NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 09:19 AM) I fully believe until we have a carbon offset system that has everyone involved in setting market prices, and involved disincentive to not follow the offset system, that it is pretty much worthless. I do also believe that all it does it discriminate against people who do not have the financial ability to offset their carbon emissions, and it is just an excuse for those with the financial means to sleep guilt free at night. If you do believe that emissions are the problem, reduce them. Don't tell me that *you* are too important to reduce your emissions, and instead are just buying your way out of actually making sacrifices. You can't tell me that someone like Cheryl Crow buying carbon offsets from an unregulated market is the same as her reducing her traveling party to save the enviornment. The system is inherantly flawed, and probably isn't a realistic solution as I see things. I bolded your three suggestions, and I fully believe that only the last two are realistic solutions. I think the last two are best for now, but even the offsets will be better as time goes on. As you point out, there needs to be regulation, though. That is not to say they are all worthless, however. And I guess I have no problem with the financial end. If I have a little extra cash to pay more to buy carbon emissions off the market (assuming a working market, here), then why is that bad? Am I missing something?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 26, 2007 -> 07:38 AM) Hey you got the joke Ha ha, touche. But that's not what I'm saying.... I'm saying do like you would with anything else you invest in: research first. Check with your utility, see what it really is doing with the offsets, check around and see what *insert your power company here* is doing. Check the news, internet, whatever. Look into not just carbon offsets, but alt-power buys and other methods of reducing your use of fossil fuels. If they are on the up-and-up, do it. If not, don't, until they fix it. That will reward the companies doing it right, and force the others to get up to speed. So, really, I'm saying we should be willing to admit (and even search for) our mistakes, adjust our tactics, and have a realistic view of things. Much better than staying the course, no?

So, there is a new website out there that is a live video shot of a piece of cheese. It ripens, live. Very, very slowly. And its attracted a million viewers. Wow. I think I'll put a website up of a picture of grass growing, and sell ad space for the million hits.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 09:49 PM) I actually did vote for him in the 2004 primaries. I think by the time I did, though, Kerry had all but locked up the nomination. I'm still thinking of voting for him next time around, but John Edwards is seeming better lately. Personal plea: please re-think Edwards. Dig a little deeper - I think there is very little substance there.

I'm glad to see this being exposed. Any new idea like this will have flaws aplenty, so the sooner we force people to fix them, the better. Unfortunately, what is inevitable is that some people will point at this, and say "see - it does no good! Its all a farce!" which is of course not true at all. It works sometimes, and not others. And as time goes on, it will work better, especially when things like this see the light of day.

Our immigrations policies are flawed, but that is no excuse for breaking the law. Even worse, people seem to think that illegal aliens actually deserve something. They are here illegally, I have zero sympathy for them.

The pitch to Sheff was a good one, Gary just reached out and hooked one.

7:30pm start they are now saying.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 05:53 PM) 6 guys in the lineup are batting .230 or below At least there is only one below .200. Its been three or four of those most days lately.

Anderson at DH tonight? Erstad at DH last night? That's like DH'ing Timo. Oh wait...

QUOTE(Dan @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 04:05 PM) Wow, do you actually know the percentage of burglers that have the know how to disarm a system? If you do, let me know, I would love to know aswell! No, and I didn't say I did. But it doesn't take much knowledge to realize that a burglar will go for the easiest target, and further, that your average burglar is not what you see in the movies. Do you really think that some uber-sophisticated super-burglar who knows how to defeat alarm systems is the person most likely to be breaking into your home? I've taken plenty of reports of burglary and theft from structure, and every one of them was simple - smash and grab, or an undefended target. Mysteriously defeating alarms and getting in and out clean without setting it off was not something I ever saw (fair information: I only spent a few years in law enforcement, so I certainly haven't seen it all). Look, you want to have a gun for home defense, go ahead. But you are delusional if you think that gun is the best defense you have.

As the Iraq bill gets ever closer to passing Congress, two tidbits caught my eye. First, quotes from Cheney and Reid... Yet again, Reid showing the world that he was a horrible choice to be the Majority Leader in the Senate. That guy really is an embarrassment to the Dems. Far worse than Pelosi, in my opinion. Then there is this... Its amazing to me, how this Dem Congress started off so well (they accomplished more in their opening days than the last few Congress' had in their entire terms), and then derail so badly. I think its some combination of poor leadership (Pelosi and Reid), fear standing up against the Iraq debacle (even though they now clearly have public support for pulling out), and too many Congressmen in both parties being too tied to pay-for-play. Whatever it is, its horrible. The only good news is that last sentence - because the ridiculous, unrelated spending in the bill was brought to light, and there was a public outcry... they removed some of the pork. Chalk a small one up for the public, the press and the GOP Congressmen willing to air that out. Unfortunately, the unrelated crap is still mostly there.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 03:32 PM) No, I don't. I just don't think that this rises to the level that you all do in terms of him leaving office. Now, personally, Gonzo is basically neutered, and should be told to go away "at the pleasure of the president". The reason isn't for breaking any laws, but for being an inept jackass. I agree that's the reason in this case. But I'm quite OK with the political mayhem in this case because so many things he did previous to this, which were much worse, are worth kicking him out of office anyway. Anything to get that guy out is a good thing.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 07:32 PM) With the youth already in our bullpen right now, there's no good reason to draft a reliever for the next year or two in any of the early rounds. Much more pressing needs in position players. Middle infielders in particular would be excellent.

QUOTE(vandy125 @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 06:09 PM) I agree that it should be enforced in some manner, but not the 3 years. That would be ridiculous. Come on Kalapse a Ferrari vs some bubbly? You can come up with a better example than that. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Give back the champagne, fine Hunter and give the fine to a charity. Make the fine large enough to be significant (not 5k), so that the message gets across. Maybe, at worst, suspend him one game to really nail the point home. But anything more than that would be a real shame, I think. The spirit of the rule seems clear - no team/person should be interfering with play between two other teams. The reward was not on the table prior, so it wasn't going to effect the Royals' play anyway. And does anyone actually think it will effect the Royals' play in the future either?

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 10:47 AM) I remember reading the article and he quoted the WSI guy. It was something like "so and so from WSI, says Buehrle is the only pitcher to have won an allstar game, won a world series game, saved a world series game and pitch a nohitter. Found it Mark Liptak of White Sox Interactive pointed out Buehrle has the distinction of starting and winning an All-Star Game in 2005, earning a victory and a save in a World Series that season and throwing a no-hitter. Well I'm glad he cited Mark L, and didn't try to take credit. I didn't see that article. Still seems a bit lame to me, but not as bad as it seemed at first.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 10:37 AM) I'm guessing that's Mark Liptak, who worked in sports (tv?) in Idaho. And its great that there are people like him on WSI and Soxtalk with that kind of knowledge. But why does Gonzales need to go to them? That's the part that is appalling to me. I mean, that data isn't some buried secret - its easy to find if you know baseball resources, which one would think should be his job.

So, Mark Gonzales, the Trib's beat writer for the Sox, apparently misquoted a statistic in a column about Buehrle's no-hitter, saying he got a WS victory in 2005 that he did not. Not a huge deal, it happens (though it seems to happen to Mark a lot). But here is the kicker. In a column today in the Trib, someone calls him on it, and he says that he and Mark L. from Whitesoxinteractive.com apologize for the mistake. So, let me get this straight. The Trib's beat writer needs to go to a message board to get stats and data? Either I'm missing something here, or Mark should be embarrassed. Anyone here know of any good reason why this should have happened?

McCain makes a policy speech of sorts on energy and environmental policy. This added to his speech on fiscal discipline have done a lot to make me see him in a better light. This is again the John McCain who I'd like to see get the nomination.

QUOTE(Dan @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 01:34 AM) An alarm can be disable and is not the end all be all. If we are talking about the fraction of a percent of burglars that are so sophisticated that they have a way to disable an alarm system, then... 1. They won't be breaking into just any place. 2. You won't be home when they do. So the only good your gun does in that scenario is giving the burglar one more prize.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2007 -> 07:34 AM) The Dow opened over the 13,000 mark today, trading there for the first time in history. Apparently they aren't terribly worried about the sudden housing spasm we had yesterday. Rates are effected, though. I think the consequences of the real estate "bubble" (really more like a spike for most people) are going to start being felt this year and next.

Let's see. Even after today, here is a guy with an embarrasing .278 OBP, and he is our leadoff hitter. And oh yeah, he was the DESIGNATED FREAKIN' HITTER last night with his horrible numbers. So to answer your questions, we're still here, and Erstad is still a joke to be starting on this ballclub. Now, if he is putting up solid leadoff hitter numbers (OBP of, say, .350) with decent defense (and is still healthy) around July, then I will gladly eat crow. But as of now, he can't even see a .300 OBP.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 08:29 PM) Easy, he is a career bench player that cant even start on the royals. Who has succeeded big time whenever he's been given consistent AB's, and who took a starter's job away in KC. Ross not having a real shot in LF is just another chapter of the whole LF/CF clusterf*** that Ozzie (and maybe KW) have fostered. And on that, I'll stop the derailment.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 08:29 PM) To be fair, that could've been a KW/Ozzie decision. Gload's arm is terrible, or was, something I can recall even fathom pointing out as a significant negative last year. Poor jumps and reads, too, in the field. Definitely could have been KW too, don't know. But Ross' arm was better than Pods even just after his return from shoulder surgery. Looks even better now.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 08:27 PM) How do you know how Gload is going to be? Well, Gload has hit .300+ in both seasons where he had any significant AB's, and was strong on both sides of the L/R split. That should give you an idea.