mr_genius

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 07:43 PM) Ball to the gap caught by JD. Good job Bmac! Wonder if there is somebody different in the 8th. i doubt it

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 07:37 PM) Not watching the game but why are people worried about Garland. His pitch count is still pretty low and his line looks good. Is he getting hit hard or something like that? Just curious. well, Garland is out McCarthy in... just started watching he game so don't know if he was struggling (the numbers don't show that he was)

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 07:36 PM) Why would he be out? He's given up 5 hits (only 3 hit hard) and 0 walks in 6 IP. Who in their right mind would take a pitcher out with a pitch count of 75 in that situation? ^^^

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Apr 18, 2006 -> 07:31 PM) Honestly, if Jon is coming out I'd like to see Matt or Neal pitch the 7th. I don't want Bmac pitching 2 innings everytime he comes in, and if he comes out there for the 7th, I bet he'll be out there for the 8th as well. of course if Garland comes out now McCarthy pitches 2 duh

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Apr 15, 2006 -> 09:54 AM) I'm sure there are lots of loony bastigages on this side of the pond who would agree with this idiot.

QUOTE(Steff @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 09:00 AM) There was a lot more, and it was just plain stupid. Ironic also considering those calling others immature couldn't see just how childlike their own behavior was. haha, those dorks.

QUOTE(Spod=Ratings @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 08:54 PM) Just wondering where's all the people that hated Konerko last year? they like posting at and running http://whitesoxinteractive.com/

QUOTE(SoxPhan7 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 08:56 PM) wow, the title really scared me! i thought Potbelly was going out of business or something. if potbelly went out of business i would be so pissed.

Konerko sucks i hate him

QUOTE(daa84 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 08:33 PM) the cubs game huh? who the f*** are they?

QUOTE(rventura23 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 08:26 PM) jose's 1.29 ERA 2nd best in bigs 1.29? thats horrible, trade him immediatley

w00t! CREDE,, YO

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 06:23 PM) Mercy. The heart of our lineup is sick. sure is can't pitch around Thome, thats for sure.

PAULIE!!!!!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 06:18 PM) Pujols hit his 4th home run in 4 at bats. damn!

haha, who made the slump buster graphic on the top of the page? nice work

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Apr 16, 2006 -> 11:09 PM) Yesterday, I rented perhaps the worst movie I've seen in recent memory, "A Sound of Thunder." The special effects featured in this movie rival Tron. And atleast Tron had an excuse, since they happened to be the best available in the early 80's. The plot itself is based upon time travel theories featured in Simpsons, Butterfly Effect, etc. An eccentric millionaire finances the creation a device capable of sending its wealthy clients back into time. Specifically, several hundred million years ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth. Purpose of such an expensive trip is to merely shoot and kill a dinosaur before it falls within a tar pit. Summarizing the supposed physics involved, which aren't too complicated--you can't bring anything back, leave anything behind, or disturb the order of the past world. Any small difference creates a ripple effect with drastic consequences. In this movie, stepping on one butterfly creates havoc beyond comprehension. Not exactly what happened to Homer when he crushed the mosquito, but still a noticeable difference in the world. Its story is what drew me to renting it. Interesting enough, I thought. Yeah, I was wrong. The effects are so bad, it just's too hard to take anything seriously. I've never considered special effects alone to decide a movie's merit, but since we're in 2006, I expect more from a major motion picture. Especially one where SE are critical to the storyline. I never intended to rent the movie for it's insight into the discussion of time travel. I was just looking to be entertained. Which it failed miserably at. haha i read this review for the movie on rottentomatoes.com "Have you seen the trailer? If so, then that's as close to watching the movie as you should get."

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Apr 16, 2006 -> 05:25 PM) cheap win...if I were a jays fan I'd be pissed as hell you sound like John Kruk

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Apr 16, 2006 -> 03:35 PM) Yes, because I am liberally minded must mean that I love Michael Moore! Sorry, no. He is the Coulter of the left and an entertainer more than a serious political pundit. But please, try to put more words in my mouth. i didn't put any words in your mouth. i made an assumption about you.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Apr 15, 2006 -> 12:43 PM) just suggest a title that is a bit better than one written by an intellectually dishonest sack of bile. like Michael Moore, the savior!

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 09:25 AM) One of our esteemed Vice Presidents has been trolling porn sites since 7am this morning. haha

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 04:38 PM) Except HGttG was written in jest. it was! oops, i've been using that as my religion.

QUOTE(Felix @ Apr 13, 2006 -> 08:42 PM) I really like that sig. Its simple, but gets the point across ^^^

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 13, 2006 -> 08:51 PM) I believe most cynics would say the thought of a government program being easy and inexpensive would be a first. haha, yea the government does botch a lot of the social "programs" it runs. However, the U.S. government is fairly good at running systems such as a computerized employment checks. If congress could get a fair bill passed, it would be comparitively simple to get all this in order. I am very familiar with computer systems such as this, and if they already have something set up (as Balta suggested) it would probably require some tweeking and education of employers of the process, but it should be very inexpensive for employers to run a check on an employees work status. I'm getting the feeling that the some of the posters in this thread will be against anything that would prohibit the use of illegal employment practices. No matter how cheap and easy the new system is there will always be some complaint how it "such a horrible burden". Thankfully, the polls show around 70% of americans would support such policies, therefore politicians will start to come around on things (they don't want to piss people off too much and lose their next re-election campain).

We'll see I think Garland will be able to turn it around fairly quickly. If I'm wrong and he sucks the rest of the year, yea we should have traded him. lol