YASNY

Two words: Washed up. I'd rather have a couple of guys on the upswing of their careers than a mediocre player on the way down.

Guys, I ran across this column this morning. You older guys will understand why it touched me so much. Enjoy.

Well, now's the time for Ozzie to find out who can do what while on the basebaths. There's nothing wrong with being over aggresive now.

Great story Texsox. I agree with you that no one should touch your kids. I've been in too many situations through my school days to where teachers and/or administrators had certain prejudices that influenced how they handled things. One of my kids came home from school one day telling me that he had been threatened with a wooden paddle by a teacher. I walked in the school the next day, after my son was in class. I went to the principle. I told her in no uncertain terms that if any adult lays his hands on my kids or intentionally strikes them in any way, that person would answer to me. Man or woman, I didn't give a s***. A full grown adult striking a 7 year old child is much worse than a man hitting a woman. And I would have made good on my threat. Of course, I would have gone to jail as well, but that wouldn't have prevented me from protecting my child.

I personally like to have the freedom to choose what I want to watch or hear, but as Texsox says, there have to be some limits placed and some common sense used in the placing of those limits. I'll give you an example of how community standards are set in a democracy. Right now, I live in a dry county. No liquor stores or bars anywhere in the county. The next county over is, however, "wet". Yet, that county does not allow the sale of liquor or beer or wine on Sunday. I do not happen to agree with any of these restrictions. However, I am in the minority, as they have been voted on several times. That's the way the majority of the populace wants it, so that's the way it is. As it should be. They standards or restrictions put upon the airwaves is also, theoritically controlled by the majority. They will stay in place until the majority becomes the minority. If you want things changed, work toward that end. Work to change the opinion of enough people to your point of view. b****ing about it accomplishes nothing.

A target is a target. Factory or individual or tank or whatever. Sometimes, when you take out a taget, innocents are casualties. It's a fact in war. You used the example of a single soldier among a group of civilians. At first, I would say no, you don't take that group of civilians out to kill that one soldier. However, if I am holding an RPG launcher and that soldier starts shooting at me, those people are toast. You have to put things into a certain perspective. If the elimination of an enemy private worth the killing of 25 civilians. Common sense says no. But, would I have bombed a dinner club in Berlin if I knew Rommel was enjoying a meal there? Yes, I would have. Hitler? Hell yes. Sargeant Shultz? Nope. You said both sides knowing killed civilians. That would be a true statement for any war ever fought in the history of mankind, I would guess. I disagree with saying those civilians are targeted. They are not the target. The are an example of the horrors of war, but not the target. In your drug lord example. If they crossed the border in the US, send the DEA. If the DEA felt they needed an Apache to take them out without getting killed, by all means get one out there. However, we couldn't cross in Mexico and do that, so it's a moot point.

Now there's a stunner!

Read carefully sir. I never said a Bush defeat would be considered a victory for Bin Laden. I said it would be considered a victory by Bin laden. Huge difference.

I agree. I don't feel Bin Laden should influence in any way who we pick as our leaders.

I am stating a fact here. I believe that if George Bush loses, then you will see on the news Islamic radicals dancing in the streets. I believe it will happen. Pure and simple. It's not a pro Bush statement. It's not an anti Kerry statement. Stop twisting my words and jumping to conclusions like I am questioning somebody's patriotism or supporting one party over the other. In fact, cw ..... I will probably vote against Bush in the upcoming election because I am afraid of the Patriot Act, and deathly afraid of Patriot Act II. So stop referring to either party as "my party". I am not so ignorant as to limit myself to the philosophies of one and only one party. I have stated that I consider myself a moderate with conservative leanings. I have never claimed to be a Republican, nor a Democrat. I claim only to be an American citizen.

Weber has already denied any interest in the job. Rumors of Keady leaving Purdue is a major shock!

I think the Cubs decided that Cruz would not ever do anything Chicago and that he needed a change of scene. They got a pretty decent LH pitcher in Pratt, as he led the IL in K's last year. The 2B the got was the 40th overall pick a few years ago, so he may have some upside as well. I can see Mazzone making Cruz an ace, but would he have ever achieved that with the Scrubs? I think the Cubs they better move him while he still had some tangible value.

Which is why I qualified that by sayins "I was led to believe". That's what I get for listening to a young Cardinal fan.

Oh, and by the way, Schoney torn a fingernail on his pitching hand during the 3rd inning that was still bleeding an hour after the game. That might have caused him some difficulty "feeling" his pitches.

You guys need to get Soxtalk gear so you vcan identify each other.

Mark's pitching very effectively this spring. Either Mark or Esteban have to sstep up and anchor the rotation, so this looks promising.

They're GREAT!

I foresee a slick DP combo of Uribe and Harris in '05. But for this year, I think Willie's gonna hang onto the job.

Sounds like it's time for an new nickname: Jim "Prime Time" Bullard.

Let me check on their off-season won/loss pct. and I'll get back to you.

You almost have to go with Reed by default. As impressive as Sweeney has been in spring training, Reed just had a monster year last year. Though, I did consider Honel.

Yep. It's a retread of the article Roger's wrote for the Trib.

I really sympathize for them.

It was two weeks ago that we found out Uggie wanted to play here, and we haven't heard the first inkling of a rumor that the front office was even considering signing him. He's too good of a pitcher. You new someone was going to. I'd rather it be the Kitties than the Twinkies.

Don't you the strategy of that? Keeping Sweeney would allow the Sox to lose him just before he hits his prime at age 25. Then they'd never have to pay him big bucks.