NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 02:24 PM) I admit, I'd rather see Colon #4, Floyd #5 than Floyd #4, Danks #5 at this point in time. Danks needs to spend this year working on his tools in AAA. That. If Colon or Contreras falter, you can always call up Danks, Broadway or Egbert.

QUOTE(Pants Rowland @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 10:05 AM) Who is the third? The better question is, who is that dude in your avatar, and where can I get one of those hats?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 01:49 PM) I believe part of the issue is the age that the classes would happen. At 16 or 18 I don't believe the kids have enough "real world" experience and it does not "stick" for the 10 years or so until they are buying homes, etc. Think how hard we strain to remember some items we learned in High School. You may not remember a lot of small specifics, but you remember some core stuff. You learned math and an assortment of other things you still remember. That's what it should be. You can't really require a class beyond high school anyway - college, its too narrow a group, and too late. Needs to be late high school.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 01:42 PM) DING!!! WINNAR!!! I'm gonna make a slightly different point - that it exposes the nearly complete lack of education on finance that this country's kids get. For the leading economy of the capitalist world, we sure don't seem to value knowledge of finances in our schools. Its an afterthought if its there at all.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 01:35 PM) I SHOULD be a little fair here. A combination of this rebate with the freezing on foreclosures might be a kick in the seat. I dont like the foreclosures freezing solution, but it's temporary. Might just be enough. Freezing foreclosures is a horrible idea, in my view. I could understand freezing rate increases temporarily, or setting some other restrictions in there. But if you freeze foreclosures, you will only make the problem worse. For one thing, those mortgage companies that are already losing money and laying people off will suddenly be laying off even more people. And for another thing, you'll just end up with an even bigger pile of foreclosures later for it, which is even harder for the economy to stomach.

The wife and I should be on a mountain somewhere in New Zealand on the 14th of Feb. (no NZ flag available)

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 12:52 PM) This is all so mental it isn't even funny. We have been being talked into a recession for six months now, and this is their way of talking us out of it. That amount of money is so small, it wouldn't really have a noticable economic effect on a 6 TRILLION dollar economy. Besides by the time this actually hits the economy and flows through, odds are we would be coming out of the slump without this help anyway. It really is pointless. Funny thing too, what may bring us out of the recession was a major contributor to going into one - housing. There has not been a housing recession like this in a very long time, and maybe not one as severe ever. It runs against the grain. Opportunists are going to start buying up depressed property for future development. That gives desperate sellers cash, and encourages that future development. The only reason it hasn't started in earnest already is the parallel credit crisis - those developers won't get as leveraged as they did, and marginal ones won't be able to enter the market. But for the majority of them that are semi-well-funded, they will only be encouraged.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 11:49 AM) The money guys aren't going to go to Huckabee, but if it comes down to Romney/McCain, which it may well if Romney wins Nevada and McCain winds up in a dogfight in SoCar... I think the GOP religious conservative base is a bit leery of Romney, both on the Mormon issue and on his electability.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 11:14 AM) You don't think there's an awful lot of connections still remaining between him and the money guys? I think a lot of those connections have backed off a bit, and I further think that they are more interested in beating the Dems than they are trying to support a candidate like Huckabee who would get destroyed in a national election.

Thread title changed, thread unpinned - for now.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 11:04 AM) I'll leave it to you guys to tell me whether you find this important or not. Tex excluded, as this I'm sure just decided his vote. Fortunately, Tom DeLay has become nearly useless to the GOP anyway. So he can "sit this one out" all he wants and it will make no difference.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 11:02 AM) I had an interesting thought... Hillary has a VERY big advantage over all the other candidates... she can be in two places at once. What i mean is, she has Bill. Hillary can hold 4 events.. Bill can hold 4 events. While in the same time Obama might only hold 4. Yes Barack has Michelle... but she's not Bill. It really give her an unfair advantage. That is part of the picture of one of the really irritating things about Hillary Clinton - she wants it both ways. She says she has all this experience being in the White House - but she wasn't elected. If she was, she couldn't be running again now, could she? So we're basically getting the Clintons as a couple doing an end-run on the Constitution. Mind you, I thought Bill was a pretty good President - especially on later reflection. So its not some unfounded hatred of the Clintons.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 10:21 AM) I just worry that Hillary's momentum will overshadow anything Edwards can contribute. I think if Hillary wins NV and second or better in SC... Edwards faids and Obama looses ground. I sort of agree. But if Edwards loses ground, I think the majority of his supporters will tend towards Obama anyway.

QUOTE(striker62704 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:59 AM) Why does everyone hate MacDougal? He had a bad year last year but there were like 4 Whitesox that didn't. He was lights out in 2006 and has been alot healthier than Dotel. I like the signing, but you can never have too many bullpen arms. MacDougal struggles under pressure, which isn't what you want from a late inning reliever. Even in 2006, his numbers with men on base were significantly worse than Thornton and others (I posted a bunch of those numbers here a while back). Plus, MacDougal has a repeated history of collapsing, and having to go back to the minors before returning. And finally, I've read him saying things that lead me to believe he just doesn't give a s***. All that combined and I think he's not worth the money, nor is he as good as Jenks, Thornton, Wassermann, Logan, Linebrink, Dotel* (if healthy), or frankly any number of those AA and AAA bullpen prospects.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 10:12 AM) I was under the impression that his delegates would have to go to one of the other candidates. Does he make them to go to his candidate of choice or can he just endorse one of the 2? He/they could do whatever they want. But if you are John Edwards, and you have a chance to use that huge number of delegates to achieve something... you do it. And his followers will undoubtedly go along with it, at least mostly. I really doubt he goes to Denver, if no one has 50%, and just tells his delegates "do what you want". Just seems really unlikely to me.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:55 AM) Oh I dont think it's that, I think he is just stubborn. He HAS to know he has no chance to win right now and to think he will run this all the way to the convention is ignorant. He needs to endorse Obama or NEITHER of them wins. Actually, despite my dislike for Edwards as a candidate, I don't think he's stubborn or ignorant on this - I think he's smart. He knows he's got enough support to do exactly what I suggested - make the next President. And if he can't BE the next President, then getting to choose that person is the next best thing. Plus he'll probably get a cabinet post out of it.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:45 AM) And Hillarity's bus to the White House will run on. She's not nearly the lock you keep saying she is. If Obama wins SC (which it appears he will), and at least stays very close in NV (which is very possible), with the look of things in national polls, I think we'll see Obama and Clinton in a near dead-heat after Super Tuesday. That means likely an Edwards crowns nominee event in Denver. And I really do think that Edwards is more likely to endorse Obama than Clinton.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:28 AM) RealClearPolitics Poll Update... Interesting Note: If Edwards is below 15% in many of the areas, that is possibly a HUGE bump for Obama. If you take the "Reuters/CSpan/Zogby" poll. 42% for Clinton and 37% for Obama. If 8% of the Edwards supporters go to Obama it's 46% Clinton, 45% Obama, 9% undecided/other. It's going to be a CLOSE race. Zogby and ARG should be trashed in any sort of analysis of the polls, as we've established previously. So that leaves 2 Jan polls, which are Mason-Dixon (Clinton 41, Obama 32, Edwards 14), and Research 2000 (Obama 32, Clinton 30, Edwards 27). And those two polls are not even that close to each other, except on Obama. Plus its a caucus. So its a close race without the Edwards swing - and there is no telling where that will go either. ETA: I think that since Edwards isn't ready to pick a side yet, they won't push for a certain candidate, so they'll split. The union worker types would likely go Obama, but in rural areas, they'd likely go Clinton. I think Clinton wins, in a close one, like NH. But I hope I am wrong.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:15 AM) I wonder if the contract has incentives involved, and whether MacDougal or Thornton could be used in a trade with either Crede or Uribe to try and get rid of their contracts. That's what I and others have been hinting at - it seems like the team is actually making it such that they have a few bullets to trade with. And at this point, it really seems like a starting pitcher is the only thing the team really needs badly.

QUOTE(bear_brian @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:09 AM) It seems like signing Dotel - and possibly signing Colon - give us more ammunition to swing a more major trade for a lead-off hitter, a centerfielder, or more pitching. Am thinking about one of the following: 1. Crede and MacDougal to the Brewers for Bill Hall 2. MacDougal, Aardsma, Richar, Floyd, Uribe and cash to Baltimore for Roberts and Bedard. Don't laugh - the Orioles have no shortstop, need bullpen arms, would love the PR from Floyd since he is an Annapolis native, and seem determined to chop payroll. 3. Matt Thornton and John Shelby for Coco Crisp (if the Santana deal does not happen). Red Sox don't need much, but could use another lefty out of the pen. Just some thoughts. We still need more pieces to contend ... Option 1, while possible, does nothing for the Sox - the team doesn't need more outfielders. Option 2 will never ever happen. And Option 3 would be an awful trade for the Sox.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 09:00 AM) The campaign finance stuff really is a sore point. And alot of conservatives do not like his amnesty positions. Otherwise, he would be an easy choice. However for me, if the other choice is Hillary, it is a slam dunk. I tend to think his campaign finance reform efforts tried to go the right way, but he got so turned around by the establishment that the result was just awful. I only blame him a little for that. I think McCain is dead wrong on Iraq, and I disagree with a few of his social stances. But I think he's truly in it for the right reasons (like Obama), I actually sort of trust the guy, he's actually interested in real energy policy change and environmental protection... he's just a much better choice than Hillary, to me, overall.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 08:36 AM) McCain seems like such an easy choice on that side, I can't believe he isn't just crushing everyone. He's starting to - look at the polls. I think people realize he's probably the only Republican who has a good shot at winning the election against the Dems. Heck, I'll vote for him most likely if Clinton is the nominee for the Dems.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Jan 17, 2008 -> 11:31 PM) A Thompson win in SC and a Guiliani win in FL would be most excellent. A Thompson win in SC would be the equivalent of when Iowa State (ranked 104 of 107 D1 teams) beat Nebraska (ranked 6 of 107 D1 teams) in 1992. Sure its possible, but...

QUOTE(Reddy @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 08:15 AM) nah i'm actually pretty certain Hillary's gonna win this thing too, which, if it can't be Edwards, I'd rather have. i know... scary right? but honestly, i think she's less likely to screw things up than he is. kind of a risk/reward ratio thing. in the same vein, if Obama wins the nom, and McCain's the GOP pick - I think I'd vote McCain. At least then you'd know what you're getting. I just don't want any reactionary "uh... let's bomb pakistan" coming from the next President and I worry about something like that with Obama. You do realize that your man Edwards has even less experience in elected office that Obama, right? Obama: 7 years State Senate, 3 years US Senate Edwards: 6 years US Senate Clinton: 7 years US Senate Now, clearly, the US Senate work is more valuable that state level. But I find it amusing you'd rather have Edwards, or Clinton for that matter, because "you know what you are getting". Neither of them have significantly more experience in elected office than Obama does. Ultimately though, I am thinking more and more that the Dems are going to Denver without a nominee. No one will get 50%. So Former Senator Edwards, ultimately, will decide the nominee, by deciding where to put his chips. Sort of funny, isn't it? The one person of the three left who is almost sure not to win, will end up with the ultimate say.

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 07:59 AM) Here is the article from MLBtraderumors http://www.impactodeportivo.com.do/?op=dis...amp;format=html And translated: http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%...=en&ie=UTF8 Great signing, its only two years, so if it does not work out, no biggie. But if it does, sweet. Cl-Jenks SU-Linebrink SU-Thorton MR-Dotel MR (right specialist)-Wasserman MR (Loogy)-Logan LR-Haeger Looks good to me, just no MacDougal please. Yeah, I like that pen as well, and agree on MacD. I hope they can trade him away for something. And with the utility type guys we have for the bench (Owens, Ozuna, Ramirez, Hall) the team could probably get away with a 4 man bench and a 7 man bullpen like that. If not, and if they get stuck with Uribe, then Haeger probably loses out. So the Sox really now have a few pieces that they should move - Uribe, MacDougal, Crede... I wonder if there will be a few moves in ST.