Balta1701

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 03:11 PM) Yes I did know that. And I do agree with you that it shouldn't be as important as Wyoming is for the GOP. For this it seems like the media goes by tradition with Iowa and New Hampshire. Hopefully there will be more than 11% tonight. We'll find out later on I guess. Tonight will almost certainly be a record turnout, because both sides have a contested primary for the first time in decades. But even then, it'll only be like 20% turnout, maybe 25%. But beyond that, I defy you to explain to me why a system where anyone who has to work or who is out of town or who is deployed overseas serving in the U.S. military should be the single most important contest in deciding a candidate.

QUOTE(Pants Rowland @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 03:07 PM) Per Wikipedia, he did not start that game (David Wells of TOR did). Was he a top 10 prospect for the Sox at one point in time? James Baldwin was #8 overall on the Baseball America prospects list in 1994. Right behind this Manny Ramirez dude.

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 03:04 PM) Just curious, but Oakland's farm system has to be pretty stacked... Who are their top 5 or so prospects? They have Gio, DLS, Cunningham and Chris Carter correct? Am I the only one who finds it very odd that the White Sox drafting, development, and minor league system absolutely sucks and KW should be fired, while Billy Beane is a God amongst GM's, and yet Beane has spent his offseason collecting guys we drafted?

QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 03:03 PM) I understand that. I kinda of think of it like this: If I offered you $100 in cash or a scratch off lottery ticket, which would you take? Depends on how the lottery game is constructed and what my odds of winning it are.

QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 02:57 PM) I have a feeling that even the people who don't like this trade are going to like having Swisher on this team. I'm not that worried about what's coming back, I'm a little more worried about the fact that DLS is going out.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 01:07 PM) The least of this teams worries is power. We haven't had to worry about power for a while now. I'd like a little more speed in the lineup but this team is going to score some runs, I just don't think they're going to be able to prevent them very well. Well, defensively, Fields is a question mark, but Cabrera is an exclamation point. Konerko is solid, Richar is solid and could be very good. Dye is weak, Quentin I really don't know, and Swisher I really don't know. So on defense we are sorta hanging a lot on Cabrera to be our stud aren't we?

Just an exercise...no particular order implied here. Cabrera - 8 home runs Swisher - 25 home runs Thome - 40 home runs Konerko - 30 home runs Dye - 30 home runs Fields - 30 home runs Pierzynski - 10 home runs Quentin - 25 home runs? Richar - 10 home runs Being pretty conservative overall except assuming a full season for Thome...That right there would come to 208 home runs.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 12:59 PM) Like every trade, you can't grade it right away. I think the line up will be much better this year. Well, clearly this makes the team significantly better the next year, maybe the next 2. You'd have to be crazy to take Owens and a hopefully .350 OBP over Swisher and nearly .400 in that regard if you're looking at a team of boppers, which is what we had even before this deal. My big question is DLS. In my head, I had hoped he could turn into a top of the rotation, ace type guy. If 3 years down the road he's that kind of guy for Oakland, winning 18-20 games, then this will be looked back on as a bad trade. Kind of like how people look at the Young deal...at the time you sort of think ok, Young wouldn't help us this year and we have other guys to fill that role, but then you start seeing what Young is turning into and then hindsight just makes it hurt. That's my worry in this deal.

Holy crap, you leave for 2 hours to set up an experiment and KW does it again. Why is it every time I leave the screen for a few hours this happens? Reaction: I'm iffy on the deal, solely because of DLS. I had him in my head thought to be a potential top of the rotation guy in 2-3 years. Gio and Sweeney I could understand completely in this deal, but on paper I'm worried about giving up that one specific piece. I think that others probably have to be right that the team must not have been as high on DLS as some of us were, because otherwise this is a hard deal to stomach. Bureau?

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 10:09 AM) And Fred says that is a lie to discourage voters and donations. http://blogs.iowapolitics.com/caucus/2008/...a-wont-end.html Well, here's video last night of Russert giving Thompson a clear chance at the end of his questions to say that no matter what happens it's on to New Hampshire, and Thompson answering that question with "Well have to wait and see" instead of giving the affirmative "yes" answer.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 09:30 AM) The true conservative will tell you that there needs to be incentive for people to succeed. Why should I go and get the education levels to work in a highly technical field, if the government will just hand me everything anyway? That's one thing I give Billy "BJ" Clinton credit for, and that was welfare reform. You have to incentivize people to get off their lazy ass, and actually DO something to earn what they get. Otherwise, we all become mindless drones and just do enough to make the state continue to feed us all. I'm sorry, I'm totally against that. And the liberal in me will reply that you are correct, but you also have to give people some basic level of services to allow that incentive to work. It doesn't matter if you have a 0 tax rate on any income over a million dollars, a big incentive to earn that much, if you don't have health care and you wind up bankrupt because you can't afford treatment of that arm you broke.

Politico

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 09:07 AM) Question for those smarter than me on politics (everybody who has posted in this thread, in other words): Just how important is the Iowa Caucus? I know it's the first one and happens here at the start of the year of the election, but what happens tonight matter as much as the media is making it seem like? Thanks in advance for any help you can give to a novice here. Overall, it should be of virtually no importance. It's one small rural state with a homogeneous racial population that is a very poor representation of the country as a whole, and at least for the Dems, roughly 1% of the available convention delegates are up for grabs. Beyond that, the procedures are insane. There are no absentee votes, so anyone who has to work or is out of town for whatever reason can not vote. In other words, if you're a serviceman from Iowa on deployment in Iraq right now, you have no vote. If you would get fired for missing a night of work, you have no vote. As one blog I read put it yesterday...it's much like Camelot in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". It is a silly place, let's not go. But, because the media have decided it's important, it's important. Historically, here is the effect that Iowa finishes have had on the average polling in New Hampshire (obviously the variance will be large, but I think this gets the point across). Because the Iowa caucuses are so freaking silly, we really do need to get rid of the whole "Iowa is always first" thing and put in a more sane system. But until that happens, that's roughly how important it is...you win in Iowa, your poll numbers go up by 15 points in NH. For the Dems, this basically means you win Iowa and you should also win NH whoever you are, because it's that close.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 07:38 AM) LINK Based on this alone i say: Obama 39% Edwards 28% Clinton 27% Political equivalent of "I don't think that taste is there".

QUOTE(Elgin Slim @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 06:21 PM) Wasn't Anderson having wrist problems after he went down to AAA? I know he had surgery in June or something. Could that possibly be the reason why he only hit .255 in Charlotte? Yes, he was hurt several times last year in the minors, which is no small part of the reason why I want him starting in the minors. He didn't get a chance to really work on what he might have needed to work on after going back down last season because except for the first week or two, he was hurt the whole season. I think I want him playing every day in a league he has bested before to try that last chance at getting his career back on track, and I don't think playing 1 time every 7 days when Ozzie decides to put him in is going to do it.

QUOTE(Elgin Slim @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 06:09 PM) If no other moves are made, I think that a 5 player consistent platoon should happen. Quentin, Owens and Dye are the regular OF. Against LHP move Quentin to RF, Owens to LF and Anderson in Center, along with Dye at DH. Platoon Quentin and Anderson every now and then, sliding Owens to LF with Anderson in center. Have the LHP lineup every now and then to give Thome and Dye a rest. Quentin and Anderson each get 350+ AB. This is Anderson's last shot to prove that he can play at the big leagues. If BA gets his head out of his ass, then he could still be something. I really don't want to see Brian Anderson starting off the season in the big leagues. I think the best thing for both the Sox and for him is for him to start one more season in AAA and have to earn his spot in the big leagues by hitting down there again. If he'd had more success when he went down last year I'd be of a different mind, but I can't see calling him up as the appropriate thing to do until he at least shows he's got his head back enough to hit AAA pitching. And barring injury, I want to see Quentin starting every day to start the season.

It's from Huffington Post, it's anonymous, it's online, I have no idea how reliable the person is. But here you go.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 05:58 PM) Why does the GOVERNMENT have to do this for you, Balta? I find it to be better if government leaves us the hell alone. Now, not to the levels that RP is talking, but... certainly, I don't want my government telling me what doctors I can or cannot see, for example. And if you think that is not what is going to happen, don't kid yourself. Sticking with the platitude level of discussion, I'll give you this example. I think it makes more sense for a government who's main goal is to provide me with appropriate health care to tell me which doctor to go to than it does for an insurance company to tell me which doctor to go to when their main goal is to make sure that they make money regardless of whether or not I get the best treatment. If I wanted to get more detailed, I could provide examples of how easily people are able to move between doctors in other systems, but I'll stick with that level for now.

QUOTE(klaus kinski @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 05:49 PM) When the big fish get away, you are left with minnows. Then stick with our minnows and see if one of them develops a genetic mutation that turns them into a bigger fish than we expected. Instead of giving away 2/3 of our minnows for 1-2 other minnows that someone else has because everyone out there says the minnows in the next lagoon are prettier.

QUOTE(BureauEmployee171 @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 04:47 PM) Ron Paul. Why would you vote otherwise? He stands by the Constitution, and wants the uneccessary government programs out of your life. Why would you NOT want that? Because I'm fully convinced there are things that the government can and must do for Americans to maintain and improve upon their current quality of life, and eliminating the government would be a gigantic step backwards. I'll leave it at that level, the principle level, without elaborating here. I would also find it to be very difficult for him to win the Democratic primary, btw.

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 02:57 PM) Tony Dungy was classless when he had a chance to call a timeout and get his team the ball back so they could try to win the game and get the Browns in the playoffs, but he didn't. It probably wouldn't have mattered, but I lost a lot of respect for him after that. Why should Dungy want the Browns in the playoffs more than the Titans?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 11:24 AM) Wow, what's with all the hate Jesus and Jesus saves stuff all over the place? Also, I really think the floats are cool... the detail is amazing. What do you think after seeing it up close? Before and after the Parade, a variety of people decide to march down the open street since they have an audience of a million people or so, and others wanted to make statements about specific acts in the parade. The "God kills sinners" people have been there bookending the parade every year I've been there. This year we also had a block of Ron Paul people walking, a group of Taiwanese people protesting the decision to allow China to enter a float celebrating their Olympics, and I'm told Cindy Sheehan was somewhere in the area although I didn't see their group marching. The floats and the whole presentation are quite impressive up close. For about 2 weeks out here we get to see them being constructed slowly on the news as the networks all take a few moments to broadcast from the construction sites. Not sure what else to say, it's an impressive undertaking.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 10:59 AM) That's the key reason why its a crisis now, as you said - its the timing. Taking the scattered, unrefined technologies out there rolling and efficient and in wide use will take many years. If we don't start now, it will be that much uglier down the road. But the good news is...thanks to the high oil prices...the oil companies have more than enough money to make sure that doesn't happen!

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 10:50 AM) When does this become an official "crisis"? $125/barrel? $150? I think the past few years have shown that there's no real line you can draw where you call it a crisis. Somehow, in the space of 7 years, the market has absorbed having oil go from what, $20 to $100, a factor of 5 increase in what you'd be spending, without anything more than slight decreases last year in oil consumption after continuous growth during the previous years. It certainly seems to me that oil alone making a fairly slow climb hasn't been enough to kick the economies of the world into a recession. A rapid climb to $150 within the next 6 months might be enough, but a climb to $130 in the next 12 months would pretty much be the same rate of increase we've seen over the last year, and that alone hasn't been enough to do it on its own. I'm becoming more and more convinced that the housing debacle is a much bigger issue to the economy than oil prices as long as the price increases are moderately slow.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jan 2, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) I have a suspicion that KW has another signing planned right around Soxfest to give some of the sheep a warm fuzzy feeling that we have a chance of finishing out of 4th place. Who else is left?