NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 09:48 PM) I think it's funny how the blue line went higher than the yellow line when gun control was a topic of debate, and when abortion was a topic the yellow line went higher. basically because blue is male and yellow is female. yellow and blue lines? What are you looking at?

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 04:16 PM) The Sox are in big trouble for the next 5-7 years. We could flip spots with the Royals very soon here. No one, not even KW, knows who will be on the Sox roster in 5-7 years. For that matter, there is only a small handful of hints at, say, 3 years. Your hyperbole is laughable.

John McCain really dislikes Ron Paul.

Ron Paul wants to get rid of the Department of Energy. Can't say I agree with that one. Smaller government is good, but energy policy by nature needs to be federal.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 08:29 PM) We're talking about the writers for the CBS Evening news. The CBS Evening news would be the ones hosting the debate. Presumably Couric would be doing the moderating. And hence, the Dems would have to cross a picket line to appear on that debate, because the show that would be hosting the debate would have its writers on strike. Garbage. If the writers want to picket, hey, that's fine. But the idea that such a strike will interrupt the dialogue that will help decide who the leader of the free world will be is just assinine.

Romney just body-slammed Huckabee on the Arkansas law regarding tuition breaks. oooh, but, Huckabee with a pretty darn good retort.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 08:22 PM) The candidates have no urge to be seen crossing a picket line, and that's what they'd have to do to appear on CBS once their news writers go on strike (a different strike from the general WGA one on right now) Someone explain to me why the WRITERS would be striking a DEBATE. I simply do not see them as related.

Anyone else watching this debate on CNN? First question, on illegal immigration, and Giuliani and Romney are seriously at each other's throats. I haven't seen an exchange like this in a debate in a while. Where's the popcorn...

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 06:42 PM) Just hitting the wires: This is a joke, right? The writers guild - for a debate?

ESPN adds that Linebrink has some sort of no-trade protection in the contract as well.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 12:10 PM) http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14713468/detail.html Stuff like this, rarely reported nationally, does so much to protect our environment. Then on the other hand, also under the radar, the administration continues their assault on the environment via proxies. Fortunately, thanks to pressure from outside organizations on the government, this particular hosebeast was fired, and some of her damage reversed. Check out the last graf. Priceless.

QUOTE(knightni @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 04:13 PM) We have a tie for 10th. I'd like to see that broken before I do the second poll. McGwire and Dawson? I think they are both going to have a shot in 2008, so I think you should include them both. Top 11 maybe? Flush out the never-gonna-happens?

Just as with the Dems, a new poll for the GOP is out for #3 in line South Carolina. Some shifts occurring there too, since the last polls. New results (change from their August poll in parens)... Romney: 17% (+6) Thompson: 15% (-4) Huckabee: 13% (+7) McCain: 11% (-4) Giuliani: 9% (-9) Paul: 6% (+5) UNDECIDED: 28% (+8) So a state formerly dominated by Thompson and Giuliani, now those two are 2nd and 5th respectively. Romney and Huckabee with big gains. And that UNDECIDED guy just keeps getting more votes in both parties. Hm. I think its interesting that Giuliani, who still leads in national polls, is not leading any of the first three primary states being campaigned in (IA, NH, SC).

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 03:47 PM) Theoretically, sure... It would have to be more than $50K, and Bud wouldn't approve. Hernandez is pretty much gone. There's nothing we can do now but beat off to Cole Armstrong box scores. I don't get part that either. If I recall, you had said Armstrong didn't need to be protected yet. So why bother doing it? Not like they need to call up a catcher in December.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 03:37 PM) last week. No Thanks. Any idea on Wing?

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 03:40 PM) doesn't matter. Deadline was last Wednesday to be protected for the Rule 5 Just curious... could the Sox decide to spend the $50k or whatever it costs to buy someone back in the Rule 5 that they already had, if they decide they have the roster room at that time? Not that I think its likely, but, you never know. And if they don't get drafted, does the "home" team get a chance to re-sign them?

QUOTE(kane0730 @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 03:33 PM) Maybe he doesn't think Richar will be the Sox starting @ 2nd. The noise coming out of the organization says Richar is probably it. But, you (or he) may be right - maybe they aren't so confident in Richar.

Also... can anyone tell me if Ryan Wing is Rule 5 eligible?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 03:20 PM) Baseball America has an interesting rule 5 draft preview posted. Couple names worth noting: I've tried to do some reading up on Hernandez lately. I think the team is making a mistake not protecting him. What is the deadline again? Is there a chance they still make some moves and protect some folks?

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 03:18 PM) Done and done. Also, Cintron waived. Good and good. Though I was holding out hope that 4th year for Linebrink was an option, or there were incentives involved, or something. Why the hell does Gonzalez keep pedaling this need for a middle infielder? Even if Cintron and Uribe gone, I'd much rather seem then go cheap for a bench guy like Bourgeois, Getz and/or Ozuna, than go out and spend a bunch of money they could use on the STARTING positions in the outfield.

So with all the IA and NH talk, we haven't seen many polls in SC, which is the third state in order of those states the candidates and the party are actually considering (they have planned to ignore MI). In most previous polls, Clinton held a substantial lead over Obama, consistently double digits, sometimes 20+ points. Not only has Obama not spent much time there yet, but it is thought by many that Obama's racial heritage would not play well in the south, and further, that southern blacks doubted his chances of winning a national election because of his race. But a few weeks ago, a new poll showed the lead at only 10 points. Now a new poll shows this (change from their previous poll in August in parens): Clinton: 19% (-7) Obama: 17% (+1) Edwards: 12% (+2) Biden: 2% (-1) Richardson: 1% (-1) UNDECIDED: 49% (+14) Really interesting. Clinton loses ground and is now in a virtual tie with Obama. And more importantly, it looks like she has lost votes to UNDECIDED. People aren't so sure about her now, it appears. SC sure does look seriously in play.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 01:58 PM) I see these types of posts often, but I guess I can't totally disagree, but that tells where we're going to be the next many years if we aren't going to dish anything out for good players. You consider Crisp and Taveras good players? I guess its subjective, but, I think there are many better options out there. In fact in the case of Taveras, we already have that player in house for 400k a year. Why get another one that costs more? Crisp I can see being a viable option - just not for the kind of trade value the Sawx are running out there.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 02:02 PM) Mike Huckabee a social conservative and an economic liberal. Where is that puking smilie when I need it? I'm not sure about economic liberal. As the article points out, he did indeed support a 1/8 cent sales tax increase for outdoor programs (amounting to $40M), but also cut $100M in other taxes. So he cut taxes net, and also shifted tax burden more towards use taxes. That's a pretty good conservative record on taxes. Changes to property tax laws resulted in increases, but that went to helping schools, which Arkansas sorely needed to fix anyway. I am more than OK with that.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 01:23 PM) And JUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUST by coincidence, a hit piece was put out by the MSM on Huckabee today. Now why TODAY? Media isn't biased my ass this wasn't timed PERFECTLY... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/huckabee_record How is that bias? That's just the MSM doing what they do to everyone. You don't think there will be some hit pieces on Obama? Just yesterday, the day after he was shown to be maybe leading Iowa, CNN had a headline story about his drug use. And if Richardson, or Edwards, or someone else suddenly took a lead in one of the early states, they would get the same thing. Guaranteed. Its all about the targets that are highest profile, and easiest to hit.

QUOTE(rockren @ Nov 28, 2007 -> 01:04 PM) Only problem with Jenkins is that Jenkins won't come that cheap either $$$ wise. We'll all be stunned to see what he gets I'm sure. Add that in with the fact that his skills are diminishing and he's played in the NL all of his career....I'm not too thrilled about him. If he wants $12M or something, then forget about it, I agree. But I think he could maybe be had for more like $8M a year for 2 or 3 years. His numbers are down the last couple years, and he knows that, which has an effect on his salary (so does the fact that MIL just left him out there to dry). I just don't think the downward trend is terminal for him - I see some signs he is likely to come back up a bit.