Balta1701

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 04:12 PM) Gavin really needs to learn to pitch over mistakes and bloop singles. Ok.

Hmm... FWIW, the guy writing this article here is the same guy who in 2006 wrote an article claiming that Iran was forcing Jewish citizens in its country to wear a badge that would publicly identify them. That story was rapidly retracted and was false. There are various other books and articles in his past which seem to follow a similar path...citing other sources that don't say what he claims they do. There's a bit of a pattern of behavior here already.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 01:12 PM) Anyone who acts like they are 100% sure of the answer there is lying. edit: anything is better than "drill baby drill" though. While you can't be sure of that answer...with nucular in particular there's a major problem still remaining, and that's the waste material. The federal government long ago promised nuclear plants that they'd put together an adequate place to store the stuff. The government has thus far reneged on that promise. And because of that, we're paying literally hundreds of millions of dollars per year already to the operators of those plants for them to store it themselves. And there's another thing to consider...it's really not that hard to estimate the cost, lifetime, and output of those power plants and come up with best and worst case scenarios for how they compare to dumping money in to other power sources. I don't have the time to do it, but if you paid me a reasonable amount I could come up with them fairly quickly.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 12:52 PM) Yeah, I was going to say the same. I don't think there's any way to avoid spending money there. The question is...are those tens of billions of dollars a year the best way to spend the government's energy related investment dollars?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 12:38 PM) Did you guys watch the Giants game? The Rams were actually in that game most of the way. Of course it had more to do with poor play calling on the Giants fault (they were throwing stupid bomb passes when they had been running the ball all over the Rams. By the way, I'm not saying the Giants are bad, more saying that Dallas and Philly are even better. Giants rank similarly with the Packers and all 4 teams mentioned have a legit shot at winning the super bowl. My response to that is fairly simple...if you give me a great defense and reasonable offense and put it up against a weak defense and great offense...the team with the better defense will win most of the time. I don't know how much gas the giants have left on defense. That's my question. If they were somehow hanging out close to the level their D played at in the playoffs...then I don't care how good those offenses are.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 11:52 AM) Zero doubt that both parties can take some pie to the face on the mess out there right now. Then, there is also even MORE that can be put on actors not even in the political system. Here's the problem with that line of thinking I have. If I'm an actor outside of the political system...say I'm running one of these businesses...what is my main motivation? Am I working as CEO of FNMA because I want to serve the public good, because I want to make that company stronger, or because I want to make myself as much money as possible? For the private sector...the actual correct answer there is "To make myself as much money as possible". Whether they lie, rewrite the rules, whatever, to get to that point...as long as they don't break the law to the point that their money is taken from them or they go to jail, then maximizing their personal benefits by taking big gambles with the money they're in charge of and ditching out before things turn sour is a perfectly rational behavior. They can retire with tens of millions of dollars in the bank at fairly young ages. You can blame them all you want, complain, be angry with them all you want...but they're going to walk out of this millionaires because that's what the system encourages them to do. And you can swap out FNMA for any of these companies that are falling apart right now.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 12:10 PM) lawn Field

QUOTE (knightni @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 10:31 AM) donuts Police

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 08:51 AM) this seems to imply that Crede is not going along with how the Sox want him to re-hab, which is weird. Are they trying to suggest that Joe is healthy enough to play but is choosing not to? I don't get it. And I doubt that's true. Well...frankly, on that part this wouldn't be the first time that Boras's people and the Sox's people had disagreed about treatment for a player's injury. Hell it woulnd't be the first time they'd disagreed about Crede.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 08:48 AM) Oops I Crapped My Pants Happy Fun Ball

QUOTE (knightni @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 09:36 AM) boatts butts

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 16, 2008 -> 05:38 AM) Why would your dream scenario include losing a series to Minnesota? Clearly because we didn't get swept.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 09:34 PM) Yes and no. Look at Danks, or even Lexi. Danks has really seemed to hit a wall(at a point where he has never pitched this many innings) and Lexi has never played a season this long. It takes a toll even though their bodies are young. I really don't know the reason the Sox seem to fade in the 2nd half. Was I the only one who watched him shut out the paws down cats for 6 innings on Sunday?

There is now renewed talk of the Feds stepping in as a last resort option to save AIG.

QUOTE (Jake @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 03:55 PM) We should pound the Yankees, they're done and not at full strength. But they're still playing the last few games in their park.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 12:41 PM) Because he's washed up and bad. He'd have a job otherwise. The Bears obviously need to pick up at leats one (more likely two) quarterbacks after this season though. As I said before the season, the quarterback of the next really good Bears team, like one that wins the division, isn't on the roster yet. Alex Smith will almost certainly be available this offseason. The 9ers aren't going to bring him back for $10 million next year when he'd have to earn the starting spot in camp.

"If you think those lobbyists are working day and night for John McCain just to put themselves out of business, well then I've got a bridge to sell you up in Alaska."

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 02:05 PM) HP just announced 24,700 layoffs. Ouch. The fundamentals of the economy are strong.

-500.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 11:12 AM) Beat me to it. Dale Sveum is interim manager. Hiring a former White Sox infielder to do the managing has at least worked for 1 team in the past 3 years.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 12:13 PM) Sounds like there's a rate cut coming, eh? That's a bad, bad thing if it is. Almost certainly as far as I can tell. The market has probably already priced in a .25 cut.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 10:58 AM) That was a pretty poor negotiation, at least what was reported. I could have swore that they at least made him a much bigger offer than that, an offer that at the time was described as the biggest contract offer the White Sox had ever made. It wasn't the same he got from Detroit as a ton of the money was deferred out over like 20 years, but I could have swore there was more than 4/$48 on the table when he got hurt.

QUOTE (BlackBetsy @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 10:36 AM) Speaking of relievers....what in the world are the Sox doing leaving any of their 40-man roster guys out of Chicago? I don't care about service time (a two week call up will hardly affect service time)...they need to win and they've got a great arm in Poreda sitting there. Unless you are 100% sure he isn't ready, I mean, he's got to be an improvement over Boone Logan. What about Egbert for the Broadway role? This is All Hands On Deck time. Aaron Poreda is not on the 40 man as far as I can tell.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 08:37 AM) Wonder how many of these minor league stars of ours get traded in the next couple years? Everyone but Beckham and Danks.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 15, 2008 -> 07:39 AM) You CAN negotiate without reaching a deal. And it certainly seems like he WAS trying to reach a deal. Again, just going by what was written. He seemed like he was trying to convince him to do something that he favored, and was told no. IS that now just called 'asking'? And there IS something wrong with it, if that person has a different message than the one of his government. And like it or not, Bush's message is the 'official' one for now. Here's what makes this interesting though...Bush is himself already trying to circumvent the rules with this "Status of Forces Agreement". Basically, he's trying to convince the Iraqis to sign something that locks in his policy of keeping troops there under rules this administration would like for whatever time period they can negotiate. Now, the weird thing is...normally, an agreement between 2 nations of this sort, where one is allowed to station troops on another's soil, is what we would call a treaty. The problem is...an actual treaty would have to go to the Senate for approval. And thus, it would open up discussion in the Senate, and frankly it'd probably fail at this point. So we have this odd situation of the President trying to negotiate something on paper that isn't a treaty but that serves as a treaty and which the next President will be bound by because it's on paper. So while Bush's message may be the official one, it's a fundamentally odd situation because typically the Senate should in fact have a say here but the President is trying to deny that to them.