Balta1701

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 05:10 PM) Except NK has never quit working on their nuclear program, even when have had deals, and millions of people have still died of starvation. Our "policy" hasn't changed anything. Except in 2007, when they shuttered their programs, turned over a lot of their equipment, and let the U.N. waltz right in. It was pretty effective then.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 05:08 PM) Millions have people have already died of starvation, despite all of the aid, they are still going after nuclear weapons, and they are firing missiles through their neighbors, what exactly are we going to make worse? All of the things they aren't supposed to be doing with our bribes, they are still doing anyway. The "worst case scenario" is that they go to war with someone around them, which I truly believe wouldn't be so bad. Once the NK military saw how fat and happy their neighbors were, they would desert quicker than Saddam's army's did. Without the military to back Il, NK would collapse instantly. So your response is that you'd prefer a war. Thank you. At least that's an answer to my repeated query.

Fascinating. As part of the transition to becoming a "Bank holding company" so that they could receive the TARP funds, Goldman Sachs had to change the schedule it operates on. Previously, their quarters would start on December 1, now they had to start on Jan 1. So...the last quarter they reported last year was September - November, and they just reported those solid numbers for January through March. An erudite reader might wonder...what happened to December. Turns out...they took a ton of losses and accounted for them in December. And it also seems that they received a crapload of government money from the AIG bailout in December. That's one way to make your books look better.

Don't necessarily agree with everything he says, especially on the bank bailouts, but I think the President's speech today is a solid argument.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 03:01 PM) Scott Podsednik is a 33 year old marginal offensive player (.256/.322/.353/.675 in 1008 PA over the last 3 seasons) and terrible center fielder with an awful arm. Why anyone would a player such as this to receive 75% of the total PA in center field is beyond me. To protect capitalism.

Josh Beckett gets a 6 game suspension for his throw at Abreu's head and undisclosed actions during the tumult that followed. Hunter, Speier, Scioscia get off with fines.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) I still want to know the truth about Roswell. what makes you think you don't?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:11 PM) Further thought: the reason China doesn't want them "free" is there's another poopload of untapped labor there and they'd lose out. Right, or wrong? I think it's because China doesn't want to have to absorb the refugees.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:08 PM) Are you happy with it? I think it's the best we can do. We have to be realistic with our goals in this case, given the weakness of our hand. The 2 priorities I have are keeping North Korea's nuclear program shut down and saving as many lives as possible. We've proven repeatedly we can accomplish those goals through long-term, determined negotiation, and I can live with that as a containment policy.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:28 PM) I'm not saying I don't want to see BA in CF, I'm saying that signing Pods was not to supplant Brian. It is to upgrade our 4th OF, whom Ozzie uses quite a bit. If that's all he's used as then no one here will have any complaints.

Pods can have it...if he's willing to meet Mr. Fields's price, whatever that may be.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:01 PM) Neither am I? QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:46 PM) Giving in to them has worked so well! So, that's obviously our only option. QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:39 PM) Well, hell, then, let's just throw our hands up and bend over! There's nothing else to do! I don't know what you call it, but you certainly seem a lot more unhappy with the current policy than I am.

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:26 PM) It seemed to me that Derek Rose hit another level with Memphis when the big tourney started, if last night was any sign, Rose might be gearing up for the nba playoffs too, be pretty interesting how he performs. On the other hand...he's about 40 more games than he's ever played in a season before, so really would it be that shocking if he was the least bit tired?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) You know what's funny? Every time I see that from you, you just ask the question and never have anything better, either. But you know what? In this case, I'm not the one obsessing over the fact that what we're currently doing isn't working perfectly.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:46 PM) Giving in to them has worked so well! So, that's obviously our only option. Like I said, the sequence is:

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:39 PM) Well, hell, then, let's just throw our hands up and bend over! There's nothing else to do! Offer me another option? I'd love to hear it. The best I can say is to try to save as many lives as possible, use negotiations and the carrot/stick approach to try to keep their nuclear program on ice, and hope that eventually the leadership within the country falls (perhaps with some encouragement if we can ever find a group that actually starts to organize itself against the government there). I'll be the first to admit it's totally inadequate because it doesn't offer a guaranteed way out. But every other thing poster here so far is some variant of "This method sucks...ok what's your proposal....this method sucks...seriously, offer me something better...this method sucks".

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:17 PM) Stop supporting the regime that is killing their own people at an alarming rate? We keep negotiating with them and they still keep going forward doing whatever the hell they want to anyway, and getting more out of it. How is what we have been doing for decades working by any stretch of the imagination. So how do you define stop supporting them? Should we cut off food and fuel aid, and allow the people to starve? Haven't we tried that and wound up killing enormous numbers of people in famines before?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:08 PM) I am not quite sure why we always knuckle under to them. What other option would you suggest? Invasion? Turning our backs on them and refusing to negotiate? That wound up with North Korea fizzling a bomb test a couple years ago. What other option is there out there other than rolling over, trying to keep as many people alive there as possible through food and fuel aid, and trying to take steps to undermine that regime over time?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:05 PM) The immigration rallies of the last few years were largely organized by labor unions and other Democratic organizations, does that diminish them? ? At least the impression I got was that the big ones in L.A. in 2006 came about through a combination of a hell of a lot of text messages and a few statements by the guys on the latino radio stations out here. Are you referring to some other set of rallies or can you dispute the impression I got?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:05 PM) The immigration rallies of the last few years were largely organized by labor unions and other Democratic organizations, does that diminish them? ? At least the impression I got was that the big ones in L.A. in 2006 came about through a combination of a hell of a lot of text messages and a few statements by the guys on the latino radio stations out here. Are you referring to some other set of rallies or can you dispute the impression I got?

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:01 PM) or the immanent threat of being tea bagged. Of course not. If you started mailing tea bags to them, they'd probably wind up having to eat them.

3 months from now, they'll sit back down at the table, issue some extra aid demands, and the inspections will come back in.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 12:43 PM) BA should have someone to platoon with, and we DO need a contingency plan if Getz has trouble. Pods is hardly a great contingency plan, but he's sure as s*** better than Owens. I'll agree that a Getz contingency plan can't hurt, but I disagree that BA should have someone to platoon with. Worst that happens is he comes out, hits .160 again, gives us reasonable defense, and is replaced in 4-6 weeks when Wise comes back. What we would need in that case is a LH bat on the bench to pinch hit for him late in games if it's close and there's a RHP in. If that's how Pods is used, I'm totally game. But really, I have no urge to see a platoon where Podsednik/Owens, or hell, Wise for that matter, gets 2/3 of the AB's and 2/3 of the playing time in CF because of which side of the plate they hit from.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 12:38 PM) Couldn't be we needed a decent-to-awful LH outfield bat to replace our awful left hand bat, could it? That too reasonable? If I hadn't lived through the Mackowiak in CF disaster in 2006 and the Erstad in CF debacle in 2007, I'd be more than happy to believe that was the case. So far though, actions speak louder than words. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 12:31 PM) Having watched Schuster, he knew EXACTLY what he was saying. Either way...he deserves applause for it. Probably the best line of the whole phenomenon.