ptatc

QUOTE (KagakuOtoko @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:53 AM) Normal this is true. Most politicians have skeletons in their closet. That being said, the last thing we need is a a politician with a very suspect history of being a predator with more power. I agree. If the number of allegations are real, he would get convicted which is what should happen. He should not be allowed to skate away with just a resignation.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:42 AM) You're somewhat right - the Congress needs to develop a better way to deal with this and a clear path by which this can be treated as an ethics violation. If that isn't done, it does set up an opportunity for someone to do a James O'Keefe setup where they try to bring down a Congressperson based on false accusations. There are unfortunately, a number of other issues with this though, including the fact that Congress has made it nearly impossible to report harassment by their members, and the fact that you can't really set up something like this that would police Congress without having to deal with the dozen+ credible claims against the President. At some point, Al Franken had to go and yesterday's was the straw that broke the camels back. Even if some of these are invented, there's photographic evidence of a couple of them, and he was not going to be in a position to do his job or represent the people of Minnesota any more. This is exactly the case that needs to be made. He is maintaining he did nothing wrong but because of public pressure he is resigning. This is a cop out arrangement. If he is truly innocent, this is the wrong way to handle it. If he is guilty he should be prosecuted. With Moore they are truly going to let public opinion determine his fate With Fraken they basically did the same thing. The party didn't think he was going to be effective going forward so they forced him to resign. The GOP still thinks Moore can be effective so they let him go on.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:37 AM) I say yes. For one, congress shouldn't be about any one person. It is a house of our government that features, yes, senators and congressmen and congresswomen, but aides and other professional staff. This is a public job and anyone shoud be able to work there without being harrassed. And any person should be able to be on a trip with those people without being harrassed. So when they behave that way, they should lose their job just like anyone at my company that would behave that way should. If there are isolated incidents its one thing, but no one in any position should get to just run roughshod over other people just because they can. The institution is more important than the person. I agree with all of this. Everyone should their chance to tell their story. however, it appears that once allegations are leveled there is pressure for them to resign without them being able to defend themselves. No doubt that many of them should resign if they are true and many seem to be admitting it. If this is the case the should be forced to resign and prosecuted. However, they should also be afforded the chance to defend themselves and shouldn't be forced to resign, if they deny the allegations and want to fight it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:29 AM) It's a political position and if the political tides turn against you and you can no longer effectively serve, you should resign. Look at HHS Sec. Tom Price earlier this year. He abused government travel funds to fly private jets all over the country. I don't think anything he did was technically illegal, but it was a bad look for the administration politically, so he was forced to resign over it. That comes with the territory of holding a political office. Abuse of government funds would fall under the ethics rules and would set him up for prosecution. However, this is another case where they weren't "allegations." They have proof of what he did and would have grounds against him. He would have no basis to fight the charges. I'm sure he could've fought it but knew he would ose. However, he should have the opportunity to fight it. I know it won't change just based on the public perception of the issues. However, it doesn't mean it's right depending on evidence.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:27 AM) Al Franken will never go to trial. He'll go home and have to answer to his family at most. Someday he may write another book for all we know. That's the world we live in - the stuff he did is such a small crime that you can do worse and be President of the United States. But is it worthy of destroying his career and any good he may have done in public service if it's not worthy of a trial? How do you determine this without some sort of measure? It's a slippery slope of doing this based on allegations. He, of course will need to answer to his family.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:19 AM) Resigning because you've disgraced yourself or your office and are facing political pressure is nothing new, whether it's for sexual misconduct (Franken) or abusing government funds (Price, earlier this fall). When a person is facing a litany of unconnected accusers telling similar stories with at least some amount of evidence, they should absolutely be forced out. These women had pictures with Franken and all told similar stories, showing a clear pattern (and there are probably more). Moore's accusers have written notes from him and he was banned from the mall--he should never disgrace the Senate with his presence. Trump's faced numerous accusers and bragged on tape about sexually assaulting women. Farenthold settled a case using public funds, just like Conyers (and, honestly, probably a lot of others. Not everything worthy of a resignation rises to the level of a successful criminal prosecution. I know it's nothing new but that also doesn't mean it's right. If someone is insisting it's a false case, they should have the opportunity to defend themselves. If they admit it or settle, they should resign. If they win the court case they should not have to resign. I'm not should I agree that not everything worthy of resignation rises to the level of a successful prosecution.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:16 AM) Do you think that there are people who played professional baseball in MLB who used steroids and did not get caught? Sure. But you can't go back and prove that they did or didn't take them because they weren't put on trial. These people will go to trial. You will have evidence if they committed a crime.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:17 AM) Isn't that what I said? Sorry. I read it as he won't be out there due to the way shoulder injuries go. I didn't realized that you meant that he will be back because most shoulder innuries make it back.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:13 AM) That bullpen could look impressive rapidly if you've got a Rodon, Cease, and Kimbrel out there. He won't be in the pen. That would put too much stress on his shoulder. He will need to be on a regular routine.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:00 AM) If some of the youngsters who are "maybe" folks on the rotation, like Cease, Danish, and Adams, wind up being in the bullpen by 2019 - it could turn around pretty quick. Edit: Oh, and as of right now I think there's a nonzero chance we could see Rodon out there for a stint in 2018, with how shoulder injuries go. Odds are he will pitch for the Sox in 2018.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 11:10 AM) That was a really bad, self-important speech by Franken that basically called his accusers liars. Good riddance. I have no problem with a Sen. Ellison aside from that it opens up another race for a House seat. Still, it'd be great to have the GOP seating a child molester who doesn't believe that women or Muslims should be allowed to serve in government while the Democrats are seating a Muslim who replaced a guy they forced out over sexual misconduct allegations. Really solid juxtaposition there. e: a woman has an even better effect in that regard. Should anyone really be forced out due to allegations? Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Shouldn't they be allowed to continue on until either they admit to it or proven guilty in court?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 4, 2017 -> 11:14 AM) Another solid piece by Rick Perlstein: The Elephants in the Resistance: Don’t Trust the Anti-Trump Republicans Sen. Jeff Flake and his ilk aren’t the heroes we’re looking for. Trump is a symptom, not a disease. What many people don't realize is that the reason this group is against Trump is that in most cases he is not conservative enough for them. If people don't like what Trump is trying to do, They will really go nuts if this group takes control.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 7, 2017 -> 10:45 AM) Well how long do you think it'll take to build a dominant bullpen ? You absolutely need one to be serious about contending. That means 3 or possibly 4 guys the Sox don't have yet. I know it's pretty illogical to sign RP's to more than 2 or 3 years but the bullpen is my biggest worry for when the Sox start contending. I suppose this year could be all about trying the scrap heap relievers but guys who produce like we had like Robertson, Swarzak and Kahnle are going to be very hard to find. I think they have at least a few. in the minors. Burdi will be one. Probably a couple of the current starters who don't make the rotation such as Fulmer. I think they will need maybe two at most of outside the organization.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 04:42 PM) People on twitter last night were saying Eloy and Kopech straight up for him might not even get the job done. I think he's a bigger risk than people are acknowledging. The culture shock element can't be ignored imo. Ichiro had a singular focus and a great, winning personality in addition to his talents, we'll see if Ohtani is similar. He's had a surprising number of muscle injuries for a guy so young, not to mention the ankle surgery. They need to determine if he is willing to change his training routine.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 02:40 PM) I have parents who are on medicare, and its a f***ing travesty they are going to cut it. The true travesty is the rampant medicare fraud. If they took the money from the cuts and used it to enforce the medicare rules they would probably make enough money to expand it. I've quit jobs because of what they wanted me to do with my medicare charges. I reported them and nothing happened to them, that I know of anyway.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 02:42 PM) I'm sure all of the Boomers who will be voting to cut this will grandfather themselves in to whatever changes they want to make. Well why wouldn't you?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 4, 2017 -> 11:35 AM) We've already got our first example of why it's bad to rewrite the tax code of the largest economy in the world over lunch: Passage of Senate Tax Bill Puts R&D Tax Credit in Doubt Unintended consequence of late decision to keep the corporate alternative minimum tax could be loss of some tax breaks; companies push back In their self-imposed* rush to pass this bill last week, they were hand-writing changes to the bill with no analysis whatsoever up until the last minutes. One of the consequences of this was that in buying off Sen. Johnson by giving a tax break to his family's company, they added the Corporate AMT back into the bill. The problem is, though, that they left it at 20%. Which is the same rate as the new corporate tax rate. So why bother taking tax credits and deductions at all if you're going to be paying 20% no matter what? *just like with health care, the real reason for the rush was to ram it through Congress as quickly as possible before anyone could really understand the bill and build political opposition to it. This is what happens when you only have one side pushing something through without a real attempt at a compromise solution. But to be fair, Republicans really didn't want the healthcare revisons and democrats really didn't want the tax revisions.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 01:28 PM) Thinking about it, it appears to be to potentially reset his HoF clock. Good call. The opposition to the "steroid era" seems to be calming down. If he can push the clock back he may get in when people don't care about it any longer.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:55 PM) He dosen't just support the idea, he advised Trump to do it. He's as guilty as Trump when people start dying over this. I think that should be recognized. No it's all about putting blame on one person. Like the KW vs. Hahn blame. People have a natural desire to blame someone. When it's usually someone's decision, people rarely make a totally uninfluenced (if that's a word) decision.

QUOTE (Quin @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:23 PM) Well, my friends in the IDF despise this. Going to make their jobs more difficult that's for sure.

QUOTE (WBWSF @ Dec 6, 2017 -> 12:59 PM) I just read where 53 year old Rafael Palmeiro wants to make a comeback this upcoming 2018 season. Hahn will sign him for his MLB leadership abilities. Hahn likes having a team with ex Cubs on it. Keep up with the injections and it's possible. Better living through chemistry.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 5, 2017 -> 05:03 PM) Get that shoulder fixed Kyle. Apparently, the ankle that was surgically repaired this past year is what has been giving him the most issues still. Not a good sign.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 5, 2017 -> 05:12 PM) I wouldnt even want to see it with anyone at my company. I have tickets for a 1;45 am show on Saturday. Hopefully I dont hear any spoilers on the way in. Last time as I was walking I was talking really loud so as to not hear anyone leaving, but somehow I heard "dead" and immediately thought Han Solo died. ;/ I'm going Thursday for this exact reason.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Dec 5, 2017 -> 12:28 PM) You are looking at it the wrong way. Small rural states are over represented in the Senate and in the electoral college (much less over represented in the electoral college but the bias is there). California's population is about 12% of the USA's population. Their electoral votes represent a little over 10% of the electoral college. New York has about 6% of the country's population but only 5% of the electoral college votes. Wyoming's population is about .2% of the general population but it has about .55% of the electoral college votes and this trend holds for the lower populated states. That is not what the article presented discussed. The .55% of the electoral college has a much lesser affect than the 10% obviously. But this situation allows the less populated area a representation. Could it be tweaked to be better. Probably. However, the overriding theme is that they deserve the representation that the other proposed processes would not afford.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2017 -> 12:35 PM) I believe it is every 10 years corresponding with the census. Correct.