NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 08:46 AM) The reason that bilingual caught any momentum is the kids fall behind in every other subject as they attempt to master English. I've yet to see a method that allows the kids to remain on grade level in social studies, math, science, etc. and not receive that instruction in Spanish. What I think we need are more after school programs to offer tutoring, in native languages, in the other subjects. It will take more of an effort to keep the kids on track, but if we make it a priority, it can happen. And, btw, being bilingual is a nice advantage in a world economy. Which gets at another problem in our schools - social promotion. I think its time we accept that just ushering all children from year to year at the same pace of learning is not effective. As it relates to ESL students, they can start with a crash course in English, then slowly back that off as they get better, and start slowly putting them into other classes.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 08:38 AM) The GOP isn't writing textbooks, isn't sitting in classrooms refusing to tell students about Watergate because it might offend some Republicans and are not going to riot if offended by history. Completely different. When American schools start refusing to teach about to history because it might offend Muslims any single group of people, we are toast. Fixed for ya.

Here is the specific article on the Cubs' eventual sale. Two interesting bits from this one... He says that as if its a good thing. Then there is this, involving the Sox.. Apparently Zell, a corporate financier extraordinaire, feels his investment in the Sox is better for him than the one in the Cubs.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 08:28 AM) What does this mean for the Cubs? It means someone else will own them, once they are sold after the 2007 season. Could mean a very differently-run team, or, it could mean nothing for the team. Hard to tell. I think an interesting question is... if the Trib is no longer Cubs-connected, what will the people screaming "Cubs media bias!" do?

From the Trib. Read for details. A few tidbits... --Cubs to be sold after 2007 --TribCo's 25% stake in Comcast Sportsnet to be sold as well --Company will be taken private - no longer will TribCo be a publically traded company

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 08:13 AM) Tex, it may be getting a bit chilly in hell today, I agree with you on this. I worry about the kids next door to me and their ability to compete in this world. I have been in my current house for 2 years now, and the only word in English I have heard the parents say is 'Hi'. As for the kids, they are about 5 or 6, and I have not yet heard them say ANYTHING in english, and neither have my 2 boys, who won't play with them because they can't understand them. Which is why kids who aren't English-speaking should be offered crash immersion courses in English early-on. That's a much better alternative than trying to run an entire public school in two languages.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 09:51 PM) Not true. Because of options compensation & bonuses, the companies with the highest paid executives are often the ones with the largest equity gains. (Profitability is another question, but of course a fund wouldn't care about that.) I don't say this to be a jerk, but your fund idea is a nonstarter. The only role I can imagine for policy is limiting cross-board influences. There may be a you-scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours effect when the board knows that the ceo knows people on their board, or when your law firm serves his friend's firm, etc. But that's something that's awfully hard to police. To be honest, I think the best answer is merely a certain social ethos. Look at Japan, hardly a 'socialist' economy, which enjoys relatively minute inequality (and has for a very long time). The US has never looked like that, but it's been closer to that than it is today. It's a tough thing to legislate, though. I understand what you are saying about compensation by options or discounted stock purchase, but that doesn't necessarily translate to equity gains at all. Those purchases are generally done off-market, purchased in bulk over time then compensated to the buyers. Yes, that information (inside trades, option coverage, etc.) is indeed reported, and yes, I'm sure brokers see that. But they also know its no longer a huge factor in determining stock strength, because its now so commonplace for these large purchases and large option grants to occur for executives at all firms regardless of profitability. And since price gain is now the far-and-away primary factor for making money off stocks (as again, dividends continue to become the exception rather than the rule), and those options and bulk in-company purchases are not seen as market-moving indicators, they won't translate to much equity gain. Those cheap-strike options, discounted stock purchases and outright stock grants are just back door salary. I could swear I saw an article in WSJ a while back pointing this out as well, but I think its behind their online wall now. I'll see if I can find it. It also mentioned the other side of the coin that you brought up. I think you are probably right about a change in social structure being needed, but as you say, its tough to legislate (not to mention a process slow as molasses, if it ever even occurs). Cross-pollenation of company boards COULD be legislated, if Congress so desired. I somehow doubt they would though, unless the public groundswell was quite huge.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 10:55 PM) http://soxmachine.com/blogs/soxmachine/arc...04/01/3345.aspx Outstanding. Ha!!! Awesome. I remember playing Oregon Trail on the first and only computer my junior high had. I believe it was an Apple, before they even started numbering them.

Weather Channel says the same. No storms until late night... Day Hourly

Balta posted a WSJ article that mentioned executive compensation, and its obscene levels. The increases, even on a net basis, that we are seeing for high level execs nowadays are just so many multiples over everyone else that's getting ridiculous. Here is a topic for discussion - how do you address this, politically? The concept behind the free market stance on the matter is that the equities markets should keep this in check, because gaudy executive pay takes money right off the top and therefore depresses profits. Also, Boards of Directors of publically traded companies should be part of the controls. But I think its obvious these checks and balances aren't getting it done. The markets are far too derivative (as dividends and A-shares are so much less relevant to pricing) and predictive (algorithmic trading and super-advance analysis) now to penalize companies, not to mention that the obscene salaries are now an expected norm. And these Boards are often made up of company officers, thus defeating that particular check. So what can be done? I for one would love to see someone start a mutual fund targeting companies that keep executive pay under control. In theory, these companies will be more profitable, all else equal. That could create a small buck to the trend, but not enough to do a lot in the big picture. Anyone have any other suggestions?

Copious current coffers of the competing candidates. Hilary's numbers are staggering: $26M in the first quarter of the year. That's over 3 times the previous record. She also has another $10M she can transfer from her Senate race monies. Richardson raised $6M, plus has $5M in case available. Obama, Edwards and the GOP candidates are expected to release numbers shortly. Hilary off to a fast start, but I'm not sure its going to be as much of a boost as some seem to think. Everyone already knows her - how will she use the money to make herself look better? Her disapproval numbers are waaaaaaay high. It will be interesting to see what the others have so far.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) I've had nothing but good experiences with Delta. What the airline lacks with in flight "extras" (although its comparable to most other product out there), it makes up for in generally good service. I don't care about the missing extras - it just drives me nuts that whenever I get on a Delta plane, I my knees are buried in the seat in front of me. Which gets really interesting if they try to recline. If you look at the Seat Guru site, you can see their leg room measures are consistently an inch or two less than the other majors. That allows them to get another row of seats on the planes, which obviously creates more revenue opportunities. Though I dislike United, I do love the Economy Plus section. That extra 6 inches of room is great, and worth it, for the money (when you aren't automatically upgraded, you sometimes have the option to pay for it).

Since its now just 24 hours away... Current forecast: 65, mostly sunny Unfortunately, the rest of the week looks miserable.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 01:15 PM) I like it. Ozuna is a great guy off the bench, and if we can't keep Iguchi, I wouldn't Ozuna getting the majority of the playing time at 2B in 08. If for some reason we couldn't keep Gooch, which would be a real loss, I'd definitely take Ozuna over any of our current in-system options at 2B.

Awesome. ETA: I was referring to the Thornton signing, but now the threads are combined.

QUOTE(Al Lopez @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 01:03 PM) His daughter had a car accident - apparently she'll be ok. Steve Stone will fill in for Ed. Per the Score at 1:)) pm. I know he's typically seen as a Cubs guy, but, I'd love to have Steve Stone do TV or radio for the Sox. He's just really good at it.

QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 01:09 PM) Per Rotoworld: White Sox agreed to terms with infielder Pablo Ozuna on a one-year, $1.25 million contract extension through 2008 with a club option for 2009. The 32-year-old Ozuna is making $800,000 this year and would have been arbitration eligible again in 2008. 2009 is his first year of free agency. There's little upside to this deal, and the possibility exists that he'll have a bad year and the White Sox will want him gone in 2008. Still, they're not risking much. We're all waiting to hear about Gooch, Dye or Buehrle signings before the deadline, and we get an Ozuna extension?

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Apr 1, 2007 -> 11:54 AM) Great - I have 4 flights on Continental this week. Is it Friday yet?! I've actually had nothing but good experiences with Continental. The only reason they aren't my top choice is that they simply don't go to where I need to go directly. From Chicago, they just go to 3 or 4 cities direct. QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 31, 2007 -> 12:10 PM) I fly 3 weeks out of every month, and only fly united. I would say American and United are tops as far as airlines go. Delta, US Airways, Continental are by FAR the worst in the skies. Southwest is ok if you dont mind waiting in line like cattle. I also travel a lot, and have had nothing but trouble with United. I'll fly pretty much all those airlines you mention over United, except maybe Delta (who seem to have the least legroom of all of them). I'd probably fly southwest all the time, if they'd just get rid of that cattle corral aspect. If they actually gave seat assignments, they'd be pretty much the ideal domestic airline, I think.

I actually tend to agree with him on this, though I think my reasoning is different. That said, I do believe that children in this country should be exposed to, and learn to speak, some foreign languages. I just believe that they also need to all be fluent in English.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Mar 31, 2007 -> 01:30 PM) Wow. That was a solid turn by Pablo on the low shuffle. And he has a pretty good arm as well Pablo was actually an infielder by trade, before we acquired him. I personally think he's close to as good at 2B or 3B as Cintron is, defensively (possibly better, at 2B). I'd be curious how he'd do at SS.

I actually am OK with politicians at that level making a career of it, if they are effective. People make the military or other government work a career. Why not them? But it staggers me that neither party can put together the momentum to take the high ground here. The Dems started strong on the first few things they did in Congress, but have since gone back to being what we all hate. If one party's leadership stood up and dropped the hammer on the scumbags around them, and stopped this pork barrel B.S., I'd think that would be a huge PR move that could help them at the polls (as long as it was properly marketed after the fact).

I like everything the article says, but... I see zero in there that is anything other than this writer's opinion. No quotes, no evidence, no nothing. He pulled that number out of thin air. So, much as I hope it happens, I wouldn't count on it. Do you have a link to the article, by the way? I'm curious where its from. Love the Anderson quote.

I can't believe I went through the pain of reading 4 pages of this thread.

According to ESPN's rankings this year, the White Sox are 7th among MLB teams in "Fan Satisfaction" and 28th among all major sports franchises, based on a number of categories (see the link for details). Last year, the Sox were 5th/13th. Other teams of interest... --Angels finished first among MLB teams, 7th among all sports franchises --Detroit Tigers jumped to 2nd among MLB teams, 12th overall, after being 26th/76th last year --the Baltimore Orioles finished last among MLB teams, 105th among all franchises --the Cubs finished 29th, second to last among MLB teams, and 98th among all franchises Outside of baseball... --Bears are 12th among NFL teams, 50th overall --Bulls are 9th among NBA teams, 39th overall --Blackhawks are dead last among NHL teams (30th), and 118th overall. Only four franchises in all major sports finished below the Hawks: Minnesota Vikings, New York Knicks, Oakland Raiders and the Detroit Lions. Not sure if this belongs here, or in PHT, or in the Pub. Someone can move it if they'd like.

Looking at some Ozzie quotes in today's Sun Times, regarding Logan's demotion... Maybe I'm overanalyzing, but I get the impression that maybe Ozzie wanted Logan on the team, and he was overridden (I assume by Kenny) to take Sisco instead. If that's the case, you've got KW putting Sisco (boo) and Anderson (yay) on the team, over Ozzie's preferences. I think Kenny is one of the best GM's in the game, but I do wonder if sometimes he is a little too interested in showing the world his trades were good. Which is weird because I think the Sisco trade WAS good, even if Sisco is in AAA this year. And I still think the Chris Young trade was good, even though Anderson struggled last year. Why rush Sisco? I doubt KW's job is in immediate jeopardy. I just don't see the logic there.