Balta1701

QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Feb 29, 2008 -> 09:33 AM) Dodgers have more to offer, IMO Well of course they do, but picking up Joe Crede for 1 year to block Andy Laroche is just stupid. Of course, it's not nearly as stupid as picking up Juan Pierre for that contract while at the same time blocking Matt Kemp, or holding on to Furcal instead of moving him to clear room for Hu, or overworking Russel Martin, or holding on to Nomar and Kent while simultaneously blocking Loney and Laroche, so perhaps they would have some interest. I think we ought to see if San Fran would be interested in Uribe also. Dump both of their contracts, save the money for FA next offseason, and maybe make the deal look a little better for them if they give up someone of some talent.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 29, 2008 -> 06:15 AM) No s***? Wow. WOW! A university should get reprimanded for that s***, seriously. Do you have any idea how often universities sell some bit of information on their students to a company like a credit card company or something like that in exchange for a chunk of funding? Usually they're kind enough to withhold the social security numbers, but those deals are big money.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 29, 2008 -> 09:30 AM) That's my point, he did. There were stories about guys like Pat Robertson running the Presidency like they did the Pope with Kennedy. They grilled Bush really hard over that. And so you'd therefore agree that McCain should get the same treatment over how he's honored to stand on the stage with the guy I pointed out earlier?

Jesus H. Christ. Seriously? Hillary? Seriously? My word. Wow. BO replies to this ad.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 29, 2008 -> 06:12 AM) I seem to remember George W Bush getting creamed in the media for speaking at Bob Jones university. I think the big difference between both of those cases and the Obama case is that Obama can't exactly tell a person not to come out and say he's voting for him, while GWB and McCain are actively going out and courting those folks. If Obama is going to be grilled over exactly what word he uses to reject their support, then shouldn't the guys gladly taking on that support get a much more intensive grilling?

QUOTE(knightni @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 08:59 PM) Adrian Peterson seemed okay with that O-Line. Four out of his last 5 games with significant touches, he got 3 yards a carry. /yes the O-Line was bad but you're giving Benson a free pass IMO. Dude, 3 yards a carry isn't exactly good. And that's what Benson was averaging. 3.4 yards a carry for both of them over the season.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 29, 2008 -> 06:46 AM) I'll bet if he has a good spring, he makes the team. If Anderson plays to his potential, he makes the team better than anyone else does, and I think if Anderson really did grow up this year, they have no problems putting him out on the field. Plus if his attitude hasn't changed and he is hitting, playing him is the easiest way to increase his value to trade him. I just can't imagine how Anderson fits on to this roster right now. We're carrying 12 pitchers, that's obvious, which leaves 4 other backup guys. One of them is Toby Hall. Beyond that, we're still holding Crede and Uribe and we can't send them down unless we trade them. Beyond that, we're looking at Owens and Ramirez who already seem like they're in line before BA, and Bourgeois may well have himself moved in front of Anderson with his versatility if both Uribe and Crede get moved. If Quentin simply can't go to start the season, then maybe. But that's the only way I can see it happening.

QUOTE(MurcieOne @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 08:09 PM) Brian Anderson played well i see... if he somehow finds his way, were going to have an interesting dilemma come April Owens Quentin and Anderson all vying for one spot. I like Jerry's new fro (not as much as Lovie's new goatee) but a fully realized Brian Anderson gives this team a bunch of opportunities. Anderson could put up an OPS of 3.500 this spring and he still wouldn't make the big league squad. And it'd be the right call. After last season, he really does need to perform in AAA again before he can be given another shot.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 08:29 PM) Good point Haroldbaines. That was a fun part of winning it all. People were stoked. It was great. I'm still particularly proud of being the first one with the "Holy s*** it worked" post in the Rally Crede thread. And no one can possibly deny how much that thread enhanced their enjoyment of that season.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 27, 2008 -> 02:06 PM) Obama's church publishes Trumpet Magazine which stated Frarrakhan " truly epitomized greatness." The guy that runs this mag is Obama's spiritual adviser I guess. It's legit to question Obama on this issue when the guy publishing this is a honored associate of Obama. Imagine of McCains spiritual adviser was David Duke. So, let's see...Imagine how the press would respond if McCain had been endorsed by a controversial religious figure. A religious figure who had attacked another religion vehemently. Let's imagine it was a Protestant religious leader, who had attacked the Catholic church, calling it the "Antichrist" and "The great Whore". Now let's imagine that unlike Senator Obama, Senator McCain had not only actively sought out the support of this controversial religious figure, but added that he was "Very proud" to have his support. And Hell, on top of that, let's throw in a statement from the Catholic League President Bill Donahue, the same guy who South Park had taking over the Papacy, condemning McCain for accepting his support and calling on McCain to repudiate it in the same way Mr. Obama did with Farrakhan. Now wouldn't you imagine that the press would be all over that? Not only is it strikingly similar to Obama and how he's been hit on the Nation of Islam, but it's on the Republican side and the media hates Republicans. And not only that, but whereas Obama disavowed that supporter, McCain happily accepted it. Wouldn't you imagine that would be a pretty big scandal? Because as far as the NYT, AP, and Reuters are concerned, it doesn't appear to be newsworthy at all. And while I"m at it, I can't even find it mentioned on MSNBC.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 06:46 PM) Also Yahoo Sports had a report saying the Bears are pretty much certain to lose Briggs, Berrian and their top special teams guy. That's quite a bit of talent they'd be losing there. I'm not sure that team is a playoff team for next season. They'd need massive upgrades at RB, WR and OL, and to find a quality replacement for Briggs, to do so. I don't know if they can do that all in 1 off-season in a weak FA class. They can't do that in FA. But thankfully they don't have to. They have 2 potential replacements for Briggs waiting from their last 2 drafts. And They at least have a trio of RB's, whether they like them or not. The team needs upgrades at O-Line and could certainly justify bringing in another receiver or two. Beyond that, anything else I consider to be less than necessity. I refuse to grade guys like Benson or Wolfe last year based on their performance because the O-Line was simply so bad. The team needs an O-Line overhaul, not just upgrades. If Benson fails behind an upgraded O-Line, then a RB replacement makes sense in the 09 draft once the cap hit from Benson has passed.

Whether you like him or not, whether you are a Democrat or not...Ron Paul is not running in any of the Democratic Primaries or Caucuses and therefore campaign statements for him don't belong in this thread.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 05:54 PM) Any chance Sebelius or McCaskill got the nod for VP? Yes. A decent one. Both fit the "potentially competitive area" qualification and could be a good fit with the candidate. But you could say that about a lot of people. Once you get past the big 3 candidates this year, there are a lot of people who are at that qualified 2nd tier level where they could make a difference on a ticket. The list to filter through could be very long this year.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 04:41 PM) I agree it's time for the Iraqis to take control of their own country. IMO, time to declare victory and bring the troops home. If we bring the troops home, we lose.

From Subscription only roll call, I'd just like to note how dastardly it is that those lousy Dems are sacrificing national security for the sake of their trial lawyer friends, and thank Jesus that the Republicans have such honorable motives.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 05:35 PM) You think Biden would be a better choice? Biden might work better in the traditional VP attack dog role...But Biden also has that problem of occasionally going completely insane with some remarks.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 02:48 PM) I really do not think either has a chance of making the roster this year barring injuries. In truth, I suspect KW will have traded one or both within the next year. That disappoints me because I like Bourgeious. If we could manage to move both Crede and Uribe, I think that gives Jason a good chance at the big league roster.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 01:43 PM) That's just stupid. Both sides needs to lay off the "technical" s***... they are citizens, leave it alone. Which is why I said we could probably use a court order reaffirming that.

And, almost as if out of spite, they're teasing us. I guarantee you this number hits before next Tuesday. Hell they may put it out on Monday.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 11:32 AM) And MSNBC just said it is unknown if all of this is primary money or if some of it is general election money. A non-trivial chunk is certainly general election money. It's been reported for a couple weeks now that they've been going back to donors to pick up general election money to make their total numbers look better.

1 in 15 African American adults.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 10:42 AM) It's not up to Justice Roberts to "prevent another large swatch of the country from being destroyed again". You people ever wonder why EVERYTHING costs so damn much? $2.5 BILLION awarded in a lawsuit? Yes, they can afford it, but holy s***, at some point, you have to ask yourself what punitive damages get awarded... and yes, this the consumer will pay for, just like in healthcare. There are 32,000 plaintiffs. People who lost years of their livelihoods because things like the fishing industry in those areas were destroyed. $2.5 billion over 32,000 plaintiffs is $78125 a person. In other words, no one is getting rich off of this. It's barely covering the money that the people lost due to the years of devastation, and probably isn't doing so for most people given that it's now been 20 years. How much would you make if you'd simply invested $25,000 at 5% interest over those years? (Hint, it comes to $67,857). In other words, if you consider the fact that this has been caught up in the court system for nearly 20 years now, basically Exxon is paying $25,000 a plaintiff at that level.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) If the time isn't now, when would you suggest that it is, other than obviously, in the past? Like I said...when you have a gushing wound, the sooner you treat it the better. We've had one for decades.

God I love these guys. Even the intelligent ones don't realize the things that come out of their mouths sometimes. I love these guys. Exxon destroys a chunk of the country, and the only thing on the chief Justice's mind is how to protect Exxon, not how to prevent another large swath of the country from being destroyed again.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 10:00 AM) Dumb question: wouldn't cutting rates be the worst thing to do right now for inflation? If we're facing a stagnating economy anyway, and lower rates = weak dollar and higher oil prices... why wouldn't hiking rates help? Shouldn't that boost the dollar which I wager would also reduce oil prices because the dollar would be seen as a more attractive investment? Yes. Cutting rates would be the worst thing to do for inflation. But holding rates steady or increasing rates to fight inflation could batter the credit market even more, and it's the credit market right now that is the driving force in the downturn. So take your pick. Do you fight off inflation, or do you fight off stagnant growth...you can't do both. This is why the phrase "Stagflation" is a rough one for economies.