Balta1701

Well, Youk gets one back.

Well that absolutely could have been worse. We can beat Santana. ERA close to 6.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 11:38 PM) Awesome. I'm excited for this. Going to check this out on Sunday night. I assume it is still scheduled for like 10:30 PM PST? Yes. Lucky PST folks. The first message will take about 15 minutes, so we'll hear from it by 10:45 PST.

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 05:25 PM) We'd all have to want to pay more taxes first. (No we wouldn't, but that's another argument).

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 02:10 PM) I'm going to shut up after this. Bottom line, anyone who believe that extremists speak for an entire population do not know enough people in that population. Anyone who believe the few people they see on TV speaking out on an issue speak for anyone else besides themselves risk a huge mistake. From politics to religion, from sports to art, no large groups are that in step with each other. Balta can try and lump me in with the groups we see on TV all he likes, but I sincerely hope that no one else does. I have been very clear that I support getting government out of the business of marriage. That the people involved should decide what is, and is not, a marriage. I do not believe I have to wave a sign or be on TV for my opinion to be validated. When a liberal politician wants to take away my guns, he is not speaking for me. When a liberal politician wants to extend abortions to the third trimester, he is not speaking for me. When my state senators speak out against gay rights, drilling in Alaska, or a myriad of other things, they are not speaking for me. I shouldn't have to constantly point that out. And the question winds up being...which of those are important enough for you to do something...like vote. It's not just the extremists on TV. There's a reason why we think of "religious people" in this country as overwhelmingly anti gay...it happens to be true. Throwing up your hands and saying "Not me" and then following it up with "I can't figure out why the media portrays religious people as gay-hating" and "I can't figure out why young people don't flock to the church these days", as has happened in this thread...is a wonderfully ironic combination.

A STRIKE!!

QUOTE (Caesar @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 07:45 PM) Well Hawk, he doesn't have his best stuff nearly enough. Get the bullpen up. He'll have to give up a 10 spot before the bullpen gets this game this early.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 07:45 PM) Can I get a quick recap, bad Gavin or bad luck? Up to this point. He's getting booed and deserves it. Back to back walks, stupid HBP on Trout.

STOP F***ING AROUND FLOYD

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 10:22 AM) I seriously wonder if some of these big contract guys are too comfortable with Ozzie as the manager because they know they're never going to be benched. I think they also never got challenged to work hard in the offseason/spring and were assumed that they knew how to get themselves ready.

QUOTE (Caesar @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 07:41 PM) Seriously, do they practice that or are our players just stupid? That one was entirely Youk's mistake. Youk has to run him back before throwing that ball.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 07:41 PM) The Sox have been f***ing up rundowns for as long as I can remember, I thought that was just an Ozzie thing. Then you didn't pay attention earlier this season. The Sox getting them right was a hallmark of Ventura's team. It was night and day from Ozzie...almost as if they hadn't practiced it correctly since 2003.

QUOTE (Caesar @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 07:40 PM) This team sucks at rundowns. No they don't. Guys who went through training camp with Ventura have done a great job at that. Youk did not.

Normal frustrating Gavin Floyd first inning...sigh.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 01:51 AM) When would we find out if anyone claimed Fontenot? If he passes through waivers, you should only know it if someone happens to leak it. There are 47.5 business day hours after the player is put on waivers for any team to put a claim in on him unless the rules changed under the last CBA. Once a claim is put in on a player, the 47.5 hour clock restarts for a team to either trade him or to pull him back. I don't believe Saturday/Sunday count as business day hours.

Hitting Trout? Seriously. He'll be on 3rd if he stays in the game.

Really, no one else cracked up at Hawks "it's all good"?

Its all good!

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 07:39 PM) 25 seconds in it says 0 margin for error And that's a slogan in there for how it sounds to the public, not an actual estimate of the likelihood of failure. Technically there has to be some margin for error since 2 centimeters would make no difference, if that's how it was considered.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 10:00 PM) The lesson it teaches is guilty people are prosecuted and punished, not innocent. And no, the players would not suffer the most. There are a lot of companies, and individuals whose paychecks are directly tied to the program. There are vendors who supply services and equipment. Think of all the people who work directly and indirectly for PSU football. The businesses who benefit on gameday. Look at the economic impact that having a team means to a community. It is way more than the players. And Tex, that's why they didn't get the death penalty. You're forgetting the other people who stood by here. The entire Penn State community assumed that everything was fine with tht program because it reused Paterno to do the right thing. They failed to do the top level thing in the NCAA book, promoting a culture of compliance. Instead, they created a culture where Paterno was bigger than everything and deliverately ignored NCAA and Federal compliance and oversight requirements in te process.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 07:47 PM) A leader of a group states away is on the news, how can I change that? Has your University made a statement about CFA? Who are they letting speak for them? Why is the default position supporting CFA? Because SOME churches and SOME religious leaders support them? There is diversity in teaching within "religions". Abortion, capital punishment, marriage, day to worship, dietary rules, customs, communion, rites, rules for priesthood, attire while worshiping, I can go on and on. When a news story quotes a Catholic who is holding a vigil because the state is executing someone and he claims that we shall not kill, and that includes capital punishment (the Catholic Church's official position) that doesn't reflect most protestant religions, and doesn't even reflect some Catholic's position. Is America really that unknowing to think that ALL people who are religious believe and think the same way? So obviously, the answer is to do nothing, be silent, let the hatemongers be the only religious voices who are ever heard, and continue to be dumbfounded when people lump religion together with the Chick Fillhators and leave it out of their lives.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 07:03 PM) Just can't accept the fact that he covered up child rape for the betterment of his program. Just keep trying to save his name, even though it will never happen at this point. All of you can go f*** yourselves for completely missing what's important in all of this. Also, good luck with the appeal. LMAO. This is one of those cases where every time you defend him...you put this story back on the front pages.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 07:07 PM) I agree. I felt sad for her. I was just pointing out the tears were poignant as she sat in the corner on the floor crying. I'm surprised nobody consoled her. She should be proud. I guess it's gold or nothing in Ruskieville still. Assuming it was the same girl...after the balance beam, her coach tried to come over to her and she pushed him away.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 07:02 PM) But I keep saying over and over I am for gay rights. I want all the things you suggest in your second paragraph. I just said I do rank my preferences: 1.) Man/woman marriage because without it there is no population. 2.) gay marriage; people can do what they want to do in America as long as it is not a criminal act. I want them to have the same rights, but at the same time, why can't I support traditional marriage as well? And even make it known that is my preference considering I am for all the things you state. Let me ask it this way...do you think that same sex marriage should be illegal? Should your "preference" be codified in to law? I mean, I prefer heterosexual marriage for myself also, as I happen to be heterosexually married. But the way the laws of this country, and frankly many of the people of this country (not all, just the gay-hating ones) treat gay people sickens me. My whole point a moment ago was...if you're a religious person, and you believe that gay people should have the right to get married, even if it isn't something you "prefer"...then you're letting the people who hate gays speak for you.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 06:39 PM) Good question. It takes a news crew to approach my priest however for him to comment on anything. The news here won't touch religious issues. I know my priest would be against the hate in the air. This may sound naive of me, but don't some of the CFA appreciation day patrons merely support the CEO's stance on traditional marriage? I mean I am for gay marriage and gay rights, but I do prefer the man/woman thing because of the fact this is how life is formed. Without men/women relations there are no kids and no regeneration of the human race. So my point is I am for the CEO's position on man/woman marriage, but I also support gays' right to marry. If I had to rank them 1-2, the traditional man/woman marriage would definitely top my list. Does that make me bad? Frankly, yes. It doesn't impact you in any way whether or not gay people can get married. No one is going to force you to get gay married, no one will force your church to get gay married, why do you get to impose your "preference" on a group of people you're not part of? That is what all of this is about. Someone's "Preference" is not a good reason to deny people the same rights you or I have. And that doesn't even count the multitude of rights that the lack of marriage denies to that group. Why do you think that a gay couple shouldn't be able to visit their partner in the hospital? Why should they be denied death benefits given to straight couples? Why shouldn't they have the same right not to testify against their spouse in court that a straight couple gets? There are some 1100 different rights at the federal level conferred on to married couples, in addition to hundreds more at the state level.