Balta1701

Jim Lehrer asks Bush the sacrifice question. Here's how it goes: You know, sometimes I wonder if he really believes the things he says. This is the most important war in American history, but all that people need to sacrifice is their peace of mind?

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 09:20 AM) You must be incredibly incapable of either reading correctly or understanding elementary logic. Let me break it down for you. 1) all five pitchers had at least 300 total inning pitches at the major league level in 2005 2) the fifth starter will have hardly any experience pitching at the major league level in 2007 maybe you can now see how those clauses are related. I'm somewhat uncertain as to how exactly this is of huge importance. While it is noteworthy yes, I'd say that the evidence from quite a few teams last season is that you don't necessarily need an unbelievably experienced pitching staff at every position in order to dominate out of the rotation; you need quality pitchers, no matter their age. Just running through my memory, I seem to recall teams getting their money's worth out of quite a few young guys. Verlander, Weaver, Liriano, the entire Marlins starting staff not named Willis, Papelbon, Reyes, Wainright, Hill, need I go on? Yes, its entirely possible that a kid or two could struggle. But we do counter that to some extent with depth, and with sheer talent. It is not a given that just because a pitcher is young, he will stink.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 08:45 AM) Actually, I said that I think Bill Richardson is the most qualified candidate out there somewhere else around here. He has executive experience, was an ambassador for us, and has some good, moderate views. I'll add a couple little notes to that. First off, we still dont' know anything on the status of Wesley Clark, and in terms of qualifications, the 4-star general route has worked fairly well in the past. But other than that, yeah, Richardson is at the top of the qualifications list. And on the other hand, paper qualifications do not necessarily make for a good candidate. George W. had executive experience leading a state for 8 years and look how he's turned out. And the people around him, the Cheneys, Rumsfelds, etc., all had a boatload of experience coming into their current jobs as well. And Obama is smart enough to know that all he needs to say to diffuse the experience argument right now is to say the words "Cheney and Rumsfeld". And on the other subject up for discussion...folks, go re-watch season 1 of 24

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 05:43 AM) Cubs are offering 11 million, Zambrano is asking for 15 million. If the Cubs are going to be spending money like fools, Zambrano wants to get a piece of the action, not that I blame him. How can the Cubs offer him the same money they are paying Lilly? Those two arent even on the same planet in terms of talent. The amount that the Cubs are paying Lilly is only of cursory importance here, that's how the arbitration system istelf works. Zambrano made $6.5 million last year. The Cubs are offering a raise of $4.5 million on top of that for 1 season. Zambrano is asking for a raise of $9 million on top of that. I would understand an arbitrator ruling either way in this case, although I really don't know why the 2 sides weren't able to agree on something like $13 million this season.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 08:16 AM) Longer explanation is that we still have a great offense, the best in the division. We have a very good starting 4, plus about half a dozen guys potentially capable of putting up adequate numbers as a 5th starter. The bullpen is filled with flameflowers, and 3 guys who could be closers (or have been) on lots of teams. The defense is still very good, except for LF, and the guys really seem to like playing for Ozzie. I would like to say that it's a strong possibility that the White Sox will actually have the 2nd best offense in the division next year. That Cleveland lineup scares the bejeezus out of me. On the other hand though, just in terms of potential, not yet in terms of performance, I don't see any other team as balanced as the Sox. Cleveland has a dominant lineup, but their starting staff might be 3rd or 4th in the division and defense isn't their strongest suit in some spots. Detroit could have a very good starting staff again and an improved offense, so they're close. Minnesota has lost a ton, especially in pitching. They still have a strong bullpen, but they're relying an awful lot on Johan + rookies. The White Sox have a potentially solid 1-5 rotation, potentially very good bullpen, potentially very good defense, and potentially great offense again. This division is going to be an interesting one to watch play out.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 05:17 PM) Ok, so 1 beer is 12 ounces, so roughly 10.7 beers make a gallon. I've consumed 10 beers in one sitting plenty of times in my life. You mean to tell me that if I had been drinking water instead I'd be dead????? Define "1 sitting"? Chugging 1 every minute?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 04:15 PM) Is he a powerful speaker that can galvanize the nation? We'll see. Thus far, he's definately proven to be one hell of a good speaker, at least to my eyes.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 04:37 PM) How many ounces are in a gallon? 128. And you couldn't google that?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 03:33 PM) I should probably make a separate thread for this, but I want CONCRETE reasons why this guy is presidential material. Not the fluffy bulls***. REAL reasons. That is an interesting thought actually. I'm not going to answer your question, but I'm going to answer your question with a question; what exactly is it that makes a person "presidential material" and how can you evaluate that beforehand? You can't just point at political experience, you can't just point at political positions, you can't just point at debate performances, what exactly is there that one can point to?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 02:15 PM) um... why? BTW, I read that Bush will be talking about Global Warming in the SOTU address. So, if he makes some grand promises about environmental legislation, will he then have Tony Snow follow the speech immediately afterwards with words amounting to "he didn't really mean it"? Like he did last year? Actually, they've already beaten you to it. Some British paper reported that the U.S. was going to go ahead and accept climate caps, and Tony Snow bluntly said today Absolutely not. So in other words, Bush is going to address global warming, by talking about it. Not by addressing it as a problem.

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Jan 13, 2007 -> 10:27 PM) I may have been the only person that really liked "The Nine" Well, Rex, I have good news for you. Link.

By the way, once again, I'd like to say how happy it makes me to see Dr. Bashir finding good work.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 11:51 AM) That is oversimplifying quite a bit. No back surgery is ever a guarantee, any more than therapy is or isn't. Yes, the Sox expressed their desire for the surgery, but that is not the same thin as saying if he had done it, that they would have automatically signed him long term. Crede's back is not the only issue, or even necessarily the main issue, of his future with the team. 2 things I think are worth noting when it comes to Joe's back: 1. Joe Crede originally hurt his back 2 years ago. He tried rehabbing alone last year. It held up for most of the year, but still it wasn't enough to make it a whole season. If the White Sox had made the playoffs, the White Sox would literally have been better off with Ozuna or Cintron starting at third given Joe's back. In other words, Joe's tried Rehab alone before, and I don't think it worked. 2. Can someone other than me raise their hand if they recall how things worked out for the White Sox and a player the last time Scott Boras and the White Sox had a disagreement over how a player treated a really nasty injury?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 09:55 AM) I thought when his head finally bowed that was it. At first I thought Jack maybe hit him somewhere where he knew he wouldn't die, but than I realized he has to be a goner. In the last shot of him in that episode, his eyes were shut and he wasn't moving. It was a brief one, but they threw it in. Does anyone remember if they did the silent clock count at the end of the episode? I don't think they did. I'm still annoyed they didn't do a silent count for Tony last season.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 09:32 AM) To be honest, this has to go on more than we ever can imagine. Corporate spying is done by most governments including the US because many countries either heavily subsidize, or even own key industries and companies. Fixed that for you. And no, that isnt' a shot at Bush.

Continuing spoiler alert... I get to congratulate a friend of mine who goes to school in Valencia on having been killed on 24 last night.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 08:40 AM) It is too damn cold here today. I've been waiting for it to warm up before venturing to the store and it hasn't moved past 39 degrees. That's not why I moved here dammit. Got ya beat...it actually froze in Pasadena last night. Burst water main pouring onto the street, policewoman standing in the middle of the ice patch warning drivers about the ice, me biking across it and smiling...

Because the only thing I trust more than the government in their ability to design an effective system is Microsoft...

QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 04:53 PM) If Bush's escalation plan is not successful, I wonder how the dark-horse GOP candidates who are now speaking against putting more troops in Iraq will fare with GOP primary voters. Some food for thought: Brownback, Paul, maybe Hagel gets in. Personally, I think that by far the biggest effect of the Iraq war is going to be to kill McCain's candidacy, and maybe knock off Clinton's while it's at it.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 08:28 AM) One thing I've been wondering -- given that a person will die by hanging, is it any more painful to him being decapitated? I don't see how it would be. Now, it's clearly better that everything's done well, but on the 'cruel & unusual' scale, the cruel bothers me a lot more than the unusual. I would bet that the decapitation is a much more rapid and much less painful process than the normal process of being hanged. Link

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 03:41 PM) This sounds exactly like Alex Cintron, but probably with more speed and better defensive range (perhaps more prone to errors, though). We'd need to get another big piece in this deal for it to make sense and Figgins isn't good enough. I for one could certainly tolerate taking Figgins in such a deal...it might not be totally balanced, but given the needs of the 2 teams it'd be pretty close to balanced, but I'd also hope we could find something to do with Podsednik as well, because I don't particularly want Figgins in CF everyday (although that would give us a really nice backup-OF option). I would say that Cintron probably strikes out somewhat more than Aybar, takes a few less walks, and has a little bit more power. But Aybar has a hell of a lot more speed, and should be able to hit for a much higher average over a full season.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) For the sox to get Aybar in a deal for Crede, the angels would have to add a major league piece. Either a bullpen arm, or a guy like Figgins. Getting strictly prospects for Crede would make the sox far weaker in 2007, even with Fields/ Mack/ Cintron/ Figgins taking over at 3b. Aybar probably wouldn't replace Uribe in 2007. Though he could push him mid yr if Uribe was struggling. The sox do need a long term SS. There are few and far between that have the type of ceiling as Aybar. It would make sense from the angels Point of view. I'm not sure from the sox POV though Aybar for Crede straight up probably isn't fair from the White Sox side, but if the White Sox wind up in the situation where Uribe simply won't be here this year, then they may have no better options available. But yes, it would be desirable for a second piece to be included at some point. I would disagree though with the statement that Aybar can't be ready to be a major league starting SS at the beginning of this year. He has spent a full year at each level in the minors, except for AAA, which was punctuated by some time with the Angels last year. He has gone to training camp with the Angels each of the last 3 years, and performed moderatley well in the time he saw. There is very little left that one could ask him to do in the minors, at least to my eyes. 5 full years, taking a step up every year, having big league time last year, multiple all-star appearances...if that's not earning yourself a chance at a big league roster, I don't know what is.

Remember how the Democrats just last week decided to put their 2008 convention in Denver? One of the farthest right-wing Senators in the Republican party, Sen. Wayne Allard of Colorado, has decided to honor his term-limits pledge and will not run for reelection in 2008. The Democrats already were lining up a potentially strong challenger in Rep. Mark Udall. This looks like a potentially very very strong pickup opportunity for 08.

QUOTE(Omeed @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 02:54 PM) There's more than a "few" Arabic linguist in the military. Here's a thought: When joining the military, service members sign a contract in triplicate form that states "Don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue." Also, annual training on this subject is required. This means you aren't allowed to ask about someone's sexual preference, aren't allowed to promote your own homosexuality, and aren't allowed to perform homosexual acts. This allows for homosexuals in the military "legally" if one doesn't openly admit to homosexuality and doesn't perform homosexual acts, and in theory punishes those who actively try to "out" homosexuals. According to the GAO, 55 Arabic speaking linguists have been dismissed from the military, and some 800 total folks with key skills have been removed from the military due to this program. Discharging and replacing those 800 people has cost the government nearly $400 million. And the 9/11 commission report identified a lack of arabic speakers as a key problem facing the U.S. in its current war messes.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 02:38 PM) The rest of the US has these laws about discriminating. LOL. The military said the same thing about women and minorities. Grow up. Being gay isn't contagious. You won't get cooties. They won't convert you while you sleep. Actually, I believe significant chunks of the U.S. do not have laws which ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. There is no national statute, and it is banned for federal employees only by executive order. Given some brief googling, here's a rough estimate of the status: So while significant chunks of the U.S. do ban that sort of discrimination, significant other chunks do not.