Balta1701

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 05:42 PM) Every federal law trumps state law. It's called the Supremacy Clause. Nullification! 10th Amendment!

QUOTE (dasox24 @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 05:27 PM) Don't you like that Knoxville doesn't have tornado sirens? What is this? 1950? I feel like it's ridiculous not to have any warning systems. I didn't even know we were under a tornado warning today. I dunno, I'm not sure I've ever lived anywhere that has had a tornado siren.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 05:28 PM) As someone who has been on both sides of those cases, it hurts the company more to defend those discrimination suits individually, and it's much more beneficial to the individual to get their own separate day in court. It might be EASIER for them, but in terms of getting some kind of decent compensation, again it's getting that .48 cent recovery for your $50 dollar loss. When you throw people into a class it makes everyone the same, and we all know circumstances are never the same. Doesn't the individual also have to be able to afford his or her day in court?

The details in this article are very sketchy, but Roy Oswalt has clearly left the Phillies to head home to Mississippi after tornadoes hit the area where his family lives. Left unsaid in this article is whether or not he's been able to contact his family, although it does say that Oswalt spent a long time on the phone before a brief outing last night. That has to be a deliberate omission.

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 05:20 PM) I know it's not going to happen but I'd like to see it. And no, I don't believe putting him at 3B automatically means he'll become a basketcase because his D is subpar...he's already shown he can rake at the MLB level last year, did it while he was healthy in ST, and I expect him to continue no matter what position he plays. Treating these guys like little sallies worrying about their mental game is so overplayed in today's game...it reminds me of the people who argued that the big hurt should start in the minors in 1990 even though he raked all ST that year and easily should have made the team. The reason? They didn't want to hurt his confidence. Give me a break. He debuted in August and hit .330 with a .983 OPS in 240 AB's that year. Ultimately I think RF seems to be his home but since we're hell bent on starting Pierre every night there is no room for him there. Why not try him at 3B and see what happens? Are we worried about his confidence? First of all, I don't think he 'Raked" while he was in MLB last year. He was a better hitter than I expected, but he showed that he had some serious swing flaws that he needed to work on. Right before he was sent down, for example, he went through a 1/19 stretch where pitchers discovered that he couldn't lay off a high and inside fastball. I don't think he'd become a basketcase because his D was subpar, but the thing I'd expect to start galling him was the fact that he constantly had to move around to new positions. At some point, there simply isn't time to keep working on your hitting when you're playing your 3rd or 4th position in 2 years.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 05:19 PM) Those may be the case currently but the size of the sample suggests that they will return to their career norms as opposed to continuing this current trend. Although the writer didn't specifically say that, I believe that the writer was generally suggesting the exact same conclusion by using the BABIP numbers. Or if he wasn't, then he has no idea what BABIP means.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:52 PM) Send me a link of the "overwhelmingly in favor" stat. I don't buy that. Favorable, maybe, in a slight majority of cases because people are willing to get 75% of what they want instead of fighting for 100% of it in court. Let me ask you this...would it make sense for AT&T, large numbers of credit card companies, etc., to prefer arbitration to class action settlements if they were losing money on the choice? Anyway, I'm sure you won't like the source because it's a partisan group advocating for reform on this subject, Public Citizen has put out a number of reports on this subject suggesting the corporate arbitration winning %age is ~94%. Your first challenge on the number is going to be the fact that Public Citizen doesn't include cases which count as dismissals as wins for the challenging party, which is a main point of contention.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:47 PM) Nearly every purchase contract has this clause these days and it's because of the cost of litigating in court. You file a case, it costs the company hundreds of dollars to appear, even if it's a bulls*** claim. Multiply that by ten thousand a year and it gets pricey just to appear, let alone defend yourself, in court. The converse is just as true though...arbitration cases rule overwhelmingly in favor of the corporate interest, which is why corporations hate class action lawsuits so much, because they don't win them all of the time.

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:36 PM) I'd like to see him sent down and bring up Viciedo and force him to learn 3B, we need another real bat in our lineup If we're trying to totally destroy Viciedo's chances of ever being a successful big leaguer, moving him to yet another position is probably just about the best possible way to do it.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:40 PM) Actually this probably hurts corporations more than it helps. It's increased the cost of defending these suits enormously. Instead of taking 500 claims and consolidating them, Wal-mart or Sony or whoever is going to have to defend each and every one of them. Just because you sign a waiver doesn't mean you are signing away any right you have to make a claim. Not to mention the fact that individuals are going to get a better deal anyway because 30% of the class funds aren't going to pay the hundreds of thousands or millions in attorneys fees that were generated for the benefit of the class. Who is really all that excited about getting .48 cents anyway? Nope, because they can also insert clauses in requiring you to either submit to arbitration or give up your right to sue entirely. There's a reason AT&T had this clause.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:42 PM) Ben Bernanke I think. I got who that meant. No idea where that name for him came from.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:31 PM) Remember how no one ever said that but you? You said that it didn't matter which one you voted for, and you wouldn't be mad if a Republican beat Obama because you cast a protest vote voted for a third party candidate with no shot of winning. Both this one and Citizens United were 5-4 decisions, clearly a result of Roberts keeping his promise to build consensus and respect precedent. You don't get to complain about a decision like this and then tell me how it's not important to vote for the Democrat in the general, because 5-4 decisions go the opposite direction if 1 person on the Court is replaced.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:25 PM) Between this and Citizens United, the plutarchy is now firmly entrenched. We lose. But there was no difference between Gore and Bush;.

Different topic. Well, slightly different, since hey, a 5-4 majority in the Court couldn't be changed by having a Democrat in the White House. Al Gore would have put Roberts and Alito in there, I'm sure. The Supreme Court today effectively has put an end, forever, to the use of class action lawsuits against corporations. Corporations now have the right to have you sign a waiver giving up your right to join in a class action lawsuit as a condition of doing business with them. If Sony, for example, had this provision in their unreadable 187 page user agreement, then you could not join a class action lawsuit against them for losing your credit card information. There's really no way this does anything but screw a whole helluva lot of people. There won't be a user agreement anywhere that doesn't have you give up that right within a year.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 04:16 PM) Another great reason not to vote for Obama: http://www.cnbc.com/id/42780381 Did you get that from the Republican thread? Because I beat you. You have to admit one thing...any candidate who doesn't do this crap will lose. Especially after Citizens United.

Link

Don't worry.

Shall we all sing the phone number as a memorial?

Great, another thing I have to find a way to ignore.

2nd tornado warning of the day.

Another day off for Morel. Come on kid, need to turn that around.

QUOTE (T R U @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 02:40 PM) If the owners were like f*** it, the NFL is done EVERY owner would go off and still be a millionaire/billionaire.. the majority of the players from the NFL would be screwed I feel like a lot of them have a majority of their assets tied up in the franchises, and they're able to pay the bills yearly because of the yearly revenue. They also employ a whole lot of their family members.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 02:35 PM) why would they? In other words...you're asking the owners to pony up additional funds to the players to pay for the health benefits. Why would they do that?

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Apr 27, 2011 -> 03:18 PM) Every time Bambi says moderate, subdued, or transitory....take a drink. Bambi?

I'll believe it when I see someone convicted of something.