Balta1701

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 12:59 PM) The only way this gets "resolved" is if it gives Obama political cover to opportunitively beat the s*** out of the last administration. That's been his M.O. so far. Personally, I'm hoping the President decides to use his newly given powers to spy on every single Republican voter, organizer, candidate, or media figure in the 2012 campaign. Put Nixon to shame. Congress has declared it newly legal again, so why not?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 12:36 PM) This is still a matter for Congress to resolve. The DoJ is not going to do it. Congress isn't going to do it either. That'd be too angry and partisan, you know, enforcing the law, and we can't have that.

Vazquez on the mound for Atlanta today. McCann already has his 2nd home run on the season.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 12:26 PM) That's a ludicriously extreme example. If the President shoots someone he gets impeached immediately/goes to criminal court. If he does something unconstitutional he needs to be challenged by Congress or the Supreme Court (SCOTUS did, a few times). Congress should've taken action, for whatever reason they didn't. Bush's own DoJ obviously wasn't going to incriminate itself, Obama's DoJ doesn't want to set any bad precedents. This is why it's not something for the executive branch to decide. This is not currently a constitutional question, it's a question of the FISA law. There is specific law on the books saying that what the President did and admitted to doing is illegal. He acted in deliberate violation of the FISA law. The courts should have taken action, but the people targeted have been unable to get actual proof that they were spied on because Congress has protected them, and thus the people who have grounds to bring the case are blocked from doing so by acts of Congress. The Obama DOJ could bring charges but that would be mean and we can't have that. The only constitutional question here is the constitutionality of the FISA law itself. But there's a key point...if there's a law on the books that you feel is unconstitutional, the procedure is not "Violate the law and then cover it all up", the procedure is to bring a challenge of that law up before an appeals court (something that has not yet been done by any administration, including the Bush admin.)

Well, since Carlos practices his swing everywhere he goes, I guess it's inevitable that it would rub off on Josh.

Captain Spock gave a group of Trekkies in Austin, TX a surprise screening of the new movie last night.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 11:54 AM) So, what I'd rather see happen is just have Congress pass a law saying "the executive branch can't do this" even though it's already pretty much understood. They passed it, in 1978. It's not just understood. If the President decides to shoot someone, Congress doesn't have to pass another law saying it's illegal in order to keep future Presidents from shooting people.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 10:08 AM) Yep. It's now or never for BA. But like you, I think he'll do the job. If he only gets 150 or so scattered at bats again this season, I think he'll do an adequate job as a part time player, but he's not going to put up numbers that will shock anyone.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 09:42 AM) Shouldn't he be giving them gel? You're mistaking him for Kenny Rogers.

Give em hell Gavy.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 08:39 AM) Plus if he is so good how come he can't crack the lineup of one of the worse teams-record wise-in MLB? Could Wise crack their lineup? (note: Wisecrack. Hehehe.)

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 08:15 AM) It bothers me to hear him booed on opening day. Give him a chance. I realize the fans are not booing him as much as they are booing the decision to start him and have him lead off. He struck out 3 times and then couldn't get the bunt down in a key situation after the 9th place hitter got down a perfect bunt. If you're going to be one of those grinder types, you at least need to get the bunt down there.

QUOTE (sircaffey @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 06:19 AM) They certainly are not in the class of the 2008 Rays. That's laughable, because that was the best defense I have seen in a long time. 2008 Rays D vs. 2007 Rockies D, who ya got? I take the Rockies.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 06:59 AM) I don't know how to say this any other way, but SUV's are what people want. If that's what they want, then make them. Simple supply and demand. I guess we should all just drive those GM segways, right? This is of course a case where the current market is inefficient at predicting the future. The U.S. went SUV Crazy without anticipating a gigantic associated spike in fuel costs. When that hit, suddenly those SUV's became bad purchases. The market is striving to deal with what the current situation is, it is failing to predict the future, once again. Which is of course, where the government can step in.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 06:35 AM) I should've also specified that those two statements weren't intended to be read together, FWIW. Illegal is illegal. What we need here is for Congress to step up and close this hole and make a warrant, even in a secret court, mandatory (redundant as that may sound). In fact, I don't really know why they haven't already. It's not a job for the Executive branch though and I think this is one reason why. Isn't that already exactly the case? By every bit of law I've read, if you want to wiretap a U.S. citizen for any purpose, including national security, you at least need to go through the FISA court and receive a FISA warrant declaring that the search is pertinent to national security issues. The problem as I see it isn't that the law is unclear or has a loophole in it. It's that the last administration and seemingly now this one blatantly decided they were going to violate the law and Congress has failed to call them on it/covered their asses with their retroactive immunity. To borrow a phrase from the gun debate...we don't need new laws, we need to enforce the ones on the books.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 06:45 AM) Credit spreads are at their widest level since crisis began. This one doesn't mean anything to me but I'd like a translation if anyone can provide it.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 07:47 AM) Don't forget the looming pension crisis on the horizon. I believe this is the next area of concern. Thankfully the Pension Benefit Guarantee corp. still exists and is in perfect health, thanks to George Bush's refusal to touch it. Oh.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 08:25 AM) Good. It'd be especially good to know the results of that before the Senate Seat comes up for primary challenges next year.

Throwing out the first pitch in Fenway?

QUOTE (knightni @ Apr 7, 2009 -> 06:40 PM) The #2 hitter's job is to strike out a lot and sacrifice himself so that the leadoff guy can get to 2nd base. So you're saying we want Wise hitting 2nd? He just needs to work on the bunting.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 7, 2009 -> 04:44 PM) Yes. I think he has it reversed. Fields missed a ball to his left today (though honestly I'm pretty sure most would have missed that one), and he has looked to me to be weaker to his left. He is stronger to his right, especially with that cannon QB arm of his. Out of the 2 options I think I'd prefer him being strong going to the right, esp. if Alexei can show the range at SS he showed on some work today. If nothing else, good range to your right can save a fair number of doubles.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 7, 2009 -> 04:37 PM) You can forget Utah, period. Possibly an anomaly related to how he's counting Mormons. Who knows.

QUOTE (beautox @ Apr 7, 2009 -> 04:18 PM) +1 I've always felt that josh is exceptional going to his left even the times i saw him down at AAA, its the routine plays and ranging to his right that hes going to strugle with. I feel the routine play errors will come down in time with more ML experience, as for ranging to his right, lets hope Alexei or Slayer can pick him up in the future. All in all, I really like the package that Fields brings to the table, now that his knee is healed, i think hes capable of stealing 15-20 bags this year and doing the little things on the bases. Wasn't the play he made today going to his right?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 7, 2009 -> 04:04 PM) None of those charts have their axis labeled. What am I looking at there? 1 second, i'll try to fix it. Done.

I like Alexei. The big difference between Alexei and Fields is the K's. Fields will probably k 150 times this year even if he has a good year. Yes, he'll walk more than Alexei and take more pitches. But Alexei is going to put the ball in play. If you get Getz/someone else on base, and you want a shot at getting them in to scoring position before Q et al., you want someone who's going to put the ball in play. Strikeouts will not be productive outs.