NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 09:38 AM) I'll tell ya what Kap...it may be fluffy bulls***, but you'd be surprised how many people will vote for him just because he speaks well. True, especially since our current Prez may be the worst public speaker in that job in the TV era. If he had been eloquent, that may not be as much of an issue. QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 09:48 AM) I'm not talking about the assbags that the Republicans have carted out there, I'm talking about Obama. Quit deflecting the subject. P.S. - Reagan had a record. He was governor, remember? You are hitting on a subject that has come to the forefront in recent elections - executive experience. Its why governors seem to be doing better and better as Prez candidates, and Senators/Congresspeople are struggling. Bush was a governor, Clinton was a governor, GHW Bush had run the CIA and some corporate interests, Reagan was a governor... there is a theme there. You need to have run something from the top. I actually agree that those jobs are better in experience than legislative ones. But I personally don't think it is a requirement.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 06:49 PM) Thius is what a lot of people say. And when you think about it, no one really knows where he stands on anything except the War in Iraq. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. In truth, we don't even really know what his stand on Iraq is. He disagrees with the escalation, but, what would HE do? He has charisma, and he is an excellent speaker. He does have that cheerleader, feel-good effect about him. Personality wise, he's got what he needs. And the political atmosphere right now gives him a good shot. We need to know now what kind of a decision-maker he is going to be, and where he stands on the important issues.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 05:33 PM) I should probably make a separate thread for this, but I want CONCRETE reasons why this guy is presidential material. Not the fluffy bulls***. REAL reasons. That is an excellent point. And no, I don't have an answer just yet. I have a general idea what Obama is like as a figure, but I know little on his issues, and I don't see a theme (or themes) yet from him. Of course, having read some things about Bush's early decision on the Presidency, he didn't really have a "reason" either. At least, not what I'd consider a good one.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 03:59 PM) I'm really looking forward to Jim Webb's rebuttal to the State of the Union. Should be interesting. um... why? BTW, I read that Bush will be talking about Global Warming in the SOTU address. So, if he makes some grand promises about environmental legislation, will he then have Tony Snow follow the speech immediately afterwards with words amounting to "he didn't really mean it"? Like he did last year?

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 01:47 PM) As KW has mentioned in interviews, the Sox do not believe this. They think surgery will leave him in better condition for the future than just rehabing. It really seemed like if Crede had just gone under the knife the Sox would have been willing to sign him long term. That is oversimplifying quite a bit. No back surgery is ever a guarantee, any more than therapy is or isn't. Yes, the Sox expressed their desire for the surgery, but that is not the same thin as saying if he had done it, that they would have automatically signed him long term. Crede's back is not the only issue, or even necessarily the main issue, of his future with the team.

QUOTE(SnB @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 01:23 PM) i honestly think it's the back problems that really worries the sox. There has to be more to that than we know. I just don't think they have faith that he'll be able to stay consistently healthy. But as I say that, I am suprised how ready the sox seem to be to start fields, considering how long it took for the crede experiment to actually work. I don't think its that there is more to it than we know. Like all back issues, its that no one knows anything for sure. Situations like this, he could be healthy the rest of his career, he could just have the occasional flare-ups like he has in recent years, or he could get worse quickly and have his career end because of it. No telling for sure. And surgery is not exactly a known result either. Back surgeries are notoriously unpredictable, and they are higher risk than doing things with, say, your knee or elbow.

Glad this got done quick, for all involved. Logically, I know he is likely gone after 2007. But dammit, Crede is one of my faves in recent years. I've got his jersey. He's so much fun to watch play at 3B. Please make us all wrong, Joe, and sign a long term contract!!!

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 12:51 PM) He's In Announced via his web site. Go two posts up. He isn't in, he formed a committee. Probably in, though.

QUOTE(Jimbo @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 11:52 AM) ESPN is setting up the live broadcast as we speak. They are going to tell Steve Phillips to just stand there for 2 years. nicely done.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 12:38 PM) The downside is character. There is something special about old homes. Of course the infrastructure should be solid or big problems can erupt. I love creaky floors and stairs. I love old worn wood on hand rails and other surfaces. I dislike the too small closets, tiny kitchens, etc. Two other positives for an older home... 1. If bought cheaper, with some elbow grease and some investing, you can turn it into a value proposition and make serious bucks. There is risk in that too, of course. 2. Many homes built now are just not built well. Quality is poor. These homes will, in a decade or two, start to look pretty bad. That can effect the value when you want to sell it later, or even in the short run, for picky buyers. On the other hand, a house built in 1900, if its still in reasonably good shape, it probably will be for another few decades.

Obama forms exploratory committee, inching closer to an official bid.

My grandfather, who died nine months almost to the day before I was born, was a Sox fan, lived much of his life in the Englewood neighborhood. I am told we are very similar in many ways, so I guess it figures. He moved the family out of Englewood to the NW side sometime in the mid-50's, when my father was about 10. He (my father) then became a Cubs fan, since taking the family to games at Wrigley was a lot closer and easier to get to. My grandfather was, as I understand it, a bit disappointed. Years later, when I was little, our family went to a few Cubs games (late 70's or very early 80's), which were just no fun. Stands were empty, the team sucked, weather always seemed crappy, etc. Then, my father made the mistake of taking us to a Sox game, so that we could see the other side of town. We drove from Evanston to Comiskey via Cicero and then Halsted (instead of the expressway), so that we could see a cross-section of the city, which was fun in itself. The game was a nail-biter that the Sox won, we sat next to Moose Skowron, my Dad caught a foul ball, and we just had a blast. In his zeal to show his kids the city, my father created a Sox fan (and a black sheep), which I have been ever since. Unfortunately, if this trend continues, my first born son will turn out to be a Cubs fan.

QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 09:20 AM) I thought KW's assistant, I can't remember his name, handled the dealings with Boras. Hahn. He is probably the one doing it, I think that was mentioned last year - Hahn deals with Boras. That was JR's way of trying to fix that particular problem.

QUOTE(shipps @ Jan 14, 2007 -> 12:27 AM) Dont need to carry a breathalyzer,Every drink is worth .02 and every hour your body burns off about .02.It is simple math really. It depends on your weight, and other factors, of course. But for most people, 4 drinks in an hour (which according to your math would be safe at .06, because .08-.02=.06) is NOT safe, and I can almost guarantee they would blow more than .08 after that.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 10:13 PM) I just heard on the news that Obama is this close to formally announcing his intentions to run for President. if he runs, as an Illinois resident, someone whom he is supposed to represent, I want him to either resign so he can concentrate on his candidacy, or reimburse the goverment for all the days he misses due to campaigning. He was just elected to represent this state, not elected so he would have a platform to run for a higher office. And no, I don't want that just for Obama, all elected officials should have to do somethign like that if they are running while still in an elected office. If he misses any votes, he is negligent in his duties as a Senator, and not representing the people of Illinois. I always wondered about that, with Senators, Governors and House Reps, doesn't it bother their home state folk that they rae neglecting their duties? Or maybe, does everyone already think so little of their representatives in government that it doesn't seem to make much difference?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 09:03 PM) In Nukes case, we have spent thousands of dollars to make him believe killing solves all problems and that you have to be a macho, broad banging, sob to be a soldier. The culture has been there forever. Perhaps it is necessary, but I doubt it. I've heard that argument before with cops too, though to a lesser extent. Its BS in that case as well. If you can't put aside what the guy next to you does in his spare time and cover each other's asses when the s*** hits the fan, then you are just a little too easily distracted.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 05:08 PM) Oh no, you see she's a liberal Democrat so she is incapable of doing any wrong. It must be someone else's fault. Would it make you feel better if I just went into every argument making every Republican politician into an extreme caricature of a human being, as far to the right as conceivably possible? And said that the GOP did absolutely nothing in Congress at all since 1994? Because that would be the equivalent of what you are doing here. The rest of us can have arguments in the childish plane too. There is grey in the world, Nuke. The Dems will act like politicians, but they have so far done pretty darn close to exactly what they said they would do. Perfect? No. But they've at least taken some strides in the right direction. But then I don't suspect you are willing to even acknowledge the smallest of things that any Dem has done right are you?

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 04:49 PM) We do want grownups......just not homosexual ones. Nuke, I want you to remember before I say this, that I have a lot of respect for your viewpoints on many topics, and I look forward to your journals from Iraq. That said... Your views on this topic are so Unamerican and freedom-hating as to make me ill. QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 07:20 PM) i'd guess that a majority of the 18-25 yr olds in the military today have grown up with openly gay people in their schools, health clubs, workplaces, sports teams, etc and would be more acceptable in serving side by side with an openly gay person. how is an openly gay person any different than men serving next to a woman? straight man wants to bang the woman gay man wants to bang the straight man There is no applying logic to hate and fear. Neither are logical thought processes.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 01:06 PM) More like it took her getting caught doing exactly what she promised not to do for her to change her mind. I thought business as usual was over in Washington? Nice obfuscation. No one (here) has claimed that the Dems' take-over would represent the end of business as usual. The theme here is of improvement, and that is absolutely happening. And as for Pelosi, this was never about her. It was about some regional magistrate trying to have his way.

I don't think anyone can reasonably disagree that changing the policy, and allowing gays to be open and honest in the military, will cause problems in the short run. Significant ones. It will be a distraction, and there will be ugly incidents. Except, the same thing happened in allowing various minorities in. Then integrating them into common units. Then allowing women into various parts of the military, then even more. There is a theme here - all these changes were difficult. But they ultimately have all benefited the military immensely. When I go to the movies, there is a commercial for the National Guard. They refer to the Guard having people from all walks of life, like "the fabric of America". Well, that's great. Its as it should be. Those fighting and working to protect us should be a representative bunch. Therefore, its time to push past this and move on. The military needs to adapt in order to be its most efficient.

QUOTE(CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jan 14, 2007 -> 10:46 PM) I'm suggesting a balance. Everything Kenny is quoted as saying in regards to signing Buerhle , Crede and Dye is negative. If the market has changed that much how do ever manage to keep anyone once they become players who are worth big money. How do you attract big names to Chicago ? Go read the "how I became a Sox fan" thread and see how many people , in the limited number of responses said they are Sox fans because of Frank Thomas. Big time players attract fans. Do not go telling me my response doesn't make sense . That is personal . I can argue my point as can you without implying my train of thought is convoluted. I realize the course the Sox are taking and can argue pro or con on the point. I know its not the GM's job to make the fans happy per se but that certainly is a consideration. The happier the fans are the more they come to games. The more they come to games the more money they can put into the team. But oh no now the market has changed and attendance means nothing. If I wanted to track down quotes by Williams and Reinsdorf I'm sure I could about once the fans get their butts in the seats we can spend more money. I am truly amazed winning a world series once in 88 years and everyone forgets decades of White Sox incompetence. If baseball historians had to pick one team and call it the laughingstock of baseball it would be the Sox. I can see both sides of the argument very clearly and can understand givng Kenny the benefit of the doubt because of market conditions. However baseball and White Sox history tells me that our window of opportunity is officially closed and the rebuilding has begun. We are now the Florida Marlins after their 1st world series victory. Lets just hope the course of action pays dividends as soon as theirs did and doesnt take another 88 years. Just keep in mind too, that just because Kenny speaks negatively, that doesn't mean some or all of those players won't be kept. They may or may not be. But what he says in the press is all part of the poker game. When all is said and done, on April 1, I'd be really surprised if this team wasn't in a better position to win than they were when the 2006 season ended.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jan 14, 2007 -> 11:58 AM) I have one question. Why can't Chicago, one of the biggest and best cities in the world with a recent world championship be able to afford players like Dye and Buehrle. It really is sad that Chicago has to try to win titles the cheap ass way. Very sad. Mark B and Dye should remain White Sox. You seen the figures on what the White Sox franchise is worth?? Sell the team Jerry if you can't pay the freight. Since others have pointed out some the obvious flaws in your statement, let me add a little Business 101... The value (or worth) of a business does NOT equal its ability to generate and/or spend money. They are seperate and often only marginally related concepts. Ford Motor Company, for example, is worth 10s of billions of dollars. But, they are hemorraging cash, so they are having to lay off people, etc. So as with the Sox, like most baseball teams, they are only marginally profitable (many teams actually lose money). So they can't just go out and spend money like there is no tomorrow. Further, the value of the team if sold also reflects periodic built-in revenue streams, that are not realized up front, but instead are material in future years. We've seen this team-worth argument over and over again, and it is just immaterial to the discussion.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Jan 13, 2007 -> 07:36 PM) X-Files spinoff Millenium featuring Lance Henrickson. QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Jan 13, 2007 -> 10:31 PM) Firefly. Both excellent calls.

I'll grab an obscure one. One the best cop dramas made in recent years, but poorly marketing and slotted... High Incident.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 13, 2007 -> 03:11 PM) How shocking is it that Pelosi applies the law to everyone else but corporate interests based in her district. Honest government indeed. Well, indeed, someone was greedy. But it seems it wasn't Pelosi. Like I said, most of these folks will take their cut. But I'll take the steps forward, thank you.