Balta1701

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 14, 2006 -> 01:22 PM) In a nutshell this is exactly what is wrong with American politics. There is no choice by the voters anymore, at all, in either party. We don't even get to choose canditates early in the process, because we have the parties filtering out canditates behind the scenes. And they can control all of these things because they control the purse strings through our discriminatory campaign finance laws. The party has all of the money because of the hard caps regarding what you can give directly to a canditate so they control what we hear about canditates almost completely. We have zero choice. You might as well have the politburo putting together the party slate, because right now the only difference between us and the communist states of prior days is that there are basically two politburos who have to fight it out, instead of just one. This system is a complete joke and needs to be completely blown up and replaced with something where all canditates stand on equal ground. Dollar vote does not equal free speech. Free speech equals free speech. Hear Hear!

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 14, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) Why didn't they compare the first terms under both Pres? Very simple...Lexis Nexis starts to have a large number of holes in their data when you start pushing back into the 1st term of Clinton. They didn't have any way to access the data to compile a complete story.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 14, 2006 -> 12:59 PM) I don't buy it. He didn't have money, and they told him that he couldn't win, so 'back off'. I think Kap looks like he's more in the right based on what reading I've done. Here is an actual post from Hackett @ TPMCafe. If you look carefully, you'll notice something is missing...any sort of endorsement by Hackett of his opponent, which is usually a sign of some sort of gracious acceptance. Oh, and then there's this: And then there's This Here's a more detailed piece looking at some of the Problems Hackett was having, and looking at what will need to be done to bring out more people like Paul in the future.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 14, 2006 -> 01:01 PM) DeWine will be re-elected and so too will Schmidt. You supported your argument with so much detail, so much thought, so much amazingly grand brilliance that I am finding it impossible to challenge your belief, oh wonderous one. Some day you must take an apprentice so as to teach others your masterful skills in this milieu of rhetoric.

So Media Matters has an interesting and thorough report on the Strong Republican slant in Sunday Morning Talk shows running all the way back through the latter years of the Clinton Administration.

Is anyone else sitting here trying to figure out why that name sounds so funny and yet appears to be totally un-funny?

The one thing I keep hoping is that Uribe will have to learn to do what Iguchi learned to do last year...be patient and drive the ball the other way. Uribe was doing terrible last year when he was swinging at every pitch and trying to pull everything. When he got hot, he added that leg lift, took a few more pitches, and had his timing better where he could drive the ball to all fields instead of just trying to pull everything. Last year, because Pods was on base so often, Iguchi got used to hitting everything to the opposite field so that Pods could get himself from first to 3rd on a hit, and he wound up taking some extra pitches so Scotty would get the chance to run. With what we've seen from Uribe before, if he could focus on doing those 2 things (Maybe with some adjustments to his swing and batting stance, i hope), then he might be able to really have success in that slot. And oh yeah, hitting before JT won't hurt. He could be a miserable failure too, but I'm just going to hope for the best.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 09:58 PM) And, since I don't think I'm really entitled to give a well-rounded opinion on the subject, what everyone's thoughts on FDR? Good, bad, otherwise? I think FDR has his good points and his bad points. Good points...i.e. fixing a lot of the major problems which drove the economy into the depression. Things like the FDIC, The National Labor Relations Act, Social Security were all some very good programs. On the other hand, there were quite a few wasteful programs as well, such as the WPA, which did a lot of good infrastructure work but also was wasteful as all Hell. Economically, he built the foundations which would allow for the growth of the latter half of the 20th century, but his efforts also struggled to end the depression and may have in some ways made it worse. Aside from that, you have to look at the war, which of course has its good parts and its bad parts again. You have great moves like taking people who weren't the most obvious choices for the roles and giving them to people like Marshall and Ike, who turned out to be incredibly good choices. You have FDR's move in 1940 or so to start a major armament program in the U.S. military, thus giving us ships rolling off the line in '42 right when we needed them. On the other side, you have his work at Yalta, where he practically gave up Eastern Europe in order to get a pledge from the Russians to declare war on the Japanese, possibly because his health affected his negotiating abilities. Like I said, some good points, some bad points. I guess maybe what matters most is that he turned out to be a very good leader during some of the most trying times this country has ever faced or will ever face.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 07:03 PM) Haha, that would keep me on the "keep Davis bandwagon". They move corpses in bandwagons these days? I was saying "Give Davis 1 more year" at the end of last year. I'm not saying that any more. That says something, I think.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 07:01 PM) Hence, the coaching change. And starting all over. Indiana would have no problem getting there again. This isn't Harvard and Yale dominating in the early 1900s and never regaining that. We hope.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 06:59 PM) Well yeah, Indiana trumps Villanova if they are both going well. But Indiana isn't going well right now, and haven't been going well for 4 years. And while 4 years isn't all that long, it's enough time to fall way behind on the recruiting trail. Was Villanova doing that well before this coach got started there?

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 06:54 PM) And that's Davis' fault that he can't get players from the state. That can easily change again. Indiana can give a guy Wright more money, and if they're both going good, there's no denying Indiana trumps Nova in prestige. Heck, the way Sean May tells it, IU would have had him had Davis bothered to pay any attention at all to recruiting him and not just assumed he'd go to IU.

So is Duke back @ #1 next week?

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:45 PM) http://will.i.am/ Good ol knapweed. Man did that stuff cause us a bunch of annoyance @ field camp.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 05:41 PM) There are several simulated trophies in there, can'tcha see 'em???? And the 1907 and 1908 trophies turned to dust, that's why you can't see them either... Sadly, that wouldn't actually happen...unlike most metals, like Iron, which react with oxygen to give an oxide phase and energy, gold is actually stable at room conditions. For those who understand what it means, the free energy change of the reaction Au + x O = Au2O3 has a positive free energy of formation...which means you literally need to heat it in order to make it rust. This is why, for example, when gold is found in nature, it is actually found as metallic gold, and not found as an oxide, like aluminum which is found as Bauxite for example. Of course, they might have made the tropies back then out of Iron, at which point none of that would matter. But ours looked nice in gold.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 05:34 PM) Ummm, the Bulls essentially traded Brand for Chandler. What's wrong with that comparison? It was and still is a horrible trade. Chandler will never be the player that Brand currently is. Oh great, another Chandler debate. And it's starting to move quicker again. Look, he's starting to turn into a decent player. He's certainly not the best in the league, he's certainly not an all-star. He has only played a few months with this new contract, and only a few weeks where he's been healthy and finally in shape. He's had a disappointing season to be sure. No one right now can tell me they know 100% where his potential ceiling is, and no one can tell me 100% that they know whether or not he'll actually reach it. If we wanted to win now, Brand pulling in 25 and 10 a night would clearly be better than Chandler. You'd have to be crazy to doubt that. Down the road? We'll see. Chandler would have his work cut out for him to improve enough to match that. Anywho, the guy who made that deal is a scout for the Yankees now or something like that, so who cares at this point? We've got him, he's not terrible, let's try to figure out the best thing we can do with him. If that's trade him, tell me. If we can build around him by getting another big guy, let's figure that out too. Aside from learning from whatever mistakes were made by he who won't be named, which I think Pax has done well (I.e. the drafting of Hinrich, Deng), there's little debate left at this point. The Clippers won't give us a redo on that deal, so let's just try to figure out the best thing we can do with what we have. Think Tyson should be benched? Traded? Play 48 minutes a game? Tell me why. But this back and forth "He sucks, no he's great" isn't getting us anywhere.

Hehe, turns out Cheney was hunting illegally. He will be issued a warning citation. (Carries no fine or penalty). But I can still taunt!

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 03:23 PM) Wow, that is quite the statement. I find it much too optimisic though. I suppose 105 could happen--if everyone on the team outperforms the most optimistic predictions and no injuries occur outside of the occasional hamstring pull. However, the chance of that happening is probably less than .1 percent, which doesn't really even make it worth considering in my mind. If this team played 100 seasons I think they would win 105 about once. The statement was "If everything goes well". That removes a lot of the bad things when you make that assumption. That means you're assuming Crede doens't regress due to his back, Thome has a Thome-like year, our bullpen holds together, and our starting pitching doesn't backtrack. Assuming everything goes well automatically excludes things like Thome, Konerko, or Buehrle spending significant time on the DL, hitting .220, etc.

Anyone else pumped that Crede still has the same haircut?

I walked past a person wearing a Cubs hat yesterday and biked past a person in a Twinkies hat about 40 minutes ago. Both times I just smiled.

QUOTE(DonkeyKongerko @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:51 PM) I thought maybe there was some connection between Church's Chicken and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Instead, it turns out Church's Chicken (and Caribou Coffee) is owned by Arcapita, formerly known as the First Islamic Investment Bank. I didn't even know there were still Church's Chickens around, I haven't seen one in at least 10 years. There are a bunch of them out here. A bunch more downtown.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) Yes, I suppose it could, should that information linkage be made, etc. Definitely should be taken seriously. This, like the leak of her name itself, should be investigated, and anyone who is guilty of leaking said information should be punished severely. With the Plame leak, it took several months before the DOJ began an investigation...the CIA had to request it, and then the DOJ sat on the request for a while before finally starting it up when Ashcroft recused himself. So what you'd expect with this sort of leak would be a CIA request to Justice for an investigation. That'd be your first sign that the CIA believes harm was actually done. For all we know this is being leaked deliberately by the CIA to try to limit some of the damage done by the Plame leak (disinformation, if you will.)

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:32 PM) You mean Astros? A jersey that says "Bush"? Get it? Eh? Eh?

For some reason the bloody video is refusing to play on my computer (realplayer) right now, but C-SPAN has a link up which supposedly runs to the video at that page. Under "Recent programs", "President Bush Remarks to the 2005 World Series Champions (02/13/2006)"

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 01:10 PM) The image of Dubya holding up a White Sox jersey with the name Bush on the back of it just made half the people on this board puke, the other half starched their shorts. And a bunch of Houston Texans fans jealous.