NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 21, 2008 -> 03:57 PM) If you note this thread...the immediate response was to blame Owens... QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Mar 21, 2008 -> 04:00 PM) True, but there were more "Blame Floyd" responses. Well, since those two are the favorite whipping boys of Soxtalk, I couldn't tell how seriously to take any of that.

So for those of us who missed it... was that first-batter triple off Floyd a real triple, or an OF bungle? Because in the 2nd and 3rd that I've seen, Floyd has looked pretty good.

Ramirez with a few solid plays at 2B. Maybe learning fast? Its not often I get baseball predictions right, but, I believe I was one of the few who said he'd make the roster. Glad to see that's the case. I really like this guy.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 07:51 PM) I can keep going if you want. If it'll help you out. Really though, there is a point and if you missed it thats fine. I would love to hear your reason for these posts from you lately - which frankly don't seem to serve any purpose other than to piss people off.

Richardson endorses Obama? I have to admit, I didn't think that was likely. But I do think it says something, for a former Clinton administration guy to do that. Richardson could be a lot of help in PR, and maybe a small help in other states, if he goes and campaigns for Obama. Edwards is the last big piece now. And frankly, Edwards is a LOT more help in PA and NC than Richardson is. If Edwards endorses Hillary and campaigns for her, I think PA becomes a huge win for her and she might even take NC. If he endorses Obama, that means Obama has a shot to win PA, and will roll through NC. Plus he still has some delegates to spread out.

So, polls for PA (4/22) seem to peg the Clinton lead there in the low teens range right now (polls 500+ other than Zogby-garbage and PPP, who are Clinton-paid)... Quinnipiac, 3/16: Clinton +12 Rasmussen, 3/12: Clinton +13 NC (5/6) polls show a single-digit lead for Obama, the polls are a bit stale... S-USA, 3/10: Obama +8 Rasmussen, 3/6: Obama +7 The first poll is out now for West Virginia (May 13th) though, and, wow... Rasmussen, 3/13 (702 LV)... Clinton: 55% Obama: 27% UND: 18% Yikes. The next few primaries don't look so great for Obama. He's still got a good lead, but, that could dwindle significantly if these margins stay in place. Not that they are likely to, as campaigning in PA is just beginning, but still...

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 04:31 PM) Probably also means welcome back Torpedo Boat as well. No way we let him go now with Richar being out that long.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 03:47 PM) Hillary currently holding a 7 point lead over Obama nationally among dems, according to gallup: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080320/ts_nm/...itics_gallup_dc Latest national polls (the 2 tracking polls are through 3/19 - yours was from 3/18)... _____________Clinton___Obama Gallup 3-day.......48%.........43% Rasm. 3-day.......43%.........46% CBS 3/18...........43%.........46% CNN 3/16...........45%.........52% USAT 3/16..........42%.........49% On average, Obama leading by about 3 points. What's interesting are the trends. Clinton went up after OH/TX, then back down and Obama took a lead. Then lately, after the Wright stuff, Clinton has surged back, though not taken a net lead. It will be interesting to see the tracking polls in another day or two, after all 3 days are post-Obama-speech.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 03:47 PM) southside... is your bracket busted already? What's with the hostility. Where did I say that JR is a poor (partial-owner). Where did I say that JR should open his books. I ask hypothetical questions that have nothing to do with me particular, just a general line of thought. QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 12:57 PM) so would JR ever open the books for everyone to look at and examine?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 03:20 PM) Nice pandering! Yeah, no s***. That's what I was thinking. And he's got UNC winning it all. Although, he does have Oregon and Western Kentucky losing.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 02:49 PM) Richar looks healthy to me. He's been playing good D with a lot of range. Just a couple days ago, he made a great sliding catch on a shallow flyball in no-mans land. And he has looked real good at the plate. His bat is a little slow now, but in a few days I predict to see him tearing the cover off the ball. He just had an MRI because his back was so bad he couldn't play. He was scratched from the lineup yesterday due to that. That doesn't sound too healthy to me.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 02:49 PM) I think it is the opposite. The newscycle is 24/7 on Obama and Clinton. The only time McCain even makes the news is when he screws something up. It is amazing 50% of people even realize McCain is still in the race. Could be. But McCain is in an awfully positive light right now, acting like a leader, going overseas, etc. And by the way, in response to Athomeboy, I was NOT saying the polls mean nothing. I was saying they mean something, but not necessarily that McCain is going to be a huge favorite in November.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 02:35 PM) McCain +7 over Obama and +10 over Hillary http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll One would expect this, given the in-fighting in the Dem party. If this was October, the Dems should worry. But its not. How this situation resolves itself is important - the Dem fight I mean. But ultimately, come July, it will be in the rear-view, and it will be a new race.

QUOTE(flavum @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 02:07 PM) Anyone else out there who doesn't really give a crap what they get for Crede? I want him traded. I want him traded now. QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 02:16 PM) f*** that. I want him starting. I want him starting now. I luv it when you analyze, Soxtalk.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 01:10 PM) Wow, I'm surprised the rest of the gang let you get away with this one. Michelle Obama is a racist now? And who are these other racists that surround him? I guess you're asserting that Wright is a racist? Any others? Ted Kennedy, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, David Axelrod, Harold Ford Jr? I think the posters here are generally smart enough to not bother responding to such ridiculous points. There can be no discussion or dialogue with something like that - its just flaming.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 12:57 PM) so would JR ever open the books for everyone to look at and examine? Forbes publishes a list every year of the value, and profit for the previous year, of each MLB team. Those numbers are not full gospel or anything, but they are probably pretty close. Looking over the years, you will see that the Sox usually eke out a very small margin, if any at all, depending on the year. You will also see that as revenues go up, so does the payroll (which would probably have to be checked elsewhere, but can easily be done). The basic numbers are out there for you to peruse.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 12:37 PM) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia No but the Army Reserve and National Guard apply. If you want a handgun permit or own a handgun, you have to be active in the National Guard or Army Reserve. Rifles would be different. As long as you have a license and permit you can own one. However, you need to be registered and up to date on rifle safety/shooting classes at least once a year. I wouldn't put too much stake in Wiki's interperetation of the word. And I am not sure where you are getting that you have to be in the guard or reserves to have a handgun.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 11:38 AM) I've always accepted that notion at face value, but in looking more at what the framers actually put down on paper I'm somewhat less convinced that was what they were trying to achieve. The Founding Fathers were very wary of the masses. Again, I'll ask a fellow SoxTalker to indulge me because I want to figure out how much of the standard pro/con arguments here are substantiated and how much is merely assumed. Do we have written confirmation from some of the Framers of the Constitution that confirms that they intended that armed citizens would serve as the ultimate check on government power? It may be going back 25 years to high school American History for me, but I still think Governor Morris summed up the Founding Fathers' opinion of the mob fairly well: I think the framers were far more fearful of an oppresive government than they were the masses. See: War, Revolutionary.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 11:33 AM) To my eyes, this simply makes no sense in the modern era. Having an armed populace does not in any way make the government more afraid of the people today...because the government is so much better armed. If the government felt the urge to execute every American (and could convince the army to go along with it) it wouldn't matter at all whether or not you had your small arms. Yes, it is an additional power denied to the government and I understand that. However, pretending that the 2nd Amendment is going to keep George from declaring himself King George the 2nd doesn't make sense to me, and hence, I don't see how you can consider it integral to anything. If the right to bear arms went away tomorrow and every gun in the nation magically vanished, aside from denying a few people the ability to go hunting and making a few areas more dangerous to travel because of actual wildlife, the impact on most people's lives would be practically zero, and the government wouldn't suddenly be more able to decide to become oppressive and start listening in on all my phone calls or something like that. I just disagree. I think the government is kept (somewhat) in check by the amalgam of freedoms given to its people. And being armed is among those. The effect isn't literal - you can't just look and say that on a battlefield the people would lose. That's missing the context. An armed populace changes all sorts of government behaviors - police tactics, for example. But more importantly, its an implicit check, like a nuclear option. Its just there, never likely to come into play. But its effect is still quite real, in my view.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 11:24 AM) Because my .22 is going to be able to stand up to a couple of Abrams tanks and a few B-2's. Missing the point. A country's government should be afraid of its people - not the other way around. The more freedoms a people have, the less power a government has, and that is key to the security of a free state (ref 2A). The freedom of ownership of arms is a major part of that - not the end and whole of it. Its integral to the continuing freedoms we enjoy.

So, a few weeks ago, the Sun Times ran a contest. Turn in a music video of a song telling them why Wrigley Field shouldn't be renamed (or if it should be, to what). The winner gets $1000. The contest was accompanied by some choice words for Sam Zell, owner of TribCo, as Cub Fans go into spasms of rage over the idea that they may change the name. The winner was recently announced. The catch? The winning video was made by... The Trib. The Sun Times was not aware they were Trib folk, but they are now. Here is a link to the video.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 11:16 AM) "Milwaukee is a permanent fixture in the NBA," Kohl said Wednesday after he announced that Larry Harris left as general manager. "I'm not in this business to make any annual profits. The value of the asset fortunately has appreciated over the years. On an annual basis, it's a money-losing proposition. I'm in it because I love the sport, I love the competition and I love winning." He HAS said nearly the same thing. The Sox don't make much money - rarely a profit, and if so, a small one. Increased revenues are plowed back into the team. That's how he has always managed the franchise.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 09:50 AM) oh bulls***. She's been saying "I'm more experienced" pre-Iowa. They're just now choosing to focus more on it. Why is it bad that they are focusing on it now? I mean, I would have preferred if they did it earlier, but, better late than never.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 09:38 AM) OK, I can follow that so far. Now, where is the modern mechanism by which all able-bodied citizens are called to national service in the militia? If that is laid out equally well, I'll have to revise my opinion considerably. As of now, my belief is that a callup of average able-bodied US citizenry is not actually possible and so my citing 2A as ensuring my right to own a gun because someday I'm going to get that call is flawed. I would suggest that the flaw in your argument is that you are assuming that 2A is only valid as part of a national call-up. Quite the contrary in fact, I'd say the right is expressly the opposite - that the militia of able-bodied citizens is a check against such a thing.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Mar 20, 2008 -> 09:21 AM) There is something funny going on with this report or it's a mistake in the report. MRI scans do not detect bone defects. They are specifically designed to look at soft tissue such as muscle, tendons or ligaments. Either they used the scan to rule out soft tissue involvement then assume it's a bone problem or somebody has something wrong here, deliberate or not. Two scenarios come to mind. One, they did the MRI because they thought it was a muscular/tendon issue, and happened upon the mircofracture. Or two, when they said "MRI", they really meant a Bone Scan, which may all sound the same to a reporter.