NorthSideSox72

Not a good week for Dubya... Multiple gaffes at the APEC Summit, including referring to it as OPEC Confrontation with South Korean leadership

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 11:19 AM) Neither of them is very good and they both are half the pitcher they were advertised as. I agree on Masset. But on Floyd, I think he is precisely as advertised. Plenty of talent and tools, but very inconsistent and a bit of a head case. High potential, but also a high risk of failure. In any case, getting him and Gio for Freddy was certainly worth it.

Romney: No tax on investment gains (interest, dividends, cap gains) for income levels I don't like Romney much, but I think he has a decent idea here.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 01:08 PM) Well if I saw someone staring through the crack of the stall I would just be like "Hey buddy, I'm a little busy here, can I help you with something?" Now if that guy whipped out his joint or something, then I would think it is well within my rights to pop him. Now aside from the fact about the senator and whether it's right or wrong or whatever... WTF is wrong with the people that are into this? Is there a more disgusting thing than a public restroom? Let alone meeting an absolute total stranger and engaging in sexual activities in one?? Isn't it better to just go to a bar and maybe pick someone you're attracted too? I mean there are some f***ed up things that I have trouble figuring out, and I gotta say..this ranks right up there. I am sure that thought occurred to many of us. I mean, imagining a co-ed facility like in Europe, in an airport... I somehow doubt if you played this game that you'd end up in a stall with someone who looked like the lady in your sig, ya know? Not even to mention how disgusting the place is. But as Rex mentioned, some people are apparently really desperate to keep things secret, so they prefer entirely anonymous encounters.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 01:10 PM) Oh don't get me wrong, they SHOULD try to catch these guys, and the fact they aren't is a joke. My point is, don't hold your breath waiting for a cleaned up game, becuase even if baseball has up to the second testing policies, cheating will continue, and usually not get caught. The words in bold are where I believe you are incorrect. If they were actually willing to do this (which they are not), they could invest in putting together an investigative unit that would be right on the heels of the most recent advancements. That means you'd get everyone at or below that line, which would be almost all of the offenders. Again, if they wanted to.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 12:47 PM) Even if they wanted to, they couldn't catch up. The cheaters are always one step ahead of the people trying to stop them, including in this case. Therefore they shouldn't try? That's a load of cowardly crap. If you make a real effort and getting right on top of the bleeding edge, you can get 99% of the offenders. That would be a heck of a lot better than pointing to 1%, saying "see we can't get them all", and just not even making a decent effort. MLB is simply too afraid of a possible strike and/or too many big name players being found guilty to swing the big hammer here. In the long run they'd be better off to go for it right now, but just like many other businesses in the U.S., MLB refuses to think long term.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 12:44 PM) Oh, and you know what else? Michael Myers kills people because 1. They're bad to his mom and him 2. He thinks he's ugly. 3. He got picked on. Oh, how deep! His "film," if we can call it that, was supposed to be Myers' backstory. And it has a little, but the backstory took a backseat to tits, gore and absurdities that go above and beyond the usual horror film's. You are trying to find depth in a modern horror film? The most abused, poorly executed genre in all of film (at this point in time)?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 12:38 PM) Out of curiousity, has anyone stopped to wonder why this thread is up over 200 posts or so, and there isn't a thread at all on Hsu? Make one. I honestly don't know much about that whole mess, but I'd be happy to learn more.

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 11:03 AM) Yep. If you catch dudes in the act (you hear someone moaning a few stalls over, etc), then that's fine. If there's some kind of verbal offer for sex, then I can definitely understand that too. Playing footsies and staring through a crack in the stall is creepy as hell, no doubt, but I don't see it as an arrestable offense. Basically, if I were that cop, I'd have let him off with a warning, but that's just me. It's called discretion, as you know; if the police arrested every creep in a public bathroom, the court system would be that much more inefficient. OK, I completely understand that. I am kind of on the fence about whether its worth arresting people for some of those things, and I think there is a good chance the cops should have better things to do anyway. But I'd defnitely call the crack-staring and the footsie moves pretty creepy.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:55 AM) You know there's a huge difference between Hall and Salty, as the Braves actually were interested in getting him some at-bats at first base (due to their awful LaRoche trade). Also, there were so many concerns about his defensive ability behind the plate, everyone knows he'll eventually become a 1B. The Sox had no other options at back-up catcher in the spring, and should have been more careful with Hall. Diving for a ball isn't something that catchers ever have to do. Ever? That's a stretch. They occasionally dive for bunts or pop flys, sometimes even really bad pitches. Or dive to make tags. Certainly its not often, but it happens. And there is not much question that playing catcher is far more risky for injury than 1B.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:50 AM) http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/070907/greenspan_market.html?.v=6 Well, if Greenspan thinks that, I wonder when we are going to have our 1,000 point in one afternoon drop? uh oh. Brace for impact.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:46 AM) I know he's hitting something like five hundred, and I genuinely like him, but 1. He struck out swinging on a changeup in the other batter's batter's box at about the shoulders 2. He makes me think of Suzuki in a bad way. I doubt he'll be the backup catcher next year. If he is, he could be a good Henry Blanco type, but he'll have to hit a little, too. Oh I agree that as of today, he isn't ready yet - heck he spent most of this year at AA. That first AB against Rogers should have made that obvious. But, his history leads me to believe he will adjust and improve, just as he's done at every level. Ideally from a development perspective, he plays a few games here and sees how things work, works on his hitting in AFL, then goes to AAA at the start of 2008. And if he does there what he has done at each other step, and can put up a .260-.280 avg with a little power and speed, combined with strong D and arm... and I'd say he is ready to take over for Hall sometime in late '08. Here is something else to consider, though. Hall makes 10 times what they'd have to pay Lucy. And in 2008, they could stand to save a few bucks. So if you are going to have a guy who hits .200, why not have it be someone cheaper, younger, with some ceiling room and better defense? Point is, I'd be OK with Lucy as the backup on Opening Day '08, though that's not ideal for his development.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:32 AM) Well Hall not only cant throw, but he cant hit or call ballgames. I wonder if ALL of that is because he injured HIMSELF in spring training. We'll see how Lucy does this month with the club, and then in AFL. He might be the backup C next year.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 09:56 AM) Call me a cynic but I'll bet he just switched dealers. That was why I said "if". You may be right.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 09:03 AM) Ozzie's not going anywhere, so it's really pointless having the back and forth debate about him anymore. I think we'll all agree we need to see better results starting in April of 2008, and if not, a lot of people should be on the hot seat. Some people love him, some hate him.....it's that way with every coach in sports. Strongly agree. QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 09:05 AM) Absolutely, he ruined our back-up catcher in the spring training (I can't wait to debate this for the 500th time this year). Strongly disagree.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:53 AM) ^^^^SS^^^^ I am still trying to warm up to a candidate. Early on I thought McCain would be the guy, but he's falling flat in my eyes. Edwards was intriguing, but I'm not matching up well with him. Hillary would be about my last candidate. I think I would prefer Edwards to Hillary. I'm thinking you may want Hillary as the Dem nominee, knowing she'd have a harder time getting elected. Although, no one on the Rep side is exciting me. This is the worse group of candidates in my lifetime, but, the most exciting speakers and personalities. We may have finally reached Hollywood, reality show, levels. Again, I think this is the BEST candidate field I've had in my voting lifetime (first Prez vote: 1992, so admitedly I've only had 5, including this one). The problem isn't a lack of decent candidates - its that the WORST ones from each party (Clinton, Giuliani) are the ones getting all the press. They are high in the polls because of their name recognition - not their abilities. And that, I am afraid, is the fault of the voting public.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:43 AM) On the train to work... At 4:14am?!?!

Just because a lot of players do it, doesn't make it any more right. As for Ankiel, it looks like he stopped as soon as it became banned. If that's the case, then that does mitigate the damage a bit.

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 04:14 AM) Where is everyone??? At 4:14am?

QUOTE(Middle Buffalo @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 12:31 AM) I like how so many people only point to the negatives of illegal immigrants, and how they seem to believe that there would be little impact in removing them from our economy. As has been pointed out, many illegals have valid SS numbers. It may not be theirs, but they are employed, and they do, in fact, pay into SS and the other taxes that we all pay. Unfortunately for them, they won't see the benefits when the time comes to draw the money out. For those illegals who work "off the books," how is it any different from the countless Americans who do the same? Or do American citizens honestly report all of their income to the government? I think we all know people who do "side jobs" for cash. Illegals buy goods (cars, gas, clothing, food, etc) here in the US for personal consumption. Remove them, and how do some of these smaller businesses survive. Illegals rent properties (houses and apts). Remove them, and how do landlords survive? Why should US business owners pay the price because the government failed to secure the borders and control the flow of immigration? Also, it's a bit short-sighted to point out that native Spanish speakers place a strain on the education system because we have to hire teachers to teach them How do we know they are illegal? Many illegals have children born here in the US, and according to the laws of our land, these children are US citizens. They have valid birth certificates and social security numbers. Do we deny these legal US citizens their Constitutional rights? Sure illegals in some ways place a strain on the economy, healthcare, and educational systems, but they also create value. I don't think solutions like massive deportation or building a wall are viable options. In fact, if we do build a wall, it's only as effective as the people we entrust with the job of guarding who comes and goes - and it's a little naive to think that guards can't be bought off by coyotes. It happens every day. Not everyone who entered this country illegally did so by wading accross a river or trekking through a desert or underground through sewer lines. I can't speak for everyone else, but for me, the idea is not to take those 12 million people and simply remove them from the economy. Quite the contrary - I have said over and over that the number of people allowed in legally should be dictated by those very demands you refer to. As the threshold is set, X number of people are allowed in LEGALLY. The only question remains is the ILLEGALs. I wouldn't support an all out deportation, because of the immense cost, the huge toll on our already beaten-down international image, and the very large negative short-term effect on the economy. Instead, go after businesses that hire illegals, and go hard. But by bit, as the illegals see the legals getting jobs they can't have, they will choose to get back in the queue. Also, I'd be OK with returning illegals that happened to be arrested for other incidents. If you handle it that way, you will get the effect you want, but much more smoothly.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 07:39 AM) Just to follow up on this situation. Sweeney will play in the Arizona Fall League, which is no surprise. People who were clamoring for him to be recalled, again, there was a reason. He is being given some time off to get healthy and going to the Arizona Fall League will be good for him. Also, Sisco is being given some time off and will play winter ball in Mexico as will Brian Anderson. That makes sense. Glad to see Sweeney in the AFL. So that's 6 guys playing in AFL, and at least those 2 in Mexico. Do you know of any others playing in any other leagues?

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 08:13 AM) It is real easy to pick out situations where things didn't work out. Where were you yesterday when Wasserman was in there to face Sheffield and Ordonez. It works both ways and has for every manager in the history of the game. That's true, but, I will say that Morneau call seemed pretty bad to me. And to a lot of others. I don't think anyone here would say that Ozzie hasn't made mistakes - just like every other manager has. Its all the less clear ones, that aren't really good or bad decisions, that make it tough to evaluate a manager.

The point that both Kalapse and 29 have been making, though from slightly different angles, is key here - evaluating a manager is not a task laden with hard facts. Its a soft study. Therefore, saying "Ozzie is an atrocious manager" is not only an OPINION, it is also probably far overstated. Saying Ozzie is a "great" manager, same thing - OPINION, and probably ignoring some of his missteps. So trying to have this discussion by saying over, and over, and over again those opinions is not going anywhere.

QUOTE(Reddy @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 07:21 PM) wrong. repealing GWB's tax cuts for the rich puts money right back into the system and that's the money he plans to use for this. You are missing the point. Its still NOT free. It still costs money.

QUOTE(Reddy @ Sep 6, 2007 -> 07:20 PM) just watch. the numbers are starting to climb, and with 4 new labor endorsements his cash flow AND poll numbers will start moving even faster. Obama's starting to fade and once its a Edwards v. Clinton there wont be any comparison So the fact that Edwards isn't even in third, but is now in 4th, in New Hampshire, doesn't seem like a negative thing to you?