kevin57

I voted football in the poll but I'm not nearly as adamant as many here are about football's primacy in Chicago. Yes, it is the #1 sport, BUT I will hold up the Sox celebration of their championship around town to the Bears' any day. The Bears got a great party. When the Sox won it all, this town went into joyous meltdown. Baseball still holds the core of many people's hearts in this town.

I'll acknowledge that Berstein is one of the most knowledgeable voices on radio in this town, but I find their routine to be sophomoric and condescending. That's a really bad combination of negatives.

The salaries, especially for pitchers, in this year's free agent class have been jaw-dropping by anyone's estimation, and that's with a mediocre crop of players. Next year's group will be much more talented and will draw even more insane offers. The WS organization is on record that they ain't going to join in the orgy. Satana will not be with us.

It's often said that fans and pundits overhype "distractions" on players' performances, but you would have to be made of steel not to be affected by these kinds of legal troubles. Uribe will not sparkle in any way in 2007.

Just respond to the point. Knowing someone makes facile, sweeping commentaries what they are...ignorant. Not that long ago, for instance, all sorts of judgments, commentaries, and questions were raised about anyone who got divorced (Can I have an "Amen" from anyone in the crowd over 50?). Funny thing, though, when their relatives, neighbors and friends started getting divorced, most of those judgments stopped.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Dec 31, 2006 -> 05:13 PM) From a secular darwinian point of view, if you don't breed, you're going out of style. Passing on your genes is what every animal on earth is trying to do. Your post makes it look like you have never (knowingly) had a gay relative or friend. Your attitudes would be quite different if you did. As to this quote, there is an anthropological theory that homosexual tendencies are placed in a small, but significant, portion of the population precisely to control overpopulation.

Levine's speculation not outstanding, I don't think Garland is going anywhere. He was awarded his contract with the idea that he would be around for a while.

Can anyone tell me if Freddy has ever even tried to incorporate MB's style of pitching (i.e., quick & efficient)? Whenever I've seen him pitch it is torturously slow, and as a general rule, I think that less thinking and a more direct "go at 'em" approach works. (Jon, are you listening?)

Take out the first half of last season, and it appears that JG has the following pitching pattern: 1/3 of his games are brilliant, superb. The other 2/3 of his games are very mediocre. In those games he either gets an big fat "L" or the offense pounds out enough runs to save his sorry ass. In the overall scheme of things, that will make Jon a .600 pitcher. By today's standards that's goes for very good, but it's not nearly up to the hype that preceded his arrival on the scene.

His service speaks for itself and it should be commended. I trust that letters--and they are legion--that have a different perspective will receive equal respect. Certainly, Cindy Sheehan's viewpoint recieved the same attention that parents of other slain servicemen and women.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 12, 2006 -> 09:42 PM) I disgree. I have seen polls all over the board, and I don't think the public is overwhelmingly anything on this. And up to now, the Bush-bashing has worked quite well for the Dems. I do agree that can only go on so long, though. There has to be more there eventually. Completely wrong. The American people pretty much suppose Bush on fighting terrorism. And polls have shown overwhelming support for violating civil rights when tapping phone messages involving Al Queda.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Mar 12, 2006 -> 09:11 PM) Except we aren't at war. The "war on terrorism" is a lot more like the war on drugs or the war on poverty than it is the Civil War or World War I or II. That argument just doesn't stick. Hmm...I guess that attack on the Towers in NY was nothing. Please.

As long as he doesn't have the mental problems of Marte, that's okay. A.J. handled a lot of head cases last year and did wonderfully with them, but even he couldn't penetrate Damaso's cerebral cortex.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Mar 12, 2006 -> 10:29 PM) hmmm he is from oakland, but i just read here and a few other places that says hes a die hard indians fan....maybe thats where i saw him, not red sox but indians http://www.answers.com/topic/tom-hanks Eh, another hollywood type...not too faithful to anything.

KW's genius is showing.

No animus against Dustin, but it's time to explore other options. No doubt, he's done what he can and the Sox have done what they can to overcome whatever problems he's encountered, and it is not panning out. This is the time to look at other possibilities.

When the Yankees do fall, will Torre's job be at risk? Oh, yes, he's one of the greatest managers around, but King George has little patience with his subordinates.

I also think the law was violated. I also think that our laws were/are not current with the needs/technology of this war on terror. Further, I think that Bush did not seek congressional input in trying to draw up new legislation. So, on a legal level, Bush was at fault, but most presidents in time of war have violated laws. There's general consensus that they have constitutional authority to do so; historical predecent would seem to back that up. If history is as "harsh" on Bush as it is on Roosevelt and Lincoln for their violations of law during their terms of office, I suppose that will be fair and balanced.

I know it's not the conventional wisdom but I still maintain that Jenks should be considered as pitcher MVP for the World Series. Granted, a lot of pitchers did a great job, but Jenks answered the call night after night, not too shabby for any reliever, and for someone with his inexperience, spectacular.

The Dems pursue this to their own disadvantage. The country is overwhelmingly in favor of what Bush is doing, despite the legality. I'm making a political, not a ethical, evaluation of the matter.

I honestly can't believe there's anyone, no matter what their ideology, who does not believe Saddam to have been a genocidal maniac. Of course, there are those who don't believe in the Holocaust, either. :banghead

welcome to the "club."

This worry is at the bottom of my possible pessimisms.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Mar 10, 2006 -> 01:23 PM) Academia is overwhelmingly liberal almost everywhere. I worked briefly at Texas A&M, one of the most conservative universities in the nation, and met very few conservatives among the faculty. Hell, one of them actually had socialist propaganda posted all over his research lab. The student body seemed more conservative than some of the other universities I've been at, but the faculty wasn't. I'll trust what you're saying is true...and also incredibly sad. Granted it was a "few" years ago, but when I went to Villanova (grad of 1979), I did not encounter any left-wing bias. I honestly could not tell what part of the political spectrum most of my profs were on, and with the couple of lefties, I felt no pressure to parrot back anything.

Thanks, I stand corrected.