Balta1701

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 02:14 PM) I think you're stretching the definition of natural. I guess it's also natural for human beings to murder people because it happens, albeit rarely. What's the strawman? A loud segment of the gay community, mostly in the entertainment industry, throw it out like being gay is 100% normal. I'm suggesting by definition it's not. Just like a month ago that guy Drex (Drex in the morning) was arguing that every man has had a gay experience in college. And OBVIOUSLY it's not everyone. It's a small minority who say these things. But it exists, which is all i'm saying. There's a reason people are pelting you on this though...it's your word choice. You're defining heterosexual to be "Normal", which in one sense it is, because it's more common...but you're implicitly (and almost explicitly) defining homosexual to be abnormal. If you wanted to just say that "a large majority of the population is heterosexual", you'd be accurate and you'd be choosing words that are sterile enough that no one would take offense. However, you're not doing so...you're using words that give a different connotation, getting an emotional reaction in response, but then falling back on trying to defend the sterile statement, while ignoring the connotation that everyone else is justly taking from your words. Calling someone part of a minority is one thing and it's not going to get a reaction if it's not a smear and it's also true. Calling someone "not normal" is going to provoke an angry response.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 01:59 PM) They could use 2011 to see what they have, wisely trade a few prospects (of which they have plenty) for some veteran help. and be right there in 2012. In fact, they probably have to trade away at least 1 veteran (Billy Butler) if they want to make room for their young guys as well. They also get out from under Gil Meche ($12) and Jason Kendall's contracts ($3.75) at the end of this year, so they do have money available if they want to spend it.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 02:08 PM) I'd like to hear from an actual gay person on this thread...anyone? This is like a bunch of hetros arguing with other hetros bout something they can't possibly understand in a real sense. Rex did chime in a few pages ago, in case you missed it.

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 01:42 PM) How long have we been saying this though? 10 years? I've gotten the impression that the Royals system right now has as much talent as it has any year since the early 2000's.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 12:56 PM) If the Royals can somehow find 1 or 2 better than average pitchers during 2011 (internally or externally), with the talent they have on the farm, I'd say they are about as well set up for 2012 as most teams in baseball. I'd say there is a very strong chance they are a going to be a team to reckon with by then. They could trade for this Zach Greinke dude, he'd be a 1 year rental but he'd give them a real shot in 2012.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 12:26 PM) Am I really not being very clear here? I'm asking why aren't there other protected classes for what I consider to be similarly situated people - classes of people that have a physical or mental trait that they cannot control. What sets a gay person apart in that respect, IGNORING the legal distinction that society created? Just looking back at the last page or so of this thread for specific examples...the physical or mental traits that you've cited, as far as I can tell, are: being overweight, or appearance issues like being red-haired or bald. First of all...when people are fired for being overweight, by my understanding it winds up being quite a complicated issue as-is. When an airline wants to require an overweight person to buy 2 tickets, it tends to wind up on the news/in court, and that's a place where that person's condition directly affects the ability of the plane to do its job. If a person is failing to get jobs because they have red hair, or are bald, etc., then that probably should be a case where they can sue the employer, unless that specifically impacts the person's ability to perform that job. Do you have better examples?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 10:29 AM) If we can get Joba and Nova back for Danks, I'd be all for that trade. It's worth noting...this would actually be a terrible deal for the Yankees. Yeah, the front end of their starting rotation would get significantly better...but they'd still be in the exact same position they are now, begging Pettitte to come back so that they can have a solid 5th starter. Captain Cheeseburger Burnett D1 Hughes Garcia/Mitre

With a few penstrokes...this policy is now gone.

Obviously vodka has its role as well.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 07:09 PM) Of course, that's not actual money. THERE ya go. :-)

QUOTE (J.Reedfan8 @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 12:22 AM) Now, can Thibs help him with that? Can the Bulls vets keep him in line? That remains to be seen. I'd say I find it highly doubtful unless he's decided on his own to get in line. It's not like he hasn't had a support system of veterans and a good coach in Denver. Billups, Karl, etc.

Must buy more whiskey...

You know what really bothers me about Kap's rant there? This was something pointed out to me a long time ago while talking to a gay person I knew. Kap asks why a gay person needs to have the right to walk around screaming "I am Gay" at every opportunity. To me, that's actually not the real question here. The way that my friend was describing it, the question was something along the lines of "why do you have to wear your homosexuality on your sleeve" or something like that. What you don't realize unless you really stop to think about it is...you're wearing your heterosexuality on your sleeve just as much. Ever show someone pictures of your kids? Or put up a Facebook post talking about how you're going somewhere with your wife? Take your family to a company party? Complain about how hard the ride to daycare was that morning? Or tell an awkward story of something that happened when you took your wife to meet your family? Come up with your own examples. Whether you realize it or not...just doing normal activities, you're holding up a big sign that says "I am heterosexual!". Most of the time, it's just not something you think about because you think it's normal. How weird would it be if every time your husband/wife called you at work, you had to deny that you were talking to them? Or when you were asked what you did over the weekend, you had to lie?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 08:48 AM) I was in college. Anyway, yeah, maybe it was a compromise. The underlying UCMJ can only be changed by the executive if the military OK's it, and its not in violation of any legislated law. DADT was a policy either set by XO and then confirmed, or set by Congressional action. Either way, I think, if Congress acted on it, then it can't be undone by another XO. Based on my reading a couple days ago that I'm not rechecking... The outright ban on homosexuals in the military was in place before DADT, and it was not changed by the establishment of DADT. That was in place as an act of Congress many years before DADT. DADT was established as an executive order, setting rules for how that act of Congress was enforced. Basically, it was supposed to prohibit the military from actively checking to find out if a person was homosexual. It never really did that and they still obviously did everything they could to actively check, but that was how it was designed; the EO was supposed to set enforcement rules.

Caufield, I know you included the phrase "NYTimes/Freakonomics" at the end, but if you're going to excerpt that long of a string of text could you please provide an actual hyperlink? Thanks.

QUOTE (since56 @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 08:28 AM) Is this closer by committee? One word answer here boys. Who is our closer? Matt Thornton.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 06:51 PM) Plus, the Vikings have a value of $531mil per year to the state. Um, you should read that article more carefully.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 06:45 PM) Dear Minnesota legislature: Option #1 - Expand TCF stadium, update the field for heating, add luxury boxes, relax the alcohol ban for pro sports there. Option #2 - Build a new stadium for the Vikings that will cost twice as much. Option #3 - INTRODUCING, YOUUUUR L.A. VIKINGS!!!! Dear Knightni: Solve our $6.2 billion (and growing) budget deficit and we'll take care of the Vikings. Sincerely; the Minnesota state legislature.

The FCC today passed its rules allowing network providers to selectively charge and ban content based on where it is coming from, and allowing wireless network owners even more leeway to control or charge for the content flowing over their network. Here is the reaction of Senator Franken:

Keep drinkin'!

I agree, bad time to think about that.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 05:22 PM) Based on fraud from unique situations like Enron/Worldcom/Madoff/etc? Some of us would call the entire financial system a fraud.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 05:10 PM) But are they going to get paid? Seems dumb for the NBA to hold the draft, start the lockout and then be on the hook for the millions-a-year rookie contracts. No players get paid (or even signed to contracts) once the lockout starts.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 05:01 PM) I'm sure that if you were to take your SS contributions to date at a 2% rate of return, and compare it to your private investments you'd still be better off with the loss. Actually that depends a whole lot on whether or not you hit one of the major expansions. The blue line here is the one worth focusing on...that's the raw, inflation adjusted S&P 500. Right now, in inflation adjusted terms, the S&P is sitting right around where it first hit in 1998, so over that 12 year period, you'd have had to substantially beat the market to come out ahead of that rate. However, if you put a dollar in at the bottom of the 1980 recession, it would have expanded massively. Over a full lifetime, yes, the market has on average beaten bond returns, no one will dispute that, but over decadal timescales, it can hover or even drop. Over 50 years, a 2% annual rate of return on money gets you a multiple of about 2.7.

QUOTE (SnB @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 04:08 PM) pre-commercial, sometimes you would be forced to go there w/ family and whatnot. post-commercial, that is one of the only restaurants I will make a fuss about not going to if I'm in a big group. The commercial we are talking about was the gilligan's Island parody. We were at a bar w/ all the different march madness games on at once and that commercial was on every game, so you heard it roughly every 5 minutes.