YASNY

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:49 AM) Oh that's crap and you know it. I have no problem with you expressing your opinion about Mariotti--IN THE END, HE'S JUST A WRITER, DIG?--the only problem I have is the inferences you make about me because I played, admittedly, devil's advocate here. I agree that he's a s***-stirrer, but in this town with these freakin' owners (save for Jerry who has redeemed himself twice-over), I kinda like that. Maybe we need more s***-stirrers in this town. And regardless of what everybody says, he has been behind the Sox for two years now. I don't know what more everybody wants. Doesn't mean that everybody should start liking Mariotti, just means let's get our facts straight. That's all. Inferences about you? What, you can't handle someone telling you to 'get real'? That's about the only thing I can see that inferred anything. And no, it's not crap. It's exactly what happened.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:37 AM) Ya know? I give up. I try and present an objective look at this and the pile-on begins because how dare I not jump on the bandwagon where Mariotti is the anti-Christ when it comes to the Sox. You're right: Ozzie was totally right to say what he said, Ozzie never does anything inappropriate or unbecoming for a World Series champ, Mariotti is simply lying 100% of the time and I am a traitor and an impostor for even suggesting otherwise. And of course I know nothing about what I'm saying, seeing that I read the column every day. God knows what you people think of Bill Simmons. Anyway, you guys win. I'm a traitor, a sheep and a lunatic and not only probably Mariotti himself trolling, but probably a Cubs fan, too. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I have WMDs to top it all off. Carry on. Forget I even posted. You're not the only one that reads this slimeball regularly. If he's talking about baseball, I read it. I happen to have a complete and totally 100% different opinion than you about this tool. You expressed yours, then get upset when I express mine. I never said Ozzie was guilt free. I just know that Mariotti is nothing more than a low class s*** stirrer.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:03 AM) Good for you Gregory Pratt, and what are you doing? Following me around? Take your own advice. Knock it off! We are getting sick and tired of this crap and it will come to a halt one way or another. You choose how it comes to a stop.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:35 AM) Naa.. I talked with him for a long time last night. The last thing he wanted was to hit anyone. He's just got too much going on his world right now. A shame. Wasted talent. I'm sorry to hear this Steff. Sincerely.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:30 AM) Okay, I'll give you that--he was over-the-top in that if he's characterizing all Sox fans as that type. But that incident was a black-eye on our park and our team. Especially since there were two. I'm starting to wonder though: are we immune to criticism? Is that what we think here? Immune to critcism? Have you read some of the s*** thrown around here at various Sox personalities? C'mon. Get real. Mariotti's a tool of the lowest order.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:28 AM) He's pretty sure he's going to be. No comment.. That's a shame. But then, LaRussa might not have bought his unintentional remark. I can see LaRussa cutting ties for that.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 11:25 AM) LMAO.. shut up. He does suck that bad - which is why he's sitting at the Ritz with his bags packed as I type this. He's been released?

QUOTE(Contreras @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 09:43 AM) I made a yahoo address ([email protected]) and sent it. You can support Jay's crusade to have every Chicago sports franchise leave the city, too: [email protected] Sorry, but I wouldn't be bragging about that email.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 12:27 AM) I disagree but whatever. To be totally honest I was never real high on his as a prospect, as a matter of fact I really didn't see him as much until he actually got here and I got a chance to see him play everyday, he's totally grown on me. I am about as impartial as it comes concerning Sox players and I gotta say the only problem I've had with his defense is his missing cutoff man, other than that he's been pretty remarkable out there. I know in one particular recent incident of BA 'missing' the cutoff man on a throw to plate, the cutoff man (Konerko?) was late getting into position to take the throw and the throw went on through to the plate. I don't remember which game, but I noticed it as the play was happening.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 04:01 PM) And I agree, unless the guy we're getting is named Albert Pujols. But remember everyone, you want Crawford, you WILL be giving up McCarthy. Not necessarily. There is always the possibility of a 3rd team in the deal, or if TB accepted Garland or Garcia, then they could flip him for a couple of good young pitchers to say the Dodgers or whoever. On problem with the second scenario is that we might have to see JG or FG with Detroit of in the playoffs at some point.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 06:48 PM) we couldve gotten Jason Johnson from the Indians for practically nothing. We really blew that. Yeah everyone says well he's like 1-7 in his last 8 starts. so. so. Why, pray tell, would we want someone that can't cut it in this division?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 11:23 PM) I think using the word is lame and boring. And yeah, it still has a negative connotation, and yeah the same people that say things are "gay" still refer to gay people as gay - so yeah, I'd say there's still a negative connotation to it. I can't say I care. But people who constantly refer to things that are boring as "gay" I just generally find to be well, boring. As expected, I must say. Thanks for your response. Also, for the record, there was nothing 'tongue in cheek' about my use of the word 'esteemed'. You are highly respected by myself and the vast majority of Soxtalkers. To Rowand44: I totally see where you are coming from. But ... How the term is intended by the user is not the problem. It's how the word is interpretted by those that hear or read it. You'll get a wide variety of reactions from use of those words. From a personal standpoint, I won't take such a hardline stance against the terms in the future. From the stanpoint of policing Soxtalk, I'm afraid I have no choice but to continue to enforce current policy, as has been discussed and agreed upon by the powers that be.

I've been reading this thread and noticed something that has been mentioned a few times. It's the contention that the current interpretation of the terms *** and gay are not what they once were. In other words, the terms do not necessarily mean homosexual any more. In the past, I thought some of the younger members used that argument just to justify using the words here on the site and to be honest, I didn't buy into it. However, I now have to step back and take another look at that. Sometimes, the meaning of words do evolve over time. The prime example I can think of is "______ sucks!" As I was growing up, that meant only one thing ... that the target of the slur was homosexual. It has since evolved to be the equivilent of saying "______ stinks!" I'd be interested in hearing some reactions to this. Especially, that of the esteemed Mr. Kickass.

This game was one of those bizarre occurances of coincidence surrounding the number 20 Date: June 20, 2006 Score: 20-6 Anniversary: 20th since the Sox fired LaRussa Record: 20 games over .500 Kinda weird. Of course, I realized all this due to hindsight, which they say is 20-20 vision.

So the gasoline (Mariotti) hit the flame (Ozzie) and there was an explosion. I'm shocked!

They need to scrap this warning stuff altogether. The game got along fine for 100 years without it.

Dennis DeYoung and the Panozzo brothers from Styx at the Arena Bowl on 103rd & Cicero in Oak Lawn back when Styx was still on the the Wooden Nickel label. They hadn't hit it big nationally at that time, but "Lady" was a local hit and I had seen Styx perform a few times. I also met Mark Farner from Grand Funk Railroad in a bar he was playing at in Paducah KY after GFR ended. And Hank Williams, Jr. fwiw.

Now that you've all taken your shots at the original post in this in this thread, I want to thank minors for posting it. I love the quote by Anne Graham and totally agree with her. I also believe this nation was founded based on Christian morals and law, but not necessarily as a "Christian nation".

I heard that Shurholz said he was not trading Smoltz.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 09:59 AM) For the love of God Yas... you know this is no place for common sense!! Bias - one sided misguided idiotic bias - is all that's allowed here. What was I thinking?

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 09:13 AM) I think whats being lost here, is the fact this guy just made a WHOPPING $7 Million Bucks! and he was drafted in the 5th ROUND! I see why now that Selig is upset about this. This "signing" is a much bigger deal than it initially seems. This has the chance to change the way the draft is run now .... The Sox signing of Borchard was just as skewed.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 08:39 AM) Um... I think maybe the reason there is so much bad news is that... IT'S A WAR! It's more than that. How many "Heroic Soldier" stories have you seen in the media? Do we not have any heroic individuals or squads over there? I'm sure we do, but you'd never know it based on media coverage. The liberal media does not want to glorify anything or anybody associated with the war in any way. Watch some WWII newsreels and see how the media portrayed that war effort, as compared to the current one. Compare the amount of coverage Abu Grahib received to the death of Zarqawi. The coverage is so liberal agenda slanted it's ridiculous. If you can't see it, it's because you don't want to.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 07:53 AM) LMAO!!!!!

QUOTE(MSHAWKS @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 09:24 AM) So does this mean they're capo regimes now, like Tessio and fat Clemenza? If I told you that, I'd have to kill you.

The bodies have been found. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13432770/