NorthSideSox72

If you make the COLA a hard 3%, you have the same problem. Any COLA needs to be pegged to a dynamic, realistic market basket measure that closely mirrors inflation. That way, increases are market-natural, and is a real minimum wage.

If we end up with Haeger in the pen, along with 5 flamethrowers, that itself could be a real asset. I mean, that could really mess up hitters to see a starter throwing 87-92, then Haeger at 65, then Jenks at 99. With all the hard throwers, maybe that is a good argument to put Haeger in the 6th slot for that very reason.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 11, 2007 -> 08:06 AM) You'll have to argue with Comed then... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationw...1&cset=true They're full of crap. The cleared 1B in profits in 2005 and 2006, they pay their CEO 27M despite being heavily regulated, and spend millions on these ridiculous programs. Plus, if they file for bankrputcy, they will have their internal operations heavily scrutinized, and I don't think they want that to happen. This is all a game of chicken with the Illinois legislatute, that's all this is. Its posturing, in order to prevent the legislature from freezing rates and to stave off open competition for as long as possible. I don't agree with the rate cuts, mind you - but this argument about going bankrupt is a steaming pile of doo-doo.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 04:24 PM) the dems think we're all so stupid we won't realize that saying "rollbacks of evil tax cuts for the wealthy" is the exact same thing as "raising taxes". if you make over 50,000 a year the dems will consider you "wealthy". might take em a couple of years to get to that tax bracket, but they will attempt raise taxes substantially on many people who are not really wealthy if given the chance. I see paranoia reigns supreme. I'll point this out again - so far, the Dems have done almost exactly what they said they would do, and the legislation they have pushed (smoking ban aside) has all been positive. Not one peep about taxes, other than PAYGO, which Republicans seem to like just as much as Dems.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Jan 11, 2007 -> 06:35 AM) It was on the news a couple weeks ago that someone involved in auditing their books said they were not even close to bankruptcy. Maybe their guy getting 27M a year can hack a few Ms off his salary to help out. Seriously. If you are on the verge of bankrupty, which I have read they are not, you start cutting extra spending like the very stuff we are arguing about. ComEd is nowhere in the vicinity of bankruptcy.

QUOTE(bigruss22 @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 02:45 PM) Rogowski! How was his year in charlotte? and if it was good is he ready to contribute at all at the big league level? Given that we have 2 very good firstbasemen on the roster (PK, Thome) and an array of others who can play the position semi-competently (Mack, others), it would be kind of a waste to take up a roster spot with Rogowski, unless he was capable of putting up Gload-like numbers off the bench (which, as a rookie, he likely would not). Better to use the spot for someone who can competently cover CF every 7th or 10th game for BA. Mack (corner OF, 3B, 1B), Ozuna (corner OF, PR, IF if necessary), Cintron (SS, 2B), Hall © and Terrero (CF) makes the most sense I think.

QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 02:35 PM) If Bush's successor is a Democrat, who should be appointed to the Supreme Court? I raise this question for fun, but I get the feeling Ginsburg will retire soon after a Dem is elected (approx. Jun '09) as well as Stevens, who is in good health, but will turn 87 in a few months. He has hinted at retirement, but as one of the court's most liberal members, I don't see him retiring until after the '08 elections. This leaves two potential vacancies for the summer of '09 of the Court's most liberal members. Here would be my two: Jaynee LaVecchia - She would be highly qualified pick, was appointed by a Republican Governor, then approved to lifetime tenure by Corzine (Story Here). She is also a political independent. It would be hard to imagine any serious opposition for this nominee. Lisa Madigan - Although she probably is eyeing a run at Governor, it would be great to see her replace Ginsburg or Stevens (Ill native) as she will only be 43 or 44 at time of appointment, thus giving her at least 30-40yrs. on the court to match Roberts/Thomas who could easily have their S.C. tenure run over 35-40 yrs each. Lisa Madigan will not run for governor as long as her father is still Speaker of the House. Plus, I think she still has a lot she wants to do out there that requires more active involvement in the process that SCOTUS would give her. Just my instinct. But, it would be great to see her in there. She's been quite good as AG, and was a solid Senator.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 02:38 PM) I wonder how true that is. The, "Most alderman are hos" part. I know a few Aldermen. I'll go with "some" as opposed to "most". Being as she herself is crooked, she'll tend to see things skewed a bit her own direction. There are also degrees of ho-ness. Some of them undoubtedly are just plain cash in hand ho's, like Troutman. Others, many of them in fact, will push developers to invest their money in certain local interests (parks, etc.) if they want their plans approved, especially if they are large in scale. So is that really bad, if it helps the community? Eh, sort of.

Just talked to my rep. For the weekend plan, there are just a few seats left in the far reaches of the UD. Weekday plan, there are some UD and a few isolated LD. Basically, this is the 3% left overs. Oh also, he mentioned that they are tenatively planning the week of 2/12 for the season ticket holder single game pre-sale, for anyone interested.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:18 PM) I was literally going through all the metra stops, on that line, and I couldn't think of any there that would be very affordable. I have a couple of friends renting in Downers Grove and they're talking about moving out of DuPage soon just so they can afford a house. My wife and I went through an exercise much like that recently. We used Metra as a guide. We tried to find suburbs that had Metra stations, which had trains that were an hour to downtown or less (eliminated stuff like Geneva/LaFox/Elburn, Elgin/Big Timber, etc.). We then eliminated ones with significant crime problems or lousy school systems, ones we could never afford in any case (anything on the north shore for example), and eliminated Metra lines in the south and southwest suburbs (our families are N and W burbs). That left us a list of about 50 suburbs to choose from. Seems pretty good, yeah? We then took those suburbs and searched homes on realtor sites, and set the threshhold for 400k or less (for 3+ BR, 2+ BA, garage, yard, single family home). Suddenly, half those suburbs were eliminated because they had basically no homes available (or had like one or two, that were tear-down specials). Only about 15 of the suburbs had more than half a dozen homes that fit that criteria. It was amazing. I think we're going to end up paying for the neighborhood and the schools, and buy an older home that needs some work. Yay projects for me!

QUOTE(Balance @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:01 PM) This is a subject I'll be very interested in for the next year or so. The wife and I do want to move from the city to the suburbs, especially after our first child is born (this coming July). FWIW, I've been looking at homes on the internet, focusing on the west and northwest suburbs, and I'm seeing a lot in the $300k-$350k range. Many of those are somewhat older homes. If you're looking at Naperville, for example, you can get a home cheaper than that- just be prepared to live on the far south side of town, in Will County. I honestly haven't looked at much in the way of the closer-in suburbs yet. My main worry is selling my current condo. I've never sold a place before, and I don't know how difficult it will be. Let me give you a piece of advice on selling a condo... Assuming you use a realtor to sell (which most people do), make sure your realtor is smart/capable enough to get your place listed on the MLS. The MLS (if you don't know) is basically a common place for home listings from all major and some small realtors, such that if you search for homes on one site (say, Coldwell Banker), you will also see homes listed by other realtors. This is a HUGE advantage. Amazingly, a guy is trying to sell a condo down the street and was complaining he wasn't getting anywhere - and if I go search the web for his place, its nowhere to be found. So, just make sure they get it on the MLS, or else you only get a very, very small part of the potential market to see it. If you don't want the larger commission cost, then just use Buy Owner or one of these super-cheap services. Don't pay a commission to a realtor who doesn't at least get you on the MLS. QUOTE(Soxy @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:13 PM) Montgomery is rather affordable, as are some parts of Aurora. Of course that's relative. But if you compare prices there to, say, Oswego or Naperhell--I mean Naperville they're pretty reasonable. Aurora schools are a bit suspect, but Montgomery usually goes to Oswego districts which are good schools. I'm hoping for something a bot closer to the city than Montgomery, but, I may have to bite the bullet.

I have to confess, I've been fortunate. Bought a condo in the city in 2004, in a great little neighborhood, just as it started to bloom. And we've invested in upgrading the place as well. Our place has gone up 20% or so since then. But, now that the market is slowing a bit, I suspect the value retreated a bit. I'm a little concerned now about our future plans, though. Our plan was to move to the burbs for a house sometime in 2008 or so, around the time we are thinking about starting a family. But looking at any of the suburbs that are worth living in, housing is incredibly expensive unless you go way out to BFE (as people have mentioned already). We will have to stretch to make it work, especially if we have a kid and (at least temporarily) go to one income. So here is a good topic for discussion - who knows of a suburb, preferably on or near a Metra line, that has good schools, is safe, and has reasonable housing prices? The Chicago area has something like 300 different municipalities. There must be some hidden gems somewhere!

One of the not-so-great effects of the housing boom. Housing is now that much more difficult to afford. Good news: Chicago is still one of the most reasonably priced cities in the country for housing. That's not only good for those looking for housing, but also good for current owners (as far as seeing better value in their homes, since there is more room topside in the market). Makes me glad I am here. How does the housing market effect you folks?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 11:02 AM) Phenomenal athlete is what he is not. If Owens was a phenomenal athlete he'd be one of those 5 tool players and he would have been playing in the major leagues already. He's a good athlete in certain area's (weak arm and is not near as fast as some of you guys make him out to be...Willie Harris was fast and was three times the ball player Owens was and we saw what he did at the major league level). When I think "athlete", that does not necessarily mean "skilled". Michael Jordan was a phenomenal athlete who sucked, for the most part, at baseball. But he was SUCH a phenomenal athlete that even without the individual skills he needed, he sort of got by in AA baseball. My point is NOT that Jerry Owens is anything near MJ in any way, shape or form. Its that athleticism can sometimes help to overcome specific skill deficiences. Owens seems to be a guy who they are hoping for exactly that. He has a lot of raw talent that may nor may not translate to the skills he needs, but that talent is strong enough that it might work (and, looking at his minor league career thus far, it is in fact working to some extent).

QUOTE(danman31 @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 12:20 AM) Minor league steals don't translate at all to the bigs. Owens hit .262 in AAA...that's bad. Pods hit .261 in the bigs. Explain to me how Owens is going to do better than Pods? Batting average doesn't necessarily translate either. Owens is a phenomenal athlete. He also seems to be picking up some skills. His arm looked pretty good in ST, his steal rate has improved (yes, in the minors), etc. I can't say much on his hitting though, other than the .262 number was a big drop for him and he moved up awfully fast. I'd bet, if he is at AAA in 2007, he pushes .300.

QUOTE(G&T @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 11:28 PM) The thread description only says "women that don't usually come to mind." But if that's not good enough I'm going to say that Nancy Pelosi looked pretty good that night she took over as Speaker of the House...is that strange enough? Um... yeah, that will do.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 08:17 PM) She's a goofy-looking figure skater that I made big deal about to follow during the salt lake city olympics back in my freshman year of college in my dorm for fun. Even found winamp skins of her, made fliers, forced other people to watch, had her initials on my intramurals team shirt, etc... I know what you mean since others are just posting random hot girls they saw in a commercial or something, but (and considering there's no official rules) I've stayed true and named a few of my "strange" crushes. She's not that hot anyways... Well, with the back story, I'd agree that's a little strange. But the modern day Sasha Cohen (I confess to having no idea what she looked like in 2002) isn't too much of a stretch. Or, maybe I just share your opinion on this matter.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 07:41 PM) sasha cohen Again, some of you are missing the whole STRANGE part...

Slate update... Democrats Officially announced (date of announcement) • Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards (Dec. 28, 2006) • Retiring Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack (Nov. 30, 2006) • Ohio Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (Dec. 12, 2006) • Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel (April 17, 2006) Established exploratory committee (date of filing with the Federal Election Commission) • Delaware Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (has publicly announced he plans to file with the Federal Election Commission later this month to establish a committee) Widely mentioned • Civil Rights activist Al Sharpton • Retired Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas • New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton • Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd • Former Vice President Al Gore of Tennessee • Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry • Illinois Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) • New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson Officially not running (date of announcement) • Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (Oct. 12, 2006) • Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record) (Nov. 11, 2006) • Former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle (Dec. 2, 2006) • Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh (news, bio, voting record) (Dec. 15, 2006) Republicans Officially announced • Attorney John H. Cox of Illinois (March 9, 2006) Established exploratory committee (date of filing with the Federal Election Commission) • Arizona Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) (Nov. 16, 2006) • Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (Nov. 20, 2006) • Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) (Dec. 1, 2006) • Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy G. Thompson (Dec. 13, 2006) • Former Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore III ( Jan. 9, 2007) • Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (Jan. 3, 2007) Widely mentioned • Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia • Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) • Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee • California Rep. Duncan Hunter (news, bio, voting record) • Former New York Gov. George E. Pataki • Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo Officially not running (date of announcement) • FormerTennessee Sen. Bill Frist (Nov. 29, 2006)

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 04:45 PM) "Bowl Teams" is a very loose term. When counting by Bowl teams played Oregon State = LSU. You're missing the point. I am not saying that BSU is better than Florida or OSU. They most likely are not. But we don't know, do we? If you go 13-0 in 1-A play, and don't just play a cream puff schedule (and by ANY definition, 6 bowl teams is not cream puff), you deserve a chance. I would have said the same for Rutgers if they had finished off their almost improbably season.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 04:36 PM) Boise could have had a greater say in the argument if they scheduled better OOC opponents. Oregon State, Wyoming, Sacramento State, and Utah just isn't going to get it done. Yes, this is assuming a bigger power would actually play them, and that's a big assumption. But I'm not ready to hand Boise State anything after their schedule and escaping one of the worst BCS teams this year. USC, LSU, OSU, Florida, and probably even Michigan would beat Boise State by 10+ points in my opinion. Take a look at who they played. 6 bowl teams, beat all of them (I missed one earlier). Of the 5 teams other than OK who they beat, those other teams were 4-1 in their bowl games and the 5th team lost by one point. The WAC was 4-1 in bowl games. Florida played 7 bowl teams, just 1 more than Boise State. Ohio State? Same number I think. Their schedule strengths weren't different by much. If you are the only 1-A undefeated team, you deserve a shot at the title, one way or another.

Boise State, 13-0. Only undefeated BCS team. Only undefeated 1-A team. Beat 5 bowl teams. And they never had a shot at the championship. College football needs a better system.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 01:03 PM) I got a 23, basically right in between Bush and Powell. I knew a couple questions where I differed because on non economic issues I don't necessarily fall on the typical conservative republican side. However, when I vote the #1 thing I consider are economic factors and thats why I vote heavy republican. I used to feel the same way. But the last 6 years, the GOP (at the national level) has been nothing but fiscally irresponsible. They are now far more concerned with interfering in people's lives, than keeping government under control.

Rip and Gwynn - great to see two great ballplayers, and two great men, get into the Hall. Blyleven - deserves it. I hope he gets in. Dawson, Gossage - The two guys on the fence, in my mind. Can't decide. Baines - deserves more votes that Murphy, and I think deserves at least as many as Jim Rice. But I don't think he'll ever reach the 75% threshold. Belle, McGwire, Canseco - This is one of the many reasons why I love baseball: its HOF has a character clause. Good for them. None of the three deserve to get in. You have to do something FOR baseball, not just for yourself. McGwire could argue he did that at least (though he blew it), but Belle and Canseco did nothing for the game. Buhner - Someone voted for Jay Buhner???

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2007 -> 07:57 AM) Big, BIG, huge key number right now is $55 a barrel. $55 is an old low from June of 05, and there is some solid resistance there, but if it can go through that number, there might not be much stopping it until $50. Also worth noting is that commodities in general are in a huge retreat across the board this week. Energies, softs, metals, and grains have all taken big losses. Now translated to everyday life, this could have a couple of effects. The first is that lots of everyday stuff should be cheaper. The second is that if this trend continues, it will take a lot of the inflationary pressures out of the general marketplace, and it might keep the fed on the sidelines for a while longer. The pressure to raise rates to contain inflation would be gone. This could also serve to stabilize the housing market through stopping the interest rate increases. LSC broke through $55 today.