YASNY

When I first read the Ventura vs. Crede question, I thought only this. Robin! Without a doubt. And as for the some of the other things mentioned. Joe Crede is no Brooks Robinson. Joe Crede is no Robin Ventura. Robin Ventura is no Brooks Robinson. I DO think Santo belongs in the HOF.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 09:43 PM) But Fathom's point, which I agree with, is if the Sox were clearly looking for an upgrade at SS(even before the re-signed Uribe they said they were), why weren't the Halos contacted to see if Cabrera was available. Did something happen in the landscape of baseball that suddenly made Cabrera obtainable? I have to imagine Cabrera was expendable for all of the off-season, as LAA knew what they were going to target in the off-season. Uribe's option had to be picked up 10 days after the WS. In this case, the contract was renegotiated rather than the Sox picking up the option. Regardless, he was a day or so away from becoming a free agent. There wasn't a lot of time there for exploring the market.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 08:02 PM) Ever think that the Angels started those talks? It's possible. Or maybe he wasn't ready to trade Garland but couldn't find anything better. I usually agree with you fathom, but this time, I think you have to give KW the benefit of the doubt. That's exactly what happened. The Angels contacted KW right AFTER Uribe signed and told him they were planning on offering Cabrera.

Has anyone else noticed that Sox fans love prospects ... until they reach the majors and struggle, as most prospects usually do. Then they are garbage with no value.

QUOTE(vandy125 @ Mar 4, 2008 -> 04:32 PM) He probably was in the middle of those discussions, but IIRC the Juan signing was at a hard deadline. It was either sign him or lose him. Where would that have put those discussions if he lost Juan right in the middle of them? Uribe was at the deadline. The next day iirc, he'd have been a FA. I also very distinctly remember that after Uribe signed, the Angels commented that they were going to offer OC to the SOx. Based on that, I'd have to say no Sox/Angels negotiations were under way when Uribe signed.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 01:15 AM) I didn't live in a state where my vote would have made an effect when I voted for Nader in 2000. Indiana was going for Bush regardless of my vote. Had I lived in Michigan, where it was close until three days before the election, I wouldn't have dared. The truth is, another four years of the same party in power along the executive branch means the calcification of the Supreme Court as conservative activist for a generation. That's not something I'm willing to chance happening by protesting whether or not I think my candidate is a nice guy. I think if most people who voted for Nader anticipated the differences a Gore presidency could have offered them over the last eight years, they'd gladly switch their vote retroactively. If you really want a third party to make a change, start at the bottom. Start with local races, state races. Don't start with an election that gives you no shot to do anything other than possibly derail your own interest. However, YAS, given you are generally diametrically opposed to my political point of view, I encourage you to vote for the third party nominee of your choice . Not this time around my friend. At least, probably not. And yes, I'd like to see another conservative or two on the SCOTUS.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 06:04 PM) I wouldn't expend much energy responding to that post. Yas is smarter than that. I think maybe he's just a little tired of the overzealous Obama supporters that seem to be common all over the country right now. Obama is still in the lead, literally and figuratively. Its still his race to lose. But, PA will be huge. Really huge. WY and MS are even pretty important. I am very curious to watch what happens after PA. If one or the other candidate leaves PA with a big enough lead, it won't matter. But, if after PA they are still very close (like they are now), then its all up to the supers. And the supers depend on electability - watch the theo polls for the national. That's the key. And its why PA is far more important than just the delegates - it indicates the ability to win a major swing state. I'm not going to fool myself into thinking I can stop paying attention - I love this. I think its fantastic that so many people are so involved in this election cycle. Bingo. Yes, I was 'over the top' with my comment. But that was by design because that's how these Obama people sound to me. Gotta give you credit. You got it perfectly.

To quote that world famous scholar, Bill Murray .... "It just doesn't matter."

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 02:27 PM) Regardless of my position on it, how would you enforce that? I'd be against it, by the way. So it's ok for muslim women to have their special time because they don't want to be oggled by men, but it's not ok for heterosexual men to have their special time because they don't want to be oggled by gay men. And regardless of the details of the enforcement question, it's the principle of the question that is the issue.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:50 PM) How would you know who's gay and who isn't? Just answer the question. It's direct and to the point.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:47 PM) Character is important, sure. But at the same time, if you claim to support what Obama supports. If those issues matter to you, voting against those issues is frankly stupid. I know that we shouldn't live in a two party state. But the truth is we do, and if you want to build an independent political party, the way to do it is from the ground up, not the top down. A vote for a third party nuisance candidate for President is a wasted vote. If you don't want to vote for Clinton, just stay home then. But then don't b**** when the issues that are important to you aren't even brought up because the person you didn't like but agrees with you never got the chance to advocate for you. What's wrong with a third party vote for the explicit message of voting "NO!". If may not affect the outcome, but if more people would do so, it might wake up both parties. I've taken the course on quite a few occasions in the past. It's my way of saying I'm not happy with the choices offered. I don't regret a single vote that I cast.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:47 PM) Just making a point that Obama has the inside track. Yes, he does. No argument there. But I'm not underestimating the Clinton machine.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:43 PM) I don't think its unacceptable to have a separate gym for women. At all. Is it a bit biased? Sure. But then again, if there is demand for women-only gym time, and judging from the success of Curves, and based upon the use I see of the Women Only studio at my gym, I don't see the problem with a private university catering its facilities to meet the needs and wants of its students. I also think that nobody, not even Alpha, would have given two s***s about this if the word muslim wasn't in this story. You may very be right about Alpha, I don't know. But for you 'nondiscriminitory' democrats to be backing a discrimintory policy seems to be a bit hypocritical. How about 6 hours a week of no gays allowed in the gym? Would that be okay as well?

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:33 PM) So then you don't really care about issues then. Character is also importmant. Or lack of it, as the case may be.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:27 PM) You sound confident go bet some money http://www.bodoglife.com/sports-betting/political-props.jsp at 5/2 odds you can more than double your money. Obama is at 1/3 so you won't make much there. Just making a prediction my friend. I don't bet unless it's for the explicit purpose of having having fun. IE, an NCAA basketball pool, a night at a casino with a hard and fast limit or a night playing poker with friends. I've never placed a bet with a bookie.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:09 PM) If it happens, that would mean the party leadership is currently lying to our faces right now. Plus, you include the fact that Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. If the Republicans were able to somehow pull that sort of stunt (hypothetically of course), the Dems would be ruthlessly attacking them for doing so. There's not a good reason to seat the delegates. We are talking about the Clintons. If they need 'em and they want 'em, they'll find a way to get them seated.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 01:04 PM) I would not vote Democrat then. And I'd hope a lot of other Democrats wouldn't as well. That's a shame.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 5, 2008 -> 12:58 PM) I believe it all comes down to superdelegates. Also, Dean best hold to his promise about not seating Michigan and Florida (especially Michigan) unless he wants all s*** to break loose. I'm betting they'll be seated.

LMFAO!!!!! Reading this thread from beginning to end knowing what the results were was just f***ing hilarious. The Bike Obama supporters were so (did I say Bike? Fruedian slip.) f***ing cocky waiting for the big cities in Texas to report, and what happened? A wave of votes for Billary came in and she won by damn near 100K votes. Then the Obamaites started grasping at any straw they could so they could still feel good about things. Spin city here! And you guys talk about Fox News. LOL ... Billary is gonna get the nomination. She'll probably pick Obama as VP but it won't be enough. Too many Obama people will just be disgusted at the net result and just not vote in the general. Gotta love this. It's just too good.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 2, 2008 -> 05:14 PM) im a little drunk right now...is that good or bad It's much better to be a big drunk.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 3, 2008 -> 10:17 PM) Nope, I didnt read that. And I said ability, which they both had to be effective, of course the probability of them not being effective was much higher. I think you confused me for endorsing those players, those signings were awful. All I know is that a white sox fan should want the OF to be Quentin, Swish and Dye, because that gives us the most talent offensively IMO. Quentin is going to end up a ridiculously superior hitter than Owens. Most likely Swish should lead off at this point. I agree with you at this point. But I'm not going to be all pissed that they give Owens his shot to win the job.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Mar 2, 2008 -> 08:42 AM) http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...59619.htmlstory looks like tomorrow is the first game 3/3, 3/6, 3/8, 3/9, 3/12 Thank you very much.

.... the first couple of ST games on Comcast scheduled?

Oh the irony.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 1, 2008 -> 08:04 AM) I really doubt it was a hit and run with an 0-2 count, but if it was, it doesn't matter if it was little league, pony league the WS or spring training, it is asasnine. Committting Josh Fields to swing at a pitch almost certainly not to be a strike isn't going to teach him anything. I wasn't watching or listening to the game, but if there were 2 out, they might have sent the runner to either get in scoring position or if he was thrown out, give Fields a new slate. I think this entire f***ing discussion is asinine and I'm out of it.