NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) I think its entirely acceptable to ask if a specific interrogation technique falls under the definition of what torture is. And the Justice Department does have a working definition of torture. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Dec30.html It is not fair to ask that specific question, in that context, and expect an immediate answer. Any immediate answer, unless he has worked multiple cases about that very thing before or done extensive research ahead of time, is going to be B.S. If you wanted a B.S. answer, we should have kept that loser Gonzalez in there.

QUOTE(knightni @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:18 PM) Farmer is a very solid color guy. The Sox need a better play-by-play guy; Bernie Mac is not it. I'd like to raid another team's radio affiliate PBP guy like the Cards did to us. Someone who can be impartial yet exciting. Hub Arkush?

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:32 PM) If waterboarding was a theoretical, we wouldn't be having this issue to begin with. I didn't mean that the technique was hypothetical... the question of it being torture or not is. Its a legal hypothetical. There is no case, no background, nothing offered into testimony other than a name. If he says yes or no, he shows quite clearly he cannot be trusted, since he is no expert on the subject and hasn't talked to the experts yet (as far as I know).

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:32 PM) Because the administration has a habit of backtracking on the learning that they've claimed to have done. Waterboarding stopped being torture for a while, then it became torture again, now it's unclear on how the administration views the subject. The Attorney General is charged with prosecuting violations of the law. Law is open to determination, especially in issues where it considers things like torture, and what techniques can be expressly not used. If the Attorney General is to say that he doesn't support torture in any form, I think its reasonable to expect the nominee to describe what he would consider unlawful torture in this case. If what is torture were simple, like, "what is blue?", then I'd agree. Except its not. Is being slapped around torture? Is sleep deprivation torture? Is gangsta rap music torture? No one has definitive answers. Also, in this case, what does Mukasey know from waterboarding? If you really want his interperetation of that specific thing, right now, before he is confirmed (which I think is missing the point)... then you have to give him the chance to research it. Find out what it is exactly, then review the law and standing jurisprudence with his team. In other words, do part of the AG's job. This is an obfuscation of the confirmation process, in my view.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:14 PM) Come on, and someone actually like Mitt "transformer" Romney? Not a chance. He's like a schitzo ex-girlfriend. Well, lets get facts straight here. Romney is LEADING the field in IA and NH, Obama is 2nd in those states in his field. Biden is a blip at best. Not really a like-for-like comparison. Kind of like comparing the #2 Democrat in the Senate to a House Rep from Colorado. Oh wait...

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:28 PM) You're right. Why are we having a debate over simulating death as ever being acceptable as an interrogation technique? That debate is not the AG's job. You think what is being done is torture, then take the appropriate legal steps, and they will eventually involve the AG's office. That office can then review the entire situation. You cannot expect Mukasey to have an absolute opinion, out of hand, about such a narrow, unexplained theoretical.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 02:19 PM) I'm sorry but that is absolutely f***ing ridiculous. I agree. I don't think the AG should be commenting on which interrogation techniques are OK and are not, and doubt he knows what they are anyway. Now, if a case comes up and it needs his review, then so be it. Now, maybe if, say, the did a demonstration... like, they waterboarded Dubya in front of Mukasey and the review panel, so that everyone knew exactly what it was and how best to do it... then you could reasonably expect Mukasey to go marry that reality with the case law and books law, and come to a stand. Until then, I don't see any reason why the committee needs to be so focused on one bizarre example, instead of confirming a guy who for once looks like he's not a Bush goon. When your disobedient child (Bush), after all that punishment, finally shows some signs of learning... do you ask him why his shirt isn't ironed?!

Drunk elephants rock.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) Anyone can run for President and declare whatever party they want to. Becoming the #2 in the Senate means your peers voted to put you there... There is a difference. Can anyone be a Congressman from Colorado too? Well, OK, don't answer that question. I just find it amusing that I make a post specifically pointing out 2 idiots, 1 from each party, being useless shills... and then the response I get is "Dems suck, huh?!"

I hate going to the Jim, Parque floors freak me out. I never had a bad Mark, Prior to Calculus. Hey, check out that Rac, Slider over here.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 01:39 PM) Doesn't say much for #2 Dem in Senate then. Nor does it say much for what the GOP puts up as a Presidential candidate. What is your point?

QUOTE(southsida86 @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 12:31 PM) I heard that Sweeney is hitting .212 right now with 10 K in 33 AB and no XBH. I think it's time for KW to consider trading him before his value goes down the s***ter like Anderson's did. After his 2007 year at AAA, his wrist injury, and now a semi-bad performance in limited at bats in the AFL, guess what? His trade value is already very low. No good reason to trade a prospect when they are low. You would get little or nothing for him anyway. Better policy is to look at the fact that he is 22, he still has a lot of talent, and give him a chance in 2008 to show that 2007 was not the real deal. If he improves, THEN you can either trade him for something or use him on the team. If he is bad again, then you haven't lost much, since he's of little trade value anyway. Sweeney, like Lucy, should be starting 2008 with Charlotte, under the gun - hit and hit for some power, or see your shot at the big leagues go whizzing by. Not that Lucy is anywhere near the prospect Sweeney is, because he isn't - just saying they are in somewhat the same boat as far as the organziation is concerned, I think.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 09:34 AM) I haven't ever listened to her, or Coulter for that matter, but if this is representative of what goes on in her head, I have no use for her either. All though a little irony in this situation is that some of the real whack job enviornmental groups have been known to commit really stupid illegal acts to further their cause. Personally I am waiting for someone to make the same comparision of a group like ELF on the right side of the radio dial. The ELF aren't environmentalists any more or less than Al Qaeda are Muslims. Which is to say, they claim to be the penultimate example, but really they just use that set of beliefs as an enabler for their violence. They are terrorists.

Perhaps a Paul/Colbert ticket?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 08:37 AM) Rhandi Rhodes = Ann Coulter of the left? Here is the audio clip, apparently Blackwater is buring California down so that they can build an HQ out there. http://s65.photobucket.com/albums/h219/pjc...ndi_rhodes1.flv Ann Coulter of the left... except a little less hate, and a little more valley-girl grammar. Neither are worth our time or concern.

Some fall league info from the Trib. Eggy will start in the "Rising Stars" game of the fall, and Sweeney and Lucy are also set to play. Also, Brian Anderson will be joining Mexicali for the second half of that winter league's play (I've updated the post 2 list).

QUOTE(BearSox @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 09:51 PM) Lucy finally hit the ball today, going 2-3 with 2 RBI's. Good. The whole reason he is there is to work on hitting. Not that you can read a whole bunch into a few AB's, but, if his average stays THAT low for the AFL season, that is not a good sign.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Oct 26, 2007 -> 12:02 AM) Yemen free's USS Cole mastermind. Thanks Yemen! Hopefully we find out where he is, and impose the first penalty on him. From Death Penalty, to 15 years to free as a bird. Nice system. Yemen is, and has been for a long time, a mess. Their government claims some degree of cooperation with the west in the war on terror, but that is a stretch. Really, the government has very little control over what goes on in that country. Heck, half the people there are permanent migrants anyway. And what little stability there is, it shouldn't be a surprise that the gov't in power will try to appease both sides to stay there. They did this during the cold war too, flirting with both the Soviets and the US (in that case as South Yemen, while North Yemen remained fairly independently minded).

So, sure enough, as predicted via memo here on Soxtalk recently... CNN publishes an article connecting the fires out west to CCGW. Now, there is one thing in there that does make sense - if the fire season is longer, because spring comes earlier and first frost later... then yes, I'd say that's a good contributing factor to more fires. And since the season HAS been longer since the 80's more often than not, there have been more fires. I wouldn't really debate that. But, I have to call B.S. on the idea that it is necessarily caused by CCGW. One could say that, if CCGW results in longer fire seasons long term (like for many decades), then obviously there is a causation there. But since the spike in fires is only since the 80's, I think there are way, way, way too many polluting factors (in the statistical sense, not actual pollution) there to establish a link. I'd call that a big stetch.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) Implying that Gload be kept over signing Erstad. Well you know me, I'm as big a Gload fan as there is. But Ross cannot play CF. He maybe could have been an average defender in LF or RF given some playing time. But that is the limit of his OF abilities. G-Load would have been a nice piece to have when Pods got injured, and also to spell Thome. But that would not have made much difference in the results of the season in any case. He got a chance to virtually start in KC, which is what he, KC and I think even the Sox wanted for him. Plus the Sox got a high potential take-a-chance pitcher out of it.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 03:29 PM) Interesting thoughts. But I just get the feeling that it's not as easy as "split it". There's too much influence and power when it comes to this sort of stuff. If you have time go back and read my examples. This is a very slippery slope, IMO. I am sure it is not as complete a difference (between this and the education thing) as I am making it, but... I do think there is a big difference there, and I think that the education funding one has a much greater potential for subjective, political B.S. to screw a lot more people, as opposed to a small number of awards for definite good things like the drugs we are talking about.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 03:13 PM) Agreed. But again, what about competing drugs? Sorry, hit the add reply too soon. Do you mean competing drugs that do the same thing? I don't know, split it or something. Not really a bad problem to have. Or do you mean different targets? Cancer, AIDS, major diseases will always be bad. Anything to cure or immunize anything in that territory will always be useful to society, and virtually no one would argue that. If you have to choose between curing hepatitis and curing a type of cancer, well, just split the pot. Its not as if there will be tens of thousands of drugs in that territory in a given year - more like a small handful if any.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 02:46 PM) Lately Dick Allen has been on fire with some good posts, so I'll ask the question to him so I don't get flamed. ... --Do you think Ross Gload would have been a good guy to have had on last year's team? Should we have kept Gload and passed on Grinder? What, no haiku? Sorry, just kidding. Couldn't help it. By the way, Gload was traded for Sisco, who I don't think anyone calls "grinder".

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 03:11 PM) Not necessarily. I think lobby money is going to dictate which delination is going to occur. BTW, what about competing drugs that do the same thing? Which gets preference? That, obviously, would be bad (bolded). Has nothing to do with the principle, that's just bad execution.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 25, 2007 -> 02:52 PM) Oh boy. Here we go. For those of you so in favor of this, but against the other post I just read about Mitt Romney, tell me exactly what the difference is. Who has the right to say which drug is better then another one? Who is going to the the police on which drug benefits society more? Just like you folks who were so quick to call Romney a douche bag for structuring a need program for college based on "society differentiators", this is pretty much the same dictate, but in a different area. I'll start with those questions. I will only say that I do realize there's a problem, but I certainly don't want my government telling me which drugs are more "beneficial" then another one. A drug that cures or immunizes against a disease which hurts or kills people is, unequivocally, good for society. No deadly disease is good. Whether a degree in Social Work is better for society than one in Education, on the other hand, is highly subjective. The two suggestions are apples and oranges. One can be easily delineated in a non-partisan fashion, the other cannot.