NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 11:05 AM) I was not really impressed with Michael Clayton. I'll give it another shot once it's out for rental. Really? I thought Tom Wilkinson was fantastic. Actually, I think the whole cast was unusually good.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:53 AM) I think 'rightist' is a legit tem. In fact, I saw it somewhere in the forum a few minutes ago. Don't ask me where, because I am too damn lazy to look for it. I guess I just dislike that they are both used like insults, and that it further amplifies this run for the extremes that out political system has been in for a while. This while so much of the public seems to want someone more centrist, reasonable. Leftist and Rightist sounds like people who can only turn one direction.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 01:44 PM) The simple fact that global warming is occuring on other planets in our solar system, that haven't been influenced by man, tells me that it is an unarguable fact the the cause of global warming is caused by the sun. You see, the isn't just 'global' warming ... it's the entire solar system that is warming. As I said earlier, they were growing grapes in England around the year 1000. Mankind didn't bite the big one then, though 'global warming' was certainly happening. That being said, I'm going to get offline for now. I'll check back whenever I get online again. Have a good day. YAS - when you return... Many posters here on both sides of the global warming/climate change/pollution debate have provided reference to the data that backs them up. The people who believe that climate change is wholly or partially caused by human activity cite the many thousands of scientific studies looking at such factors as temperature, CO2 levels, receding glaciers and ice pack, wind currents and assorted other evidence. Those who think it is part of a normal cycle point out the many cold and warm periods during the time of man. So I ask you... where are you seeing this evidence that global warming is happening throughout the solar system? I mean, other than Pluto (which is really a comet/asteroid anyway), I have not seen any sort of scietific piece that stakes that claim and provides any evidence. Could you reveal your source?

QUOTE(bigruss22 @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 08:04 AM) I was taking information from an article from chicagosports.com, where they said he taught Bobby how to throw his breaking pitch, and also has helped other younger guys, and im just saying it may make the transition easier for some of the younger pitchers who may find themselves on the team next year. More specifically, they say Nieves taught Jenks that hammer of a curveball. That's a huge pitch for Bobby.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:26 AM) ZZZzzzzz who cares. Well, I care that people are closing their children off from the world for stupid reasons (or no reason at all). But your point is well taken. Truly these are not people to be taken seriously.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 02:47 AM) Did I miss your 'Into The Wild' review? Haven't seen it yet!!! We were going to last night, but it didn't work out. I am going to try to catch it tomorrow. I do remember I promised a review, so you will have it. Also, should have added to the list of cool fall films I want to see: Reservation Road, and There Will Be Blood.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:12 AM) What is between man and God should be between man and God. How a man in a leadership position is going to lead his fellow men is what man (speaking of man in the both genders sense here) should be concerned with. Well put.

So... how long until some of the groups who forbade their children from reading these books (i.e. the Christian Brothers, who said it promoted sorcery) come out and say "See?! It was evil!!!!!!" I just finished the final book on Friday as it happens. Good stuff.

Of course. I would guess that those who have problems with the UN, for the most part, just don't like the way they do things - not the fact that it exists as a forum.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 09:57 AM) If MacDougal has an 'oh well' attitude, we should say 'Oh well, see ya later". I was thinking the same thing. Thanks for the update though 29, that was very interesting. Hunter. Hm.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 06:16 PM) Actually, Israeli warfare has generally been fought with much restraint - when out and out war is the issue. I just read a history of the 6 day war in 1967. They were attacked by Egypt, Jordan and Syria simulatneously, with support from Iraqi troops. That's why the six day war was fought on several fronts. There isn't the will on behalf of Arab countries at this time to fire on Israel after Israel would exercise a nuclear strike on Iran. These states are interested in their survival as well. The scenario you describe assumes that there are no rational actors on either side, and I just can't see something getting that out of control. Exactly what I was saying.

Just curious... how much effect do people think it has on A-Rod's situation that Torre is leaving?

Dow down 367 points on combined fears about oil prices, credit/housing, a weak dollar and assorted other economic maladies.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 02:46 PM) His Iraq stance leaves him no chance at the Republician nomination. Yeah, virtually zero. I still think he may be setting himself up for an independent run.

Ron Paul higlighting his social conervative credentials, now that he is becoming a slightly bigger blip on the radar. He's apparently a staunch pro-lifer, wanting to pull the rug out from under the courts. Interesting idea, though I don't really agree with it. He certainly does get right to the point though, doesn't he?

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 02:10 PM) It was just another example of him not knowing what he would do or not knowing about an issue. He seems like the least ready candidate in my life time. Why is he even running? Its funny, he had such a huge opening to hit. The party was just dying for a true conservative with name recognition, because they are all scared to put Giuliani or McCain out there. But so far, Thompson has been a big disappointment to those same conservatives. The people I've talked to who normally vote rightist have all expressed their disappointment - they thought he'd be the right guy to step in, but he's been uninteresting and uninvolved so far (not to mention not raising nearly as much money as they thought he would).

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 01:04 PM) It seems Pete Stark has a nice history of saying some really ignorant things about people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Stark I keep thinking... this is a role for Jack Palance, should they ever bother to cast this character in a film. What an ass.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 01:37 PM) Interesting USA Today poll. Dispite the inability to get their side of the story out, a majority of Americans seem to agree with the Republicians and Bush on this issue. http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...ppoll16.art.htm Which is funny, because the polls asking if the public favored the bill showed over 70% support. There seems to be a 20-30% band in there that are expressing opinions on a bill they know nothing about.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 11:54 AM) I don't think they much care what the rest of the world thinks. Think about it from their point of view. The entire world, sans the US, votes against them every chance they get in the UN. They are condemned, attacked, and hated by most of the world. Its not like they are endangering some big base of support here. They don't care what the rest of the world thinks, as they only care about their own survival. If they are attacked with nuclear weapons, do you really think they are going to stop and think about what the rest of the world would say if they answered that attack? They never have in their history, why would they start with the most deadly of attacks? Seriously, at very least, they would launch at nuclear attack at whereever the missile came from. More than likely they would settle old scores and attack anyone who was even thinking of attacking them again. I agree they'd probably nuke or seriously decimate Iran if Iran nuked them. But because they care about their survival, I don't agree with your premise that they would use Iran as an excuse to turn the entire Middle East into a big glass parking lot. That would only result in their destruction as well.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 11:45 AM) I have zero doubts that if anyone exploded a nuclear device in Israel, in anyway, shape, or form, they would do as they have historically done, and respond in spades. To me it is the most obvious part of the equation. Israel has been under attack since they day they were formed. The way they have survived is by taking on all enemies, and doing it with an overwealming show of force. I am convinced that if someone tried playing the trump card of a nuclear bomb on Israel, they would lay all of their cards on the table, and make sure none of their enemies could take advantage of their weakened state. They would respond in kind. In kind means nuking Iran. What you are suggesting, attacking a whole list of enemies, won't happen. It would ensure their own destruction, and accomplish nothing. If you are thinking of the 1967 and 1973 wars, in those cases, they attacked multiple countries because multiple countries attacked them. Now, I agree that their response to Iran in that scenario would be a lot more than 1 nuke. It would be an attack far more destructive, and the US would probably back them.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 09:59 AM) First of all, nobody is worth that contract. Its absurd. Secondly, I would pay for Santana before I would pay for A-rod Odd as this might sound... Santana is probably a bigger impact player than A-Rod for a team, but, I'd still pay for A-Rod over Santana at that level of money. Pitchers are just a lot more susceptible to injury risk, plus A-rod is out there every day. But I agree that I don't think any team should pay a third of their payroll for one player - its too dangerous.

I just have to say I am really excited about the fall movies coming out. This looks like a really good season. Some of the ones that look particularly good to me: No Country for Old Men American Gangster Lions for Lambs Gone Baby Gone Michael Clayton (already saw it while in limited release, it was very good)

QUOTE(WHITESOXRANDY @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 08:28 AM) http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=60316 I'll bet 5 bucks against my house right now that the Sox don't even come close to signing him. But, even if they brought the same team back with ARod instead of Uribe they wouldn't come close to winning the divison with an outfield of Fields, Owens and Dye and Crede's questionable performance level and the bullpen such as it is. I know this topic has been beaten to death so I'm stunned Rozner came out with it yet again. Is he serious or just filling space ? I would love to see the Sox sign ARod even for 10 / $ 300 because that would make them a lot of money and a huge story as long as he's with the team. But, I owuldn't want them to finish 3rd or 4th with him. They would need to add some more pieces which, right now, would mean increasing the payroll even more than $ 30 mil. I can't see how the Sox would do that. Thoughts ? I'll take that bet. The article definitely seems more like theorizing than having any actual information. But I do think they will make an attempt at him, if he leaves NY. Its not outside the realm of possibility he ends up with the Sox. Just a long shot. And by the way, as for jerseys and other A-Rod gear... if I recall correctly, the Sox don't get any money directly from that, unless its through the vendors within the ballpark. The money goes to MLB, and is not sent to a specific team for their specific merchandise.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 08:43 AM) There's your 2006-2007-2008 Democratic Partiy in a nutshell. Thanks for the soundbite, Bohner... Oh now come on. The party in a nutshell? Are we going to characterize the GOP by finding the most extremist, warmongering quote we can find? Is Tom Tancredo the face of the rightists?

Interesting to see the Q&A on Mukasey. I have to say, I think I like this guy. Good answers. The Dems have to do their song and dance, but, ultimately, he says the right things (IMO) on torture - its not constitutionally allowed, but, any given technique needs to be evaluated case-by-case to see what might constitute torture in the legal sense.