YASNY

QUOTE(ChWRoCk2 @ May 5, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) Shes not bad for a schoolteacher. I'd work on her lesson plan with her.

Nice job, Jim. I'll just say I like Dos Equis in the green bottle with lime. That works for me.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:44 PM) Well, he might get an extra :headshake No, he would have gotten the same treatment that Rush got.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:35 PM) Bucause the point is altogether not the touchstone truth people want to make it out to be. Author Mae Ngai of Columbia University is a recognized authority on the history of illegal immigration. And guess what? It doesn't start with the Reagan-era amnesty, or any time near that which you would consider modern. Her first book, Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America, 1924-1965 (2004, Princeton University Press) gets into how the restrictive US immigration laws set the stage for the illegals epidemic. She's writtten a lot on illegal Chinese immigration during the Cold War years, and is working on something now that goes back as far as 1870 to see evidence of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration has always existed, I'll give you that. Now, let's talk about numbers. Twelve million? That number was probably not achieved in the first 200 years of the existence of this nation.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:41 PM) I won't rush to Pat Kennedy's defense. Whether he was drunk or whether it was the pain medication he is apparently addicted to, when I hear he has no recollection of the events of the day – including getting out of bed. . . getting in his car . . . crashing his car – I just have to :headshake :headshake Still, if it was anybody with an ® after his name ....

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:32 PM) I just see this new Watergategate (or would it be Fornigate? Or how about Watergate 2: Electric Boogaloo?) as a bit different. They were using the brothel to elicit political favors. What Clinton did with the lying was pretty bad. This one is just as well because it was pandering political favors. Perhaps the GOP should just stay away from the Watergate. They seem to have really bad experience there. Was that intentional?

I wish the best for Marte. But I don't miss him coming out of the Sox bullpen.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:27 PM) The Watergate Hotel -- Seems to be Republican kryptonite. Clinton just f***ed some random women but he never tried to claim the 'higher' moral road of family values while doing it, YAS. Therein lies the funnier difference. Yeah, what Clinton did made him a scumbag but he was doing it for his personal gratification. These guys were doing this with the assistance of lobbyists to get political favors. Plus, many of them are anti-porn, anti-sex, pro-family values sorts and engaging in this behavior. Funnier still when you see that the limo company is a DHS contractor and has gotten millions from the government (and the CEO has a 62 page rap sheet) As I said, I have no problem with him getting head. Just the lying.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:22 PM) True, but the alleged special treatment would have been tthe subject of today's news cycle I assume. You assume that because it's suits your position. If this would have been Dick Cheney, it would have been trumpeted all over this board.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:20 PM) Seems like sex is still the one thing that can lay low the mighty. Which, when it comes down to it, shouldn't even be part of the equation ... for Clinton or anybody else. That should have been handled between Bill and Hillary. Bill never would have had to said "I have never had sexual relations with that woman." I didn't mind him getting a blow job. I did have issue with him blatantly lying about it.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 5, 2006 -> 03:19 PM) Kennedy would have been the lead story of the day if not for the Goss resignation. It would be troubling to find he did get special treatment and was not administered a breath test. Kennedy is on his way into drug rehab at Mayo. Ah, but this Kennedy thing hit yesterday.

How Clintonesque.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 5, 2006 -> 01:21 PM) Well they were here legally and documented... The point conveniently gets left out of the discussion.

I find it curious that every newsflash about Rush hits this board in a New York minute, yet the Patrick Kennedy fiasco (Yes, the esteemed congressman from Rhode Island and the son of Sen. Edward Kennedy) gets nary a word. Like father, like son?

QUOTE(fathom @ May 5, 2006 -> 08:53 AM) And that's what I said all along. Don't abandon it, but just be a little wiser in when he goes, etc. Against pitchers with a quick delivery and a strong throwing catcher, Pods has had no chance this year. You can still distract a pitcher without attempting a steal. Pods could go 0 for the rest of the season on the bases, but pitchers will still concentrate to hold him on base. What we can't have happen is for Pods to be picked off once or twice a week, especially when it's just due to him having too big of a lead. Pods still has to find his comfort zone on the basepaths. If he never goes, he'll never find it. I don't like the way he's been running either, but I know how valuable his intimidation by speed can be.

QUOTE(fathom @ May 5, 2006 -> 08:46 AM) Station to station baseball failed because we had s***ty pitching. Again, I never said that Pods shouldn't be going. I have no clue why Ozzie doesn't try to utilize the hit-and-run more with Iguchi at the plate. He seems a lot more comfortable doing that than he is protecting the runner. I know we've improved our pitching and our defense, but you just can't totally abandon the threat of Pods running. It messes with opposing pitcher's head and puts pressure on the defense. You get the 1B holding him on, infielders cheating toward 2nd and moving on the pitch, the CF coming in to back up the throw. There is lot more to consider than just his success rate.

QUOTE(fathom @ May 5, 2006 -> 08:41 AM) Yes and no. Iguchi's a much better hitter when he's not trying to protect Pods at the plate. Even if Pods isn't active on the bases, pitchers will still pay a lot of attention to him. I'm not saying Pods shouldn't try to steal. However, I think he needs to cut back on his aggressiveness on the bases until he can either regain his speed or his confidence. With our home run hitters at 3-4, it's not wise to be making outs trying to steal 2nd (unless there's two outs with Iguchi up). If Pods never goes, then we are back to playing station to station baseball that failed year after year in the Maggs, Lee, Thomas era.

QUOTE(Be Good @ May 4, 2006 -> 09:57 PM) I think Daly's exaggerating a little. Wanna bet?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ May 5, 2006 -> 07:59 AM) Seems pretty obvious to me, and his results seems to indicate he is right. But there are a lot of people on this board (and Sox fans in general) who don't seem to see that big picture. I talked about the big picture all last year. It fell upon deaf ears. Deja Vu.

QUOTE(fathom @ May 5, 2006 -> 08:32 AM) Great post. When you add someone like Thome to your lineup, you're not trying to play small ball. Still, you need the threat of Pods running to be part of the equation.

*Yawn*

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ May 2, 2006 -> 09:47 PM) Exactly. They're no different in that regard to any other group of immigrants, no matter how far back you go. There is one huge difference. The vast majority of the other immigrants were here legally.

There is no curse of the Black Sox. There never was a curse of the Black Sox. This was something talking heads invented last year during the Sox run.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ May 5, 2006 -> 12:48 AM) Well you're just wrong then. :finger

I still gotta go with Iguchi's play.