NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 10:39 PM) This is a scary term. From the NYT: Whatever you think of the substance of the opinions, I think you have to agree with this quote. The last couple days have been a carnival of precedent-crapping. Roberts really does appear to be the wolf in sheep's clothing that some Dems expected. As for this case, Kennedy's separate opinion is crucial. And imo it's much more insightful than that glib quote from Roberts. I hope it carries the day. I think you are right that the seperate opinions in the majority are important here. But, glib or not, I think Roberts' opinion nails the issue cold, both legally and morally. I said on nomination that, even though he is more conservative than I'd like, I was OK with the Roberts nomination. He has been consistent during his career, and he seems very effective at reducing things to their essence. That all said, you make a very good point about the big changes occurring, and its entirely possible the changes may start to get scary at some point. QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 11:49 PM) There is no such thing as "judicial activism." There's only "judges whose opinions you disagree with." Rehnquist and Roberts are big scrappers and overturners and precedent-setters. Is it a bad thing? Debateable. But they're just as "activisticcccc" as anyone they've replacedddddd I agree with this, and have said it myself before. The whole "activist judges" thing, which was banged on over and over again early in Bush's administration, is a complete and utter fallacy.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 03:55 PM) I don't think many people here view Lucy as a future starter either. Some do. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 04:10 PM) With his athletism he very well could be. He's a very good defensive catcher who has the tools to hit for a decent amount of power (and it has slowly started to come). The other thing you have to consider is that in general catchers take more time than any other player (position player or pitcher) to develop. In fact, often times the first couple years are almost solely spent on defensive adjustments and improvements (ie blocking the plate, working on getting a quicker release to second and improving your footwork on those throws and of course calling a game and handling the pitcher) and often times it isn't really until after they get comfortable with all of that where they begin making offensive adjustments to the point that the begin to emerge as potential all around catchers (maybe even good offensive catchers). Heck a prime example of that would be Pudge. The thing is Pudge's defense was so good that it enabled him to make a major name for himself at the major league level prior to his bat coming around (but the longer he was up the better and better of a hitter he turned out to be and now he's arguably the greatest catcher to ever play the game). I agree. The guy is a plus defensive catcher with a great arm (he's been throwing runners out at about a 60% clip), has a lot of athleticism and speed for a catcher, and his offensive numbers have continued to improve over his years in the system (despite that he is in a pitchers' park this year). Plus he has been said by more than a few to be particularly good at handling pitchers. With neither Wiki nor Gustavo doing much in AAA, I'd expect Lucy in Charlotte before the year is out. And I think he is in a good spot with this organization particularly. Around the time when Lucy should be at AAA and ready for a shot (2008), AJP and Hall will both be in the last year of their contracts (though Hall has a 2009 option) and getting older. If Lucy's jump to AAA goes as well as his jump to AA did, there is a good chance he'll be taking one of the two catchers' spots for the Sox in 2008 or 2009. Sorry for the thread derailment. I like Richar too.

75% he signs by EOD Friday (or at least in principle)

The bill is dead. Again.

The Supreme Court today ruled against 2 school districts in their attempt to diversify their student bodies by racial selection criteria. The ruling was 5-4, with Roberts leading the majority. The vote was basically along partisan lines. There were some signs among the majority, though, that race may still be used under certain limited circumstances. I like Roberts' quote early in this article. That pretty much describes my feelings on the matter. You can't get rid of racism by way of racism. I am glad to see the court chose the route of true fairness here.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 01:01 PM) I can't imagine any way that Anderson will be a starter with the Sox again. Also, I think soxtalk is the only place where anyone considers Getz to be a possible major league starter. Well like I said, Getz is no guarantee. And I didn't necessarily mean these guys would start with the Sox. Fields probably will, Sweeney probably will. Lucy might, Richar might. Anderson, you are likely right, won't start with the Sox.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 12:56 PM) If they had any balls they would break it into pieces and pass the bill, or not, one item at a time. the idea that it needs to be one, huge comprehensive bill is just assanine, and just used so they can TRY and hide all the different loopholes they want. Yup.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 12:49 PM) Fields is the only person who I think can be an everyday starter. Sweeney has to get a lot stronger in order to come close to the lofty expectations some people have for him. Fields, Sweeney and Anderson from the AAA level will, I think, all be starters at some point in the next couple years. Richar and Getz both show big upside and I'd put them at 50-50 or better, though Getz needs a little more time (and I know many people won't agree with me on Getz). Lucy has a decent shot as well, in a year or two. Then there are a handful of guys that have outside shots (Owens and the like).

Richar is definitely someone to watch. QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 12:27 PM) Our hitting prospects in the minors suck. There's no one down there that I'm confident can be a MLB starting position player in the next few years. I am not sure what you mean by next few years, but I think you are being far too pessimistic on this. The system has gotten better this year, and I see at least 3 players at Charlotte who I'd wager have a better than 50-50 shot at being a starter somewhere. Plus there is Fields. And another 2 guys at B-Ham. That is 5 or 6 guys in AA and AAA that are probably going to start somewhere someday. I understand your point, the system is weak on position player prospects - and I agree. But I think there are a significant few who look like future starters.

On the subject of all star games... B-Ham puts 5 on the SL game roster (Getz, Collaro, Lucy, Gonzalez, Egbert).

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 10:51 PM) You would have thought the noise would have woke him up, if not the bullet slamming into his skull. I am sure that would be the case, except as soon as his skull began to indent on his brain under the pressure of the bullet, he probably was rendered immediately unconscious. So when he awoke later, he would have no memory of the shooting.

I've been out of town a lot and unable to watch the games. How is gonzalez defensively in CF? Because if he is halfway decent out there, then maybe he becomes the 4th OF next year.

Some years ago while living in Tennesee, I actually participated in a Civil War re-enactment. I had a friend who was a sergeant in a re-enacting regiment, so I borrowed some period garb and joined up for a weekend at a place called Shiloh. Shiloh was considered the bloodiest battle of the "West" (quoted because West, in the Civil War, meant anything west of the Appalachians). I spent the weekend marching around with a working musket rifle, firing in line, camping out on a kilt, and playing the character to all the parents and kids who came out for a demonstration at the military park. One of the cooler experiences I had in TN. Firing that musket rifle and re-enacting a battle maneuver were a blast. And we actually got to march and skirmish along the historical battle lines, which was a cool way to learn about it. Oh, and, it was kind of fun being with a regiment from the South. I tried my best to not talk like a yankee. One scary part - there are some people down there who really don't seem to know that war is over.

Yikes. Well, I agree with Boehner's assessment. Other than the reduction of the wall, everything else mentioned is a bad idea. I mean, that's a lot of poo poo in that bill. Even for Congress. Fortunately, it appears it may well fail.

Mark's statement doesn't mean much either. He wouldn't steal the press thunder. There probably is something brewing, just not nearly as close as some have suggested.

Fred Thompson leads the GOP field in a new national poll.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 03:05 PM) I want to gouge out my eyes after reading this. OK so, I have owned only one pet that was larger than a fish, in my life (our current cat, which I married into, my wife's previously). So I am not exactly an animal person. But, I have a very low opinion of anyone who mistreats animals unnecessarily. Whether callously or intentionally, its irrelevant. My opinion of Mr. Romney just went way, way down.

Jeez - K Perez has six errors already, in his first three games since being demoted. Death spiral, anyone?

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 09:00 AM) The word "bong" is an adaptation of Thai baung. Which is the Thai name for waterpipe. When you use the word bong hit. Its the process of smoking out of a bong. More people in this world use bongs for tobacco than they do marijuana. So these people are assuming he is talking about drugs. They brought the whole issue of drugs up, the kid didnt. A bit literalist, no?

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 10:51 AM) "There's no official announcement," I like the sound of that. It does have a slightly positive ring to it.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 10:41 AM) Maybe the Sox are leaking bad info out to certain people to try to determine who their leaks actually are. Suggested a few pages ago.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 10:29 AM) No way the Sox would do this, as it only makes their fans more upset if Buehrle is eventually traded. Or, it makes them look like they tried to sign him and couldn't.

If this turns out to be false, and given the large number of people falling for it (not just WSCR), there is another possibility to consider here. The Sox may have done this intentionally to expose the "source" - like a mole hunt. I wouldn't put it past KW. Just a thought.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 10:07 AM) I propose, I think, I guess, I hope, I heard.... PLEASE. This is becoming stupid. You forgot.... I have a weird feeling.

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 09:59 AM) Think Buerhle would do a Tom Brady and out of respect for the organization take less money. Think he said, I'd take 4/$50 but you need to sign Garland..............or Rowand It does happen on occasion. But 4/50 isn't just a little low, its a lot low.