any data to slant the findings.

Carolina Baltimore Denver Minnesota Indianapolis N.Y. Jets Cincinnati Tampa Bay St. Louis Tennessee Seattle Oakland Atlanta Philadelphia Green Bay New England

They must have did the test wrong or something, 'cause the earth is only 6,000 years old. Everyone knows that.

No friggin way. The guy's a headcase, and the last thing this team needs is another headcase. He also gets worse as the level of pressure goes up. He also left that last Cubs game early the same day Sammy did, but nobody paid attention to it.

I believe, also, that Colorado, Florida and Arizona all voted for Bush: Faith-Based Parks? Creationists meet the Grand Canyon Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 At a park called Dinosaur Adventure Land, run by creationists near Pensacola, Florida, visitors are informed that man coexisted with dinosaurs. This fantasy accommodates the creationists’ view that the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that Darwin’s theory of evolution is false. Among the park exhibits is one that illustrates another creationist article of faith. It consists of a long trough filled with sand and fitted at one end with a water spigot. Above the trough is a sign reading “That River Didn’t Make That Canyon.” When visitors open the spigot, the water quickly cuts a gully through the sand, supposedly demonstrating how the Grand Canyon was created, practically overnight, by Noah’s flood. That’s nonsense, of course, but what else would you expect at a creationist park? Certainly, one might think, this couldn’t be acceptable at, say, a National Park, right? Think again. Two-thirds of the way across the continent, some four million people annually visit Grand Canyon National Park, marveling at the awesome view. In National Park Service (NPS) affiliated bookstores, they can find literature informing them that the great chasm runs for 277 miles along the bed of the Colorado River. It descends more than a mile into the earth, and along one stretch, is some 18 miles wide, its walls displaying impressive layers of limestone, sandstone, shale, schist and granite. And, oh yes, it was formed about 4,500 years ago, a direct consequence of Noah’s Flood. How’s that? Yes, this is the ill-informed premise of “Grand Canyon, a Different View,” a handsomely-illustrated volume also on sale at the bookstores. It includes the writings of creationists and creation scientists and was compiled by Tom Vail, who with his wife operates Canyon Ministries, conducting creationist-view tours of the canyon. “For years,” Vail explains, “as a Colorado River guide, I told people how the Grand Canyon was formed over the evolutionary time span of millions of years. (Most geologists place the canyon’s age at some six million years). Then I met the Lord. Now I have a different view of the Canyon, which according to a biblical time scale, can’t possibly be more than a few thousand years old.” Vail’s book attracted little notice when it first appeared in the NPS stores in 2003, until a critical review by Wilfred Elders, a respected University of California geologist, brought it to light and took apart its pseudoscientific claims. That led David Shaver, who heads the Geologic Resources Division of the Park Service, to send a memo to headquarters urging that the book be removed from the NPS stores. “It is not based on science,” he wrote, “ but on a specific religious doctrine…and should not have been approved for in NPS affiliated book stores.” The presidents of The American Geological Institute and six of its member societies also weighed in, expressing their dismay to the Park Service. Noting that the Grand Canyon “provides a remarkable and unique opportunity to educate the public about Earth science,” the scientists urged that, “in fairness to the millions of park visitors, we must clearly distinguish religious from scientific knowledge.” But when Grand Canyon National Park superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the sale of Vail’s book at canyon bookstores, he was overruled by NPS headquarters, which announced that a high-level policy review of the matter would be launched and a decision made by February, 2004. So far, no official decision has been announced. Even worse, according to the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), an organization that includes many Park employees, papers obtained under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that no review has ever taken place. Indeed, PEER claims that the Bush Administration has already decided it will stand by its approval for the book and that hundreds more have been ordered. “Now that the book has become quite popular,” explained an NPS flack to a Baptist news agency, “we don’t want to remove it.” Even more troubling, PEER charges that Grand Canyon National Park no longer offers an official estimate of the age of the canyon, and that the NPS has blocked publication of guidance intended for park rangers that reminds them there is no scientific basis for creationism. The group has been increasingly concerned about what it calls the Park Service’s “Faith-Based Parks” and the agency’s seeming indifference to the separation of church and state Among other moves, for example, NPS has allowed the placing of bronze plaques bearing Psalm verses at Grand Canyon overlooks. PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch is indignant, “If the Bush Administration is using public resources for pandering to Christian fundamentalists, it should at least have the decency to tell the truth about it.” Is this religious bias, as some creationists charge? Hardly. It’s more than likely that the majority of scientists, environmentalists and others protesting the NPS stand are themselves intelligent, rational Christians who are convinced by overwhelming evidence that the Grand Canyon is no Johnny-Come-Lately. The creationists have demonstrated again that they are scientifically illiterate, and out of step with the 21st century.