NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 01:21 PM) Who's to say we wouldn't have had 5 more 9-11's since then if Gore was in office. You guys are make making some hellacious assumptions based on a whole bunch of nothing. For those of us who don't see BushCo's policies as having done much positive for the war on terror, it seems unlikely we would have seen any more 9/11's. Most of what Bush has done has only made us less safe, not more. (NOTE: I said most, not all) Economically, SS2K5, I agree - that is exactly what I was getting at. Some of Bush's financial ideas and the GOP Congress' policies were very helpful in the 2001-2003 period. Gore would seem to have been likely to do more poorly in that way, and that could have been really bad. This whole question is obviously full of assumptions. I voted for Bush in 2000. But in the philisophical realm, if I could go back and vote again, you'd better believe I'd have voted for Gore.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 12:55 PM) I can't really make the call on the domestic side but it would be hard for me to imagine how Al Gore could have done any worse on the world stage. I'll agree, and narrow it even further. Gore may have struggled economically to get things done right. But on the world stage, and on domestic issues of social or environmental nature, we'd be far better off.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 10:09 AM) Are you so dense as to ignore the chairman's words that it was a message to the President? Those were his words, not mine. Jesus Christ, mate -- first you act incredulous and smarmy in response to my claim that Carter was given the nod to spite Bush then when the chairman's own words are brought in you say, "Well, he deserved it anyway, and besides, they could've given it to Clinton or Gore to spite Bush!" which of course ignores the fact that Bush and the Clintons get along fairly well, Gore has nothing that merits Peace Prize (and Clinton is a stretch). Whatever, man. Carter's Peace Prize was an award from hacks to a hack. And who gives a s*** whether or not the Peace Prize committee thinks Bush's actions are noble or not? Plenty of deserving people have never won a Peace Prize and Yasser Arafat has. Who cares about the Nobel Peace Prize, and what extra authority does it give Carter when the committee said that they were sending Bush a message with it? Screw that. So you're saying the Nobel Peace Prize is like the Gold Glove, or the Heisman. An award no longer given for its intended reasons.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 10:03 AM) I just think you guys are all underestimating the racist tendencies of America. Not just in the South but in Ohio and Pennsylvania (the first being the most Republican swingstate the other being the most Democratic one) and of Missouri, Iowa and Florida, too. If Obama runs he will be trounced. That's about all I've got to add on the matter. If you are focused on racist tendencies in America, then you should take the whole picture into account. There are plenty of racists out there who will vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black. Remember that Bush carried a pretty decent percentage of that segment in 2004, in fact more than any Republican in some time, if I recall. Many of those voters would not have even considered Bush if the Democrat running was black, instead of the whitest of white men. QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 10:05 AM) You can put a good chunk of Indiana on that list as well IMO... I'd in fact say Indiana is much more socially conservative than Iowa. Iowa, despite being mostly rural and lilly white, has tended to be socially moderate. Indiana is trending the other way.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 09:48 AM) On subsequent posts, you did make that point. However, those posts weren't there before I posted. Gotcha. Sorry to jump on that, but the last thing I wanted was people to think I was saying racism was the distinct territory of the GOP. That was sort of the opposite of my point - which is that its existence in both parties might cancel out the effect of a minority male running for national office.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 09:21 AM) Wow! There are no racist Democrats. When you are done hyperbolizing, read my post again. I was quite clear that racism against blacks in the GOP would be, in some form, cancelled out on the other side by racists on the left. In the case of a black man running for President, that means some small percentage of the GOP votes against him because he is black, but also, some small percentage of the Dems vote FOR him because he is black. Is that more clear for you? Both parties, whether they like it or not, harbor certain hateful groups in the fringes of their electorate. In the case of racism by whites against blacks or hispanics, yeah, like it or not, they are a lot more GOP than Democrat. You can not like that fact, but that doesn't make it go away. Similarly, there are fringes on the left that are so full of hate against the majority race or religion that they will vote against them purely for that reason. In BOTH cases, those fringes do not rule the party. But they are there.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 08:57 AM) I've read what he's written. I know all about Colin Powell. He's a liar and a scumbag, frankly, and I base that on his role in the My Lai cover-up. I have no doubt that a career military man would lie or EXAGGERATE why he skipped out of the election. If his wife said that, good for her, but the real reason was almost certainly that he KNEW that there'd be some serious problems. You seriously underestimate racial issues. You know about Doug Wilder, right? Democrat from Virginia. Damn good Governor, was going to run in 1992. People love him in name and his achievements but as soon as they learned he was black, through pictures and campaign, he was done. That'd definitely happen to Colin Powell. Definitely. Virginia U.S. The amount of underlying racial tensions is as amplified in VA as it is anywhere in the country. Few other states have as much of it. Your view on the influence of race takes individual pieces of information and extrapolates them over the entire country. Forgive the use of phrase, but, its not that black and white. For some on the fringes, race might be the one and only factor. But the fringes would cancel out anyway, as I pointed out earlier. In Obama's case, any adamant "I won't vote black" stuff on one end of the spectrum would be balanced by black voters who might vote for McCain or Giuliani if the Dem running was white. The votes that matter, the ones that swing left and right, are not tobacco farmers in southern Virginia. They will tend to be wowed by a guy like Obama who dispells many of the stereotypes that some of them may harbor, and they are often interested in something different than what is going on today. Obama, unless he says or does something racially specific that offends people during his campaign, will not win or lose because of his race - despite the fact that yes, racism still exists. Those may seem like opposing facts, but when you dig in, you'll see what I mean by not that black and white. QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 09:01 AM) I don't know about percentages, but i know both parties have their idiots. It might be more in one group or another, but I still feel it is enough to sway an election in this climate. Again, look at where those idiots (in the case of racism-type idiots) fall on the spectrum. Those who will vote for a black man for that reason alone, or vote for the other guy for that reason alone, will vote Dem and GOP respectively anyway if both candidates are white. Therefore, the influence is minimized. Now, there are plenty of idiots in the middle too. But those who are that racist are not socially in the middle, by nature.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 08:41 AM) As split as the electorate is, it doesn't take much to keep a canditate out of office. If you were to get the usual party line split, plus even a couple of a percent of a party who either didn't vote, or voted for an opponent because of their usual party's canditate's race, it would be enough to swing an election quite easily. It isn't that the overwealming portion of the country isn't ready for a [insert downtrodden minority of your choice here] President, its that the 1% of the country that isn't, would be the swing vote in this scenario. I completely disagree. The 1% (and I'd say its actually more than that, more like 5% or more) of the population that simply won't vote for a black man is NOT the swing vote - those voters will vote GOP, or maybe 3rd party, almost all of the time. So Obama doesn't suffer for that. Powell might have, though. The far right fringes, where racism is most prevalent, wouldn't vote for any democrat in any case. The swing votes, America's socially moderate, are far less likely to be driven that way. As for sexism and Hillary on the other hand, I think the fear of a female President would exist on that far right fringe, but ALSO exist in other segments of the population. She suffers at the swing much more than a racial minority would. QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 08:48 AM) It was absolutely nothing. The poll was taken in the VERY early stages. He'd have been destroyed and he knew it. That's why he didn't run. (I don't buy the "My wife would leave me" angle. That's more of a clever excuse than anything.) Have you read much on Powell? Or read anything he has written himself? Because I have. I don't doubt for one second his wife said that. Powell was lacking in political prowess and mindset to be sure. He is a statesman in the pure sense. If he lost, that is what would have made him lose. The few percent on the far right of his party (as stated earlier) would not have voted for him, but he would have picked up at least that many based purely on race from the far left in the black community.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 08:34 AM) Polls indicated -- you're telling me that Powell had a chance because the polls indicated? Please. Polls indictated that John Kerry had a prayer. As soon as the Forces of Politics and Race got a hold on him -- which doesn't happen during the "Honeymoon" of "Will he or won't he?" but only once the race BEGINS -- he'd have been mauled. Kerry did have a prayer - he lost 51-49. And if he had been the slightest bit competent in his campaign messages, you would have won. You make it sound like he was Walter Mondale or something. Polls are obviously flawed, but to say that a poll showing Powell favored in an election is nothing is dismissing reality.

This is where I sing my Kurdistan song. Its really the best option at this point.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 08:54 PM) Neither has a prayer today. Hillary Clinton might because there is plenty of support for Clinton out there but even that's a stretch and a helluva stretch. See: Doug Wilder, 1992; racial makeup of America. Sorry. Honestly, I'm rather amazed that otherwise smart people are willing to pretend that America doesn't have the racial history it has or racial makeup it does -- that Pennsylvania, the most Democratic of the swingstates, would vote in a Black Man even though it's over 90% white (I think it's ninety seven). That a Black Man can win a single electoral vote in the South -- in Iowa, in Missouri or Michigan. When Colin Powell was considering a run from the GOP side ('92 or '96, I forget which), polls indicated he was at that time the most popular choice not only in his own party, but nationally as well. He eventually dropped out (at least in part because his wife said she'd leave him if he won), but he absolutely had a good chance to win. I have no doubt that there is still plenty of racism and bigotry in this country. But I do believe that the right person can bust through that, and right now, Obama looks like he might be that person. I just think American is more ready (right now) for a black man than a woman of any race to win the Presidency. None of that should really matter of course, but, it does.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 06:39 PM) Obama is a black man. He won't win. Don't kid yourselves. He won't even take The Nod. And beyond that, he's a tad mediocre, IMO. A guy with good speechwriters and PR skills. All hat. No shoulder pads. (I say he's a black man and can't win not as an endorsement of racism but an acknowledgement of American racism still, ah, existing.) I'd wager that the American public is more willing to vote in a black man than a white woman.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 06:27 PM) I'm not a big fan of Edwards, but he's done a lot for the Dems in the last four years, and would be more than acceptable to the base that the Dems would need to turn out. He probably could get North Carolina AND Virginia to flip red to blue, which might be enough. Especially if Warner gets a VP nod. IMO, I think of the current candidates, I'd like to see an Obama nomination - if nothing else to see someone other than a white male at the head of a ticket. But I'd want Schweitzer, Richardson or Warner to be the VP nod. If Al Gore wanted this nomination though.... if we get real Al Gore, and not consulted algore, I'd be all for it. I would definitely prefer Gore to Kerry, Clinton or Edwards. If, as you say, we get the real person. But he isn't going to win, or even run, probably. Might be an inspired VP pick though, if the Prez candidate is on the moderate or conservative side of the blue zone. Schweitzer?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 05:50 PM) I think Harry Reid's done some darn good things already, but he's also got a bit of a dark streak in him where he's willing to compromise in areas he shouldn't. Certianly has a record thus far a ways in front of his predecessor, but he really needs to stop doing this sh*t. Say what you want about the internet, the blogosphere, etc., but the one thing it's really good at is catching and publicising this sort of crap. I agree that the internet can be used as a nifty tool that way. Tell me some things Reid has done "already" that are darn good. Seriously, I want to know.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 05:05 PM) Bloomberg. Nice way to start, jacka**. I really do think there are some in the democratic party who want to do positive things, but Reid is one who has never impressed me. He is not the guy I'd want leading the Senate.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 03:19 PM) I'd rather have Sweeney start everyday in Charlotte. Plus, he's not a CF by any stretch, although, granted, he's better than everyone else besides BA. Is Sweeney better than Terrero defensively in CF?

QUOTE(Damen @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 02:38 PM) 17? I'll give you another tip. I'm pretty sure Kap isn't 17.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 02:37 PM) If this guy was who he says he was then it should have been a small matter for him to produce ID and have his story corroborated after invoking the name of his contact. This story stinks of bulls*** to me. That thought occurred to me too. But if you read the article, they guy was let go eventually, so indeed they did eventually corroborate his story. They just took their sweet time. And I can't say I'd be surprised it would take a while to figure it out, knowing how poorly the FBO communicates with other branches of government, and also seeing how understaffed and undersupervised those military prisons in Iraq appear to be.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 02:36 PM) Jerry Owens is a well-below average defensive MLB center fielder. From everything I've seen and heard about him, he's not even close to being ready to contribute in the majors offensively or defensively. Well then let's hope he isn't the one picked for the backup CF role. I am hoping, at this point, we have Terrero for that role, and then either Sweeney or Owens as the backup corner OF (which leaves Mack, Cintron and Hall for the other 3 bench slots). Sweeney is probably more ready, but knowing Ozzie, he'd prefer a speedster like Owens on the bench.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 02:27 PM) My question is how hard is it for a guy to identify himself as a contractor and produce ID to avoid that whole mess? Sounds easy, right? Except, Nuke, I'm sure you know how some of these things go. For one, if the warrant squad (or whatever the military calls it) wasn't informed that someone on premises was an informant, then they would just take everyone and stick them in a cell until everyone settled down a bit. Second, again if no one informed the military of this (and I am so not surprised that there was a communication breakdown between the FBI and the military), then they would have assumed he was a co-conspirator. The point of the article, to me, is two-fold - to see from an American's perspective what the prisons are like over there, and further, to illustrate how piss-poor the management and inter-agency communication is in Iraq, particularly in the justice apparatus.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 01:52 PM) Can Owens even play CF? I know almost nothing about him, except that he still needs time in the minors. I don't know much either, just saw him do it in ST last year and he played a couple games in OF late this past season. He seems to have some of the skills for it. But I really don't know if he is (or can be) that good. I just think Ozzie and others are pointing him in that general direction. But KW seems to want Terrero to be that guy.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 02:15 PM) Oh, does anyone realize the constant defense of these people, who IMO gave up their rights when they started hanging around people (or are those people) who want to blow us all up, is absurd? did you actually read the article?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 01:10 PM) Exactly my point. So in other words, someone has to go if there were to be another outside solution. Um... I was saying we would NOT be getting an outside solution, probably. We'll get Owens or Terrero on the 25 man roster.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 01:00 PM) After dropping Gload, we do have room on the 25 man roster for 1 more backup that we didn't carry last year. However, we don't have room on the 40-man for any other signings without someone clearing waivers or being traded. Terrero is already on the 40-man. EDIT: So is Owens.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Dec 18, 2006 -> 12:22 PM) Also, definitely still need a back-up CF. I think we'll see Terrero or Owens brought to the club for that purpose. Not saying that's great, but I think that's what we'll get.