NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 11:55 PM) Mike Tyson is campaigning for Michael Steele, the GOP Maryland Senate candidate. http://www.nbc4.com/politics/10103003/detail.html Did he threaten to eat Steele's opponent's children?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 10:48 PM) But (and yes this is generalizing, but help prove me wrong, seriously) most Muslims apparantly aren't "good" in your context here then, because I certainly don't see them condeming their own who do these sorts of things. As has been pointed out multiple times, they do that plenty here (by here, I assume you mean the US). Heck, the appointed and elected leaders in Iraq even do it. But don't expect the great majority of Iraqis to condemn extremists... as far as they know, they were invaded. Why would they cheer for the invaders? By the way, to be clear, I don't believe the majority or even any more than a slim minority of soldiers are even capable of this. Nor do I believe that the majority of Muslims are. I do, however, think that a population of conquered people, in a country torn to bit with civil strife, are a lot less likely to condemn violent acts against the perceived aggresor. The fact that they are Muslim is, I feel, irrelevant.

The Fear of Flying thread made me think of this. Answer one, some or all of the following: 1. Best airport 2. Worst airport 3. Best airline 4. Worst airline 5. Longest air travel excursion 6. Funniest/best/worst air travel experiences. I'll start... 1. Gary-Chicago. 2 gates, parking 50 feet from the door. Best big airport: Denver Int'l. 2. Mumbai Santa Cruz. In the U.S.: LaGuardia. 3. Frontier 4. Delta 5. Chicago-Frankfurt-Mumbai-Pune. 29 hours. 8 hour layover, in the middle of the night, on the cement floor of the domestic terminal of Mumbai Santa Cruz airport, waiting for the last leg. 6. I had a kid puke in the seat next to me in the first hour of a three hour flight. He didn't use the bag. It was an unpleasant rest of the flight.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 03:56 PM) London's fun. Heathrow is not. Stansted neither. I'm totally starting a best/worst airport thread. QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 03:58 PM) "After you get where you're going, take off your shoes and your socks then walk around on the rug bare foot and make fists with your toes." Die Hard.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 07:15 PM) John McCain on the possibility of the Democrats winning Congress. http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews....=rss&rpc=22 So much for John trying to woo the middle. Seems like the last year or two, he moved a bit to the right. If he keeps talking like that, I'll start to think he wants to be the trench candidate for the GOP instead of the moderate.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 06:22 PM) There's already been a few of those. I'll pass on this one. It was a good question I thought. Agreed, agreed and agreed. Besides, Steff would kick my a**.

I actually knew a man (father of a friend) who was buried in a tux... but was wearing a White Sox t-shirt underneath.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 04:16 PM) A couple thoughts, #1. This is a very small minority of elected officials #2. In the context of #1, are these guys sick before taking office, or does the office and power somehow trigger this? In this case, the page is 18, though he is still in high school. So its slimy, but maybe not pedophilia. As to #2, a similar discussion is often had about cops. Are bad cops bad people to being with, or did the job push them over the edge? To me the answer, in both cases, is that it is some of each. Despite how much we ridicule them, being in Congress is not at all an easy job. So, if people already have problematic tendencies or habits, the job may push them over. But in the specific case of people who are pedophiles (and yes, I still think that is the correct word in Foley's case), I cannot imagine the job did this to them. Made the problem worse maybe, but I fail to see how any job could create this type of problem.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 04:04 PM) As I specified in the post you responded to, I was referrering specifically to the guage of the pellets and not identifying marks on the pellets, of which most don't even touch the inside of the barrel so whatever is on them is usually only what they've hit. QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 01:52 PM) A shotgun shot does leave barrel marks on whatever is expelled from it, and a firing test would confirm if the gun he turned in was used in the shooting. See above. In any case, we've obfuscated the thread. So how about that Juan Uribe? Pretty dandy with the glove, eh? I really hope he is telling the truth. But I know zero about the man.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 02:04 PM) I don't get info from TV either. The pellets in shotgun shells of varying guage have identifying characteristics. I've been shooting shotguns for many years (hunting and in turkey shoot competitions) and this is common knowledge. Yes, they have identifying characteristics to that type of cartridge. Not to the gun. Think about it. A small metal pellet, which is round, could be scarred in an infinitely variable set of ways, none of which are particular to the barrel of any one gun. Now, I suppose if they shotgun was loaded with slugs, then you could do identify scoring marks from a specific barrel. Matching shotguns to any sort of evidence they leave, as a rule, is problematic.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 01:52 PM) A shotgun shot does leave barrel marks on whatever is expelled from it, and a firing test would confirm if the gun he turned in was used in the shooting. Being in a car means little because shells from any fired weapon can be projected anywhere. Unless they picked them up, they can be anywhere. As well, guage can be determined from the pellets. GSR washes off with one soap and water washing. Jackie, the same tests they run on handguns are used for shotguns. My understanding of shotgun shot is that you cannot tell anything from damage to the shot. The shot is just a bunch of little metal beads, so you cannot get a pattern on them. And in this case, I didn't get the knowledge from TV. Tests on shotguns show blast pattern and spread, and some other factors. But the shot isn't usable for identification to a specific gun (unless things have changed a lot in the last 10 years).

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 01:07 PM) The first, and easiest, thing they will do is a ballistics comparison. Take the shells,casings, or bullets at the scene, compare them to a test shot of Juan's gun. If they match, he's got some explaining to do. If they don't, then he's clear. The guage is determined by the shot used. They would know that upon visual inspection of the spent shells at the crime scene. If the gun was cleaned, it will show it wasn't fired. Since he might be anal and clean his gun everyday, a result of that test wouldn't mean much. If it was his handgun, then yeah, as you and Rock said, firing tests can be done. I was assuming, based on Jackie's post, it was the shotgun. And if they were in a car, there likely will not be any shells on the ground. So they'll have to go by spread, etc. The type of shot found isn't really an indicator of the gun, since various guages of shotgun can use various size of shot in their shells. Juan's hands could also be tested for residue, but I am not sure how long that residue normally stays in the skin (or how effectively it could be scrubbed out). That wouldn't confirm the gun, but would confirm if he'd fired one recently.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 01:19 PM) You take something away such as "tag" or flag football--even for reasons such as liability-- these kids are going to compensate. So, they'll just create other, more violent games. Or release there aggression out across other areas deemed safe, such as basketball. I propose the reemergence of V-Bombs. Atleast that's what we called them in grammar school. You would tightly fold up a sheet of paper, fold it into a 'V', and then lauch it from a rubber-band at someone. This little activity made recess during the winter months enjoyable. Nothing could POSSIBLY go wrong from kids these days using V-Bombs. I think you are 100% right about compensation. We'll see more and more violence in schools, if we take away simple playing activities.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 12:12 PM) Dumb question -- What kind of a "match" can one do on a shotgun? Meaning it won't even be the right type of gun for these pellets? Or will a test show that it hasn't even been fired? Depending on how sophisticated they get, using the distances between gun and target and the wounds on the victims, they could probably determine the guage of the shotgun. Similarly, maybe the barrell length, based on spread. But they'd need some scientific analysis. There may also be damage in the car, residue and what not. And yes, you can tell to some extent how long since it had been fired or cleaned.

If you have a mild fear of flying, have a drink or two beforehand. If you have a SERIOUS fear of flying, then do NOT drink. You'll just toss it up.

The article in today's Trib about Pinella's hiring has a quip about Lyons. Pinella basically says that Lyons "doesn't have a racist bone in his body", that it was a joke and he didn't mean that, etc. I can't find the online version and the link right now.

So, it turns out Obama may be seriously looking at a Prez run in '08... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politic...ll=chi-news-hed I must say I'm surprised. As I've said, given he earlier was adamant about not running, I thought in his case, that would stick. I may have been very wrong on this one.

Tag?!?! We played tackle football, maul-ball (like Rugby) and bombardment at recess. Not to mention dodgeball in gym. There was a whole discussion on this in Buster. This country has become sue-happy. Kids are going to be come vegetables with all the video games and wimps with the lack of risk. Sad.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 10:42 AM) I agree with you totally. I have been saying for years the guys on these exchanges need to bury the grudge if they are going to make it through the 21st century. Let's face it the NY futures markets are complete garbage technologically, so really Chicago has no challenge in the US. They are looking at places like London and Tokyo for competition when it comes to futures markets. Like I said before, if they really want to take the next step, they need to pretty much merge all of the Chicago financial centers... The rest of the world couldn't come close to that monster. Another thing Chicago should consider is taking on clearing and some other non-venue functions for some of the US straggler exchanges like KCBOT and MGE on the futures side, and the PSE on the securities side. Maybe you could even merge operations of CHX and PSE, and create a stock exchange with some teeth to compete with NY in that space. Try for a niche set of companies. Continued innovation and new market spaces like the FXM will help as well. Swapclear failed at the LCH, but Chicago might be able to make that work.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 09:32 AM) I think going for Pierre is the wrong direction. If we are trying to pick up a lead off outfielder, there is no reason we shouldnt be agressively pursuing Ichiro. I don't think Seattle would part with him. But, if we did pick him up, for LF or CF, that would be most excellent. That would solve the problems of a leadoff hitter, solid defender and offensive presence in the OF, speed and execution.

I think what we are seeing here is a war. I think Chicago, riding the enormous wave of increased volume in trading options and other derivatives in recent years, is making a run at New York as the financial center in North America. Think its a stretch? Think about this. When CME's FX marketplace goes live this year, Chicago will be the leading American market in every major type of traded investment instrument other than straight stocks (that means futures, options, equity options, fixed income and FX). I think this is the beginning of Chicago declaring a business war, in the investment arena, against New York, London and Eurex.

QUOTE(BobDylan @ Oct 17, 2006 -> 06:48 PM) Way to buy into the SoxTalk hype. There is no, NO way Ross Gload is a better defensive LFer than either Scott Podsednik or Juan Pierre. Ross is a solid firstbasement but the only reason he touches the outfield is because Ozzie Guillen likes to make people ask the question "why?". Um... SoxTalk hype? I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority who want to see Gload start, and would be OK with him in LF. The hype is in the other corner on this argument. And I do think that, if he played regularly, he be as good as or better than Pods in LF. Will he ever be a great, or even above average defender out there? Probably not. Maybe more like average at best. I watched him play LF, in person, in ST this year. The guy isn't as horrible out there as people sometimes think (people are, I think, overinfluenced by a series of awful plays in RF against the Cubs some time ago).

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 17, 2006 -> 07:29 PM) Lawyers are A problem but the system with its gaping holes that said lawyers can exploit to free obviously guilty criminals and helps social parasites cash in big time because of their own poor choices and dearth of common sense is the problem. Correcting the flaws of our legal system is something that money hungry lawyers have and always will fight because it is those same flaws that enrich them and give them power. There's nothing "noble" about freeing a rapist or a killer because of some petty procedural error and there's nothing "noble" about filing lawsuit after lawsuit and attempting to see what sticks and how much money they can squeeze out of a defendant for some frivolus reason. If all that wasn't enough. Lawyers have created a climate of fear in this nation. Fear of being sued that is. Need proof? In one Mass town they wont even let kids play tag at recess for fear of.....thunderstorms?.....traffic?......bullies prowling for lunch money?........no.......lawsuits. http://cbs4boston.com/local/local_story_290105157.html That story is just the tip of the iceberg. They are a huge factor in the death of personal responsibility in this nation also as they give social parasites an avenue to try to get paid for their own bad choices. Also if you want to change GOP in your point about Foley to Congress then you are spot on. Congressmen are a special breed of vermin all their own but that's another rant for another post. You want to accuse me of intellectual laziness? I suppose if calling a spade a spade and being of the belief that not every question has a complex answer makes me guilty of "intellectual laziness" then so be it. I'll wear it as a badge of honor. What's funny is, I agree with what I think are some of your root points here... the death of common sense, a society in fear of each other in part because of frivilous law suits, a lack of personal responsibility, etc. I just think the blame falls on the people who choose to sue, and further, the judges who allow such things to go on (see my earlier point about jury trials). If civil trials were screened for such nonsense, and the legal hurdle for even bringing a civil suit to court was higher, then the problem would be solved. You don't see this kind of nonsense in Europe, in part because the courts don't allow it. Remember the infamous $3M coffee spill from a US McDonald's? An almost identical case was brought in the UK, and dismissed outright. And I do think its noble to defend the least likeable of people. The adversarial system doesn't work without those people, and their importance is as great as anyone else in the system. About the intellectual laziness... I was talking specifically about the tendency all of us have at least occasionally to dismiss difficult situations by trying to write off part of the equation via inaccurate categorization. And I think, as that tends to happen more and more, the road leads to a lot of hatred and anger. So I try to fight against it. Sorry if I came off preachy or harsh. But if that's what I am, and I am doing it for the things I believe are right, then I will wear that as a badge of honor.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 17, 2006 -> 05:58 PM) It does appear he was being specific to this female and this situation, no? No. Saying this particular person deserves what she got or worse makes sense, and I agree. What bothers me is the connotation that, as he stated, defending cop killers and black panthers is of the same ilk that aiding terrorists is. It goes with the thought he put forth in the other thread, about how evil lawyers are. And that all points to a general theme - that lawyers and the legal system are somehow "the problem". Its ridiculous. I am tired, more than anything, of the sweeping generalizations. This defense lawyer does something slimy... and people rip the profession. Foley turns out to be a scumbag (well, beyond just being a Congressman)... it must be a GOP thing. Its all crap, and to me, its just a small step from bigotry. They are rooted in the same problem - intellectual laziness. I don't feel like dealing with the complexities of human nature, so I'll just lump everyone into a category and s*** on it. That is why I called out this post. Its not just Nuke. /rant. Sorry.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Oct 17, 2006 -> 05:01 PM) Is an upgrade defensively in LF really too much to ask? Why should we accept a guy like Gload in LF because he can play equal defense to the worst defensive LF in baseball? Just for once can't we have a guy in left who's capable of throwing the ball 30 feet in the air and perhaps catch a ball that's hit to him as opposed to letting it bounce off his face? Here is the thing. I'd love a guy who can play really good defense in LF and can bring the bat. But that isn't Pierre, or anyone else I have heard discussed. To me, Pierre is an upgrade defensively from awful to average at best. And offensively, I guess I don't see him as much of an upgrade either. Gload would be a wash defensively at worst (or, he may improve), and a large offensive upgrade. And he'll cost a sixth what Pierre will go for. Putting Gload aside for the moment... who is on the market, or in our farm system, who is likely to be a significant upgrade both defensively and offensively that we can plug in there? I just think that Pierre isn't worth it, value wise. I'd take him over Pods, mind you. But not my much. His OBP was identical to Pods, his SB% was a little better, and his D is better.