NorthSideSox72

Anyone notice anything amusing about Broadway's quote to the press? He actually broke out a "Dadgummit". Not sure if that was an intentional Hawkism or a funny way to avoid swearing, but its funny in any case.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:54 AM) Austin is actually a really great city. I've heard that. I haven't been there yet, but most people I know who have, tell me its the best city in Texas. I've been in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, El Paso, Amarillo... just not Austin yet.

OK, now it is Friday. 3 games remain for all the teams involved. There are still SEVEN teams in the National League who could make the playoffs, and NOT ONE has clinched a playoff birth. If you really love baseball, this is fun to watch, no matter who your favorite team is.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:40 AM) Yikes, they really screwed the pooch on that one. I wonder who pushed that quote into the papers, Hillary or Edwards? Its a small Iowa newspaper. I think in this case, its at least possible they just screwed up. Or that they were trying to raise their profile by getting a "scoop".

You Texans (Kap, Texsox) should be proud. Austin is a leading city in environmentally conscious policy, as well as energy use reduction.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:33 AM) I'm uneasy with the Executive Branch having that much power. I see the benefits, but like any changes, there isn't a free lunch. Like any other veto, it can be overriden by 2/3 of the houses. And my suggestion is less broad in power than a plain old line item veto that some have suggested.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:29 AM) And here's the trillion dollar question, place a group squarely in the middle of all this. Would they stand up and say, you have our votes if you cut this crap out? Or would they say, we need $150,000,000 for this road, a new community center, a research grant for our local college, and so on and so on? Another way to control this that people have suggested is line item veto power for the President. I think maybe a restricted version of that - budget item veto power. In other words, the President has line item veto power over any given spending item, and can say for those items he/she chooses, no money allowed.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:21 AM) Garland's 4.23 era makes me utterly shocked he's getting in the B's territory. He doesn't make the bank that he does to go out there and be 3 games under .500 with a 4.23. Oh yeah, FYI, he's under 100 k's on the entire season... (98) classic Jon. His W-L record, especially on this team, has pretty much zero to do with his performance. And a 4.23 ERA from a consistent 200 IP pitcher is most definitely above average - therefore, I'd say a B is pretty reasonable.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:20 AM) You're absolutely right. But I also don't hear Re-pube-licans running around telling me that they have to raise taxes to fund 85 billion pet projects either, during this next election cycle. Both parties disgust me, the Democrats much more so. No, the Re-pube-licans want another $200 Billion for THEIR pet project - a disaster of a war. Oh, and, all THEIR pork too. By the way, I've suggested this before, but it bears repeating here... I think the Chicago City Council has the pork thing down right. None of the budget-related bills have amendments, they are on-point. But the know the Aldermen need to show their wards some local money. So, the budget contains a chunk of money specifically to be distributed to each ward for local, "pet" projects. The money in the ward pot is partially dictated by the population in the ward, as well as TIF money and other ward-level tax in-take. Those pet projects are usually helpful to the community, because the aldermen use the money for parks, road repairs or whatever, that makes them look better, to get elected. In essence, they found a way to keep "pork" under control by sanctioning a certain amount of it, but building the system in such a way that the needs of the citizens are aligned with those of the aldermen. I'd love to see Congress set up a similar system - no spending amendments EVER, but based on population or land area or some combo, you get a chunk of money per unit of measure to spend on the projects your area needs (but that aren't covered by major legislation).

QUOTE(Brian @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 08:11 AM) Mine didn't hurt at all. Just felt hot and than numb. Maybe some of the longer lines the guy dragged on hurt a tad, but the pain is overrated IMO. From what I understand, some parts of the body hurt a lot more than others.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 07:32 PM) You want the truth? Generally, you have about 20% of the Democrats that believe this s***. I mean, truely believe it. So, I basically mock it, because you see these assholes running around Congress and in front of their kooks being a parrot to these asshatery idealogues. I say it here, because people here need to realize that is what their party stands for at the end of the day. I have also mocked BushCo on a number of occations, just not as blatent. NSS was alluding to it, and I agree, that there are fringe elements of the Re-pube-licans as well - which is why I call them Re-pube-licans. They are a disgrace to their party as well. They have given up on their conservative principles to pander to the fringes of their party. A lot of times, you start to see elements of the "fringes" come out around here, but most of the time, people know when to stop. You can still see it in the majority of posts and the subjects that people here choose to start as conversations, or steer the conversations. The God's honest truth is I don't like the Re-pube-licans of today, either. I've said it a lot. But, I think the Democratic party is just completely off their rocker and want to take control of everything that they can. I don't want my government interfereing with anything I choose to do. If they TRUELY help people, fine. It scares the s*** out of me when people like John Dingleberry tell me that he is going to take away my deduction because that motherf***er thinks I live in too big of a house. Who the f*** does he think he is? And the Democrats continue to do this s*** ad naseum. The healthcare issue, the same damn thing. Give people the choice to take care of themselves. It's not my fault that people choose to do stupid s***. I chose the path I did to try and take care of my family. I want my government to stay out of my life and not tell me what doctors to see, or how much I can earn without them taking it all away for redistribution to feed their pet projects. This all is meant to say what more of some of my "true" beliefs are. I can't do that in one post, and I would say that half of my posts are hyperbole - but it does call attention to what the Democrats really are pandering to, and it's sad. What you are getting at with voting GOP because you want less government in your life, is why I have voted Republican more often than Democrat (for both Prez and US Congress seats) over the years. But here is the thing - if you pay close attention, I think you will find that the GOP no longer can say that with a straight face. They have been far too busy this decade telling people what they can and can't do in their bedrooms, who they can and cannot associate with, running up huge deficits and spending far more than they take in, intruding in their lives without the fuss of a warrant, getting all up in arms about the occasional nipple on TV (while ignoring violence on it), and stealing money from what 70% of the country wants to spend it on in favor of a war supported by only 30%. That's not less government - its more government. Frankly, neither party can say they are the smaller government party anymore. I hope one of them tries to regain that ground, but right now, I just don't see it.

I have one, on my right shoulder. Kind of surprises people if they see it - I seem to not be the type they expect to have one. QUOTE(Soxy @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 09:54 PM) I only want one. And I'll be getting this between my shoulder blades. I Soxy.

I'm not sure about the rotation for next year, but it seems clear he spent this year working on one or two new pitches, and improved in his second half. So at the least, I think he is close to ready. Ideally, he is in AAA for a second year (he pitched only one year there - not sure where people are saying he has already repeated), and puts up very good numbers. His numbers there should reflect being a complete and ready pitcher, not experimentation like they did this year. I still think Floyd, and even Gio, are more ready for the rotation at this point than Broadway is. Assuming a rotation next year of something like Buehrle-Vaz-Contreras/Garland-Danks-Floyd, then the AAA rotation should be something like Broadway-Gonzalez-Egbert-Sisco-Haeger/???... that's a pretty damn good AAA rotation, and it bodes well for the future of the starting staff.

There was an article in the last couple days in one of the papers, saying that Broadway was learning two new pitches this year. I'd guess his walk total may be somewhat related to that. The Comcast gun was showing 88-89 for the FB, but, it also showed Riske not getting above 88 or 89, and I know he can throw low 90's. So I'd guess Broadway was about where the scouting reports put him - 90-91 FB.

Shouldn't Gustavo be on this list?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 06:09 PM) No guys, with the exception of probably two to four people in here, YOU ALL are not the ones I mock - it's really these knuckleheads in Congress who want to keep fanning the flames to cater to the moveon.org fringes. It disgusts me. Most people in here post pretty reasonably (with the exception of four people that come to mind). I'll address the other questions you asked later. Edit: You all also have to realize that your Democratic Party is being hijacked by people who DO believe in the hyperbolic s*** I post every day. And that is why I point it out, to be honest. And if they themselves don't believe it, they at least cater to it, and that's just as dangerous, IMO. Do you actually think that is happening any more in the Democratic party than it is in the Republican? I personally think it already happened on the right, and is just now catching up on the left.

Marlins bring in a LOOGY to face Floyd, and he walks him on 4 pitches. And they are keeping him in there against the righty now.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 05:17 PM) Something like that. But honestly, I have seen enough of that crap to last me a lifetime. Unfortunately, there will be more of it. Not in here. You keep wanting to fire shots at the extremists, but those extremists don't post here, for the most part. How about some discourse for those of us not in the small minority of extremes (one side or the other)? I thought the article was important. I think its pretty scary that we are relying so heavily on private contractors for what are really military tasks. At the least, its worth some discussion. I was not saying that was what the war was about - not at all. What do you think about it?

Marlins still with the 5-4 lead through 6.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 05:05 PM) OH OH OH OH BUT THIS IS WHY WHY WHY WHY WE WENT TO WAR! HALLIBURTON! BLACKWATER! DYNCORP! BUSHCO! That hat fitting a little tight nowadays?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 04:48 PM) Oh, trust me, they would have said "global warming" - they choose their words very carefully - semantics or not. Well of course - they wouldn't want to admit that they were wrong about something originally, or that some Democrats might be right. Better to give it a new title. I actually prefer Climate Change anyway.

Cubs close the gap a bit - now 5-3. They have 2 on, 1 out, and the Marlins are changing pitchers.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 04:45 PM) CLIMATE CHANGE is NOT (necessarily) "GLOBAL WARMING"... So its Global Cooling then? 'Cause its one or the other. Seriously, semantics. If you feel better calling it Climate Change instead of Global Warming, then fine. Call it that. Whatever, its there, we need to do something about it.

Be very careful what you drink in Columbia.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 04:30 PM) The campaign has sent out a transcript of her actual remarks and is saying that the Quad City Times misquoted her. The QC times has corrected said quote: Makes more sense.