Steff

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 20, 2007 -> 07:40 AM) Wow. Three more letters than I could muster up...

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 17, 2007 -> 01:51 PM) Is he the one seated, in the vest? Or the one standing up against the wall? The fat cow with the bad hair plugs sitting down.

Gonzales is so disgusting.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Feb 17, 2007 -> 10:24 AM) If 3/33 is correct, then the Sox were lowballing Buehrle in years and money. At last years ASB...? No. If I had to guess on the deal it was likely 9, 11 and 13 - not including incentives or the option year. Very fair at the time.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Feb 16, 2007 -> 11:12 PM) Ha, I can completely relate. Wish I had a camera right now to showcase my three year old retro Sox hat. It endured piss, alcohol, cigarette butts, dirt, grime, and sweat over it's liftetime. I literally had to stop wearing it because it was giving me rashes on the back of my scalp. Not to mention it had an odd odor. Lysol could only do so much. I considering washing it, but another hat I had previously was never the same after a rinse cycle. They have "hat holders" at bed bath and beyond for washing them in the washer - which I would not do. Soak them in the sink with some Tide for about 15 minutes, rinse with cool water then shape and let air dry.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 16, 2007 -> 07:47 PM) I just saw Ozzie on that Comcast sports show with Jiggets, and he said he "wants them to paint over that s***". He wants the team to be hungry and not think about 2005 anymore, and I agree. Weird.

I wish they would paint over the WS stuff in the dugout. It's all over the park enough.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 16, 2007 -> 03:54 PM) Oh no doubt he will not enter the hall a White Sox, but he is a current member of the White Sox that will likely make the hall. Based on the criteria Hideaway Lights stated "which current White Sox (that have spent most of their career with the team) do you think will eventually be hall of famers?" Thome does not qualify.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 16, 2007 -> 12:21 PM) Jim Thome There is no way Jim Thome can be a choice based on the criteria. He'll never be on an active roster with another team longer than he was with the Indians.

With the criteria you've stated. IMO, no one.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 04:12 PM) Id put alot of money on the law that the lady is accused of breaking is statutory and not common law. Almost all criminal laws are statutory. The statute proscribes the conduct that is necessary for conviction. A law like "statutory rape" does not include "knowledge" which is generally required in common law crimes. This is important because prior to statutory law the prosecution had to prove to things: 1) actus reus (criminal act) 2) mens rea (criminal mind). In this case it would be almost impossible to prove mens rea (like in the case of the 18 year old and 17 year old where the 17 year old comes in and says they consented negating the criminal mind). That is why I believe that it was a statutory crime, and that makes it much much harder to defend against. Basically I think the statute says all you have to do is committed the act, regardless of whether you intended to or not. If that is the case it doesnt matter what excuse she uses the act happened, shes guilty. Like statutory rape, it doesnt matter if 1000 witnesses come in and say that the girl lied about her age, was in a 21 club, etc. If the boy had sex with some one under the age of consent, its rape regardless. Sorry if i wasnt clear enough. You weren't for me so thanks for going into more detail.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 04:00 PM) I already stated why I brought up the example. I apologize, but could you clarify this a bit more for me... "It could be hard though because most likely its statutory and probably poorly written so that there is no knowledge requirements etc. " What in this case would be considered statutory? I'm missing the connection you are making.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 03:49 PM) Im not even going to get into this argument, I just wanted to use an example that most people would know. Im not going to start writing a book on conflict of laws and what state law would trump etc. Most people have heard of 18 as an adult, 17 as a minor, so for an easy comparison I was just using that. I guess since its an Illinois website I could have used 17 and 16, but the age thing was really not the point. Aside from that non argument, what is the relevance of a statutory defense in this case?

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 03:40 PM) Yeah it varies by state, I was just going with the common 18 is an adult, 17 and 364 days is not. It's 18 in only 10 states. It's 14 in 3, and 13 in Virginia. The solid average is 16. http://www.amber-net.org/amberstatutes.htm

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) Idonno, I know Jurors are apposed to consider the law when they are ruling guilty or not guilty. But if it was me, I would have a hard time being convinced to send someone to jail for having sex with a girl one year younger than him. The age of sexual consent in Connecticut is 16.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) What is the industry standard for coffee temperature? IIRC, 130ish. The coffee that burned Liebeck was "at or about 190 degrees" per McDonalds admission, FYI.

QUOTE(Soxfest @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 01:43 PM) #1 I am talking about next winter, nobody knows how it is going to turn out. White Sox have not been a major player in top shelf free agents for awhile and with the money they will have after 2006 season they will be able to be a major player, I am just saying history says otherwise. I hope I am wrong but JR crying about salaries this winter, next winter free agents will not be any cheaper! But history DOES NOT say otherwise. The holding group has ALWAYS put ALL black back into the team.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 11:30 AM) Question: do the rows in section 152 begin with numbered rows or lettered rows? I got section 152, row 1 for a 1/2 price Monday, so I'm wondering if I'm in the first row or the 4th or 5th. Thanks! Everything in the park has supposedly changed back to numbers... so if that is correct you are in row 1

QUOTE(easyw @ Feb 14, 2007 -> 06:25 AM) Might not have been his wife - could've just been some baseball annie. Yea, on national tv. Hopefully, Jim isn't as stupid as that thought.

QUOTE(bmags @ Feb 13, 2007 -> 12:58 PM) that's a shame, i've heard soldier field shows are kinda bleck. I don't think i want to go to arena like shows ever. i like the band right on top of me and then hanging out with them at the bar. I've seen 4 shows there and as long as you get a seat on the Caddy club side nearest to the north end zone as you can get, you will love it.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Feb 13, 2007 -> 05:18 PM) Didn't the last time this get brought up we were treated to a treatise on vacuums and how the dyson loses its effectiveness quickly based on the fact that its plastic? I wasn't part of that convo, but based on using it daily for the past 2 weeks, that would be a false assesment.

I bought a Dyson. I didn't believe all the hype, but holy crap does that thing work.

QUOTE(Iwritecode @ Feb 13, 2007 -> 01:32 PM) There were when I checked on the Sox website yesterday. They weren't very good seats (sect 109 row 30) but they were there. My bad. I never would have asked for something over there. Work wants some so I asked our rep for something between the bags+5 and there's nothing. QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Feb 13, 2007 -> 01:31 PM) You can buy full season on the website. They don't guarantee tickets to every postseason game however. Just 1 a round I believe. I don't know why but I have this mental block that full seasons can be anywhere in the park.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 13, 2007 -> 01:21 PM) Sorry, I meant the net count, not specific holders. There are still some 81 game plans left, but I bet they all sell out, and with the added season seats, the net number of holders will likely be higher than last year. I was commenting about retention. As of last Friday, there are no 81 game plans avaliable.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 13, 2007 -> 01:14 PM) I don't think it would be odd. My maternal grandparents both died recently and a lot of people brought kids (even some that weren't related to us) and the kids were a really nice diversion for us (the family). And they bring cheer and life to an otherwise not so cheerful and lively situation. Completely agree with both of your posts on this. When my grama died earlier this year almost every child in the immediate and extended family came and it was much different than any other wake I had been to before. Made it a bit more tolerable for me as I was extremely close to her.