Balta1701

I don't know if I've ever seen not only that many personal fouls on a single play...but the crowd react as strongly to all 3 of them.

Arizona defense, hi again.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 04:36 PM) Because we need, and will get, a left handed power bat. Vlad's OPS over the last 4 years .901 Thome's (excludes time w/Dodgers) .933 Going to 4 years is the key there...Thome is simply older, and more likely to be down this year.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 02:29 PM) did you look at the date of that article? I just assumed it had to be sarcasm.

Patriots first play defense, meet the Saints first play defense.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) I don't think anyone out there has high expectations for 2010. Define "High expectations". This team still ought to win the division.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 07:56 AM) and is going to lose his job at both ESPN and ABC, along with any other major affiliate. Craig James is going to become a nobody beyond this season, especially when calls get traced to his cell phone at the exact times that Leach said they were. I still say Leach comes out smelling like roses in this, and he goes on to coach a C-USA or Big East program that needs help. As a semi-Orange fan, I hope he ends up there, because he could run the table in the Big East each and every year. Doesn't it say something that UT wound up scrambling for a coach and they had no interest at all in Leach?

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) Dang right we do. We kick 'em out of school if they're Godless commies and do not recite the Pledge of Allegiance. I walk around around and make certain to hear them say every word. I also start the week replaying the school talk by Obama and daily ask the kids what does Obama want you to do today? Your state is also about to try to convince all the students in the country that McCarthy was right.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 03:01 PM) Nothing like exempting unions from paying thier fair share when they try and tax 'Cadilac' plans. WHy don't they just come out and change it to 'all Democrats are exempt from paying anything more for the first five years'. http://tinyurl.com/ygmg24h There's actually quite a logical reason for giving the unions a couple years exemption; because union contracts tend to last multiple years, you're giving the unions and the businesses a chance to take that into account in their next set of contract negotiations. That's the whole idea of the tax anyway; it's to make it less profitable for companies to sell high-cost plans that keep pushing HC costs higher. What's kind of impressive is that the Dems are still keeping a tax that hits a large number of unions because it is good policy, even if its terrible politics.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 02:48 PM) Let's hope this is true: http://www.nationalreview.com/onthenews/?q...DliZjQ2M2M0OGI= Keep up the good work Supposedly video has been posted of him since then and his followers have denied he was killed.

2006 without even a second thought. How do you predict that the pitching staff would fall off that badly?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 12:10 AM) That's a good point, too. But, does it take an aircraft carrier? It is a good point that we "lead" in situations like this, I guess... but then again, it takes away resources from an already thin military. Quite frankly, yeah, it often does take an aircraft carrier. One other thing to think about is utility. Let's say I had a humanitarian agency dedicated to responding to the world's crises on a massive scale, with everything the military ever winds up needing. It gets used for what, maybe 10% of its total time? 5%? The rest of the time, you're funding a relief agency that sits around doing nothing...or, they decide, more likely "There's lots of other places we can do good" so they go into Africa, Asia, wherever, and start rebuilding on a regular basis there. Then, an earthquake hits, their resources already in that place are knocked out, and the other resources are scattered around the world. One other reason why the military is pretty useful in this matter is...it has something to do with the otner 95% of its time.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 05:18 PM) re: the meals on wheels comment: leaving the Democrat part out, our military is not built to provide "relief efforts". That much I agree with, no matter who is in charge. I wonder if there should be a creation of some sort of meals on wheels type of military organization so that they actually could be effective at this sort of thing. Isn't that what americorps is or should be? I think that the military has a number of advantages that no other group could possibly match. They're positioned around the world with, in large numbers, with many bases for logistical support and direct shipments from the U.S., with equipment unlike any other organization. The types of things the Navy has, carrier groups and landing craft, are simply perfect for these kinds of incidents. They carry large numbers of things like helicopters that can be used for moving supplies and evacuations. They have large medical facilities and supplies. Landing craft can land on beaches when the airport or harbor has been destroyed and render aid and supplies and evacuations. Carrier groups and landing craft groups can purify and generate clean drinking water in large amounts. And there's really no where in the world that isn't within a few days sailing of a U.S. carrier group at most times. Going even beyond the Navy, who else has the heavy lifting capacity of the air force? Who else can take over the police functions of a state/city after its government has been destroyed other than people with big guns? Americorps couldn't do it, not without the resources of the Navy or air force. It does seem like these events happen often enough that the military ought to be game-planning for them. For all I know they might be; it's not that hard for us to guess where the areas on Earth that are at moderate to high seismic risk are and say "come up with a plan to render aid here".

Sigh. Quite a collection today. Obviously, you can guess where that one comes from. And a response to a caller disagreeing: Tampons in your ears? People seriously think of things like that, and then say it, and get rich on it? Oh, and I might have missed this one. Anyway, here's Beck. Audio at link if you don't like the .... And here's an actual elected Rep., Steve King (R-Ny). The money quote is him wanting to deport people to be relief workers. ...Sigh....

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 03:05 PM) Someone refresh my memory, did the networks do a telethon for the Tsunami on '04? NBC ran it on its family of networks.

Link

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) The Tigers offense is worse than the White Sox, but their pitching staff could end up being better. Verlander Porcello Scherzer Galaragga, Bonderman, Willis, Robertson. If Scherzer shows development, that could be a promising front 3 with an ace at the top and a potentially good 21 year old #2 (who is still seriously young though). The back end of that rotation though...p-u.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 01:43 PM) SOMEHOW, Detroit found a way to free up $14 million for Valverde when they've blown tens of millions on Bonderman, Sheffield, Renteria, Robertson, Dontrelle Willis, Carlos Guillen and Magglio Ordonez (more for 2009 and being stuck with him for '10, too). You do realize that the "Somehow" you quote there was "Trade one of the game's better young hitters and your #2 starter for prospects, let your closer (37/38 sv. opp), your grindy starting 2b, a quality setup man, and an OF and SP that you traded for midseason walk". I literally can't even come up with a comparison from the Sox for what we'd be talking about giving up. It'd be something like dealing Danks and Beckham for prospects, letting Jenks walk for nothing, letting maybe Teahen walk for nothing, letting Garcia walk for nothing, and then losing a couple other relievers while you're at it.

MANILOW!!! (SHAKES FIST)

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 11:32 AM) Well I'm glad I went long SEF then. But I still don't see the markets selling off as intensely as you project. Barring a serious, probably international event, there's no reason for a huge selloff to really start until the Fed starts yanking out its supports. Its inflated the stock market as a bubble it can use to push money outwards, in the hopes that consumers and unemployment can start to rebound before that bursts.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 10:52 AM) Local reports or speculation? ProFootball Talk's article is written as a "he should consider it again" IF asked, while you phrased it as UT already asked. Local press reports were as follows: 1. 2 nights ago, right after Kiffin's firing, the local news went through a list of potential coaching candidates. It led off with Smith, but gave no details and discussed other candidates in more depth. 2. Last night, the local news spent a little more time discussing candidates. It led off again with Smith, and this time said something along the lines of "the university may be willing to pay up to $4 million a season if Smith were interested in the job." It then went off to discuss other candidates. The way the reports were phrased, it gave the very, very strong impression that a call was made by UT to Smith or his people after Kiffin's departure and at least to see if Smith would be interested, UT threw out a dollar amount. No indication was given as to whether a positive or negative response came from Smith's side, nor was there a suggestion as to anything as specific as a full, detailed offer being given. If they did not place a specific, new call to Smith's people yesterday, then the people who wrote that statement ought to be running shows on Fox News, because it came through very strongly what they were trying to say.

The police are searching for Crittendon's gun.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 10:12 AM) Hmmm, maybe his ratings weren't as good because you put another Tonight Show on before him?? So instead of having the die-hard Leno fans give him a shot, you gave them Leno at 9 and they tuned out. They over-saturated the NBC market with talk show. I don't see how they could ever think that it was a smart idea to put a talk show up against f***ing CSI and s***. They were expecting to lose in the ratings but to come out positive because of the lower production costs.

Link

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 15, 2010 -> 09:34 AM) Of course you don't see it that way. Fine. Please provide examples of said denials.