NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 11:59 AM) Robin has never shown interest in working in baseball again. He has been asked before. I actually saw something a while back, quoting him at times, saying he DOES want to get back into it... but not until his kids are all out of high school. I have no idea when that happens.

Anyone get to watch the Reid/Angle debate? I only saw quotes in articles after words, and heard a few audio clips on the news this AM. How did either of them do? Anyone do anything to make a difference in that race?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:51 PM) I keep hearing this, but how many complete $100 million teams are out there? Hell, even the Yankees have holes in their roster. QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 05:57 PM) Fair enough. At least it seems you're semi admitting that KW and his staff have a major challenge ahead of them this offseason. If they are not allowed to scrape $110M or so, then yeah, he has to pull a rabbit out of his hat.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:14 PM) seems like the Dem strategy has been to try and 'take the wind out of the sails' of the tea party. but when i read some of the tea party stuff, it seems some of those 'sails' actually belong on the Democrat ship, rather than the GOP ship. i think sapping 20% of tea party support and transferring to the Democrats would be a very workable goal without compromising the Democrat platform. I agree.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:11 PM) The overwhelming bulk of the tea party (lower case) movement seems to be socially conservative, not libertarian or liberal. Your capitalization thing is just confusing now. I think the angry, socially conservative crowd, which we knew in the 90's and 2000's as the Christian Coalition, makes up PART of that crowd. The other major part is the Libertarian crowd.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:08 PM) The aspects of the tea party that are led by the Palin/Beck crowd (Tea Party) are the relevant aspects because that's who's getting candidates nominated and who's pushing national discussion on policy. The pushback comes from the Tea Party trying to present itself as some new voting bloc or as something outside of standard far-right Republican policy. Whatever not-just-rebranded-Republicans tea party movement there was after the Democrat victories in 2008 has been completely subsumed by the Tea Party as of about January 2009. The Ron Paul libertarianism streak is barely detectable. So, there may be grassroots tea party movements. There may be people who consider themselves part of the tea party but distance themselves from the Tea Party. But that's not what's at play in the upcoming elections. When the Tea Party is talked about, the national Republican Rebranded version is what is on everyone's minds. And part of that is fair, as I said, but part of it is stereotyping. I am saying, try not to label all Tea Partiers (regardless of capitalization) as the same as the candidates and talking heads. Also remember, this is a relatively recent construct. It may just fade into obscurity, or it may mature and become stronger and independent of the GOP and Dems. Can't know for sure yet.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:07 PM) Where exactly then is the Tea Party rally in favor of prop 19? This is 100% the most classic libertarian argument that can possibly be made, happening in the state with the largest population. If there is any issue that should provoke a surge of tea party libertarian support, it's right there. I don't even know what Prop 19 is. And how do you know the rallies for it don't include TEa Partiers?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:02 PM) They're not the tea party movement...but the tea party movement doesn't appear unless they get involved. On issue after issue, the Tea Party gets riled up on classic Republican issues, classic republican talking points, and they show up when a Republican leader or Fox News calls on them to do so. You want another great example? Take a look at the tea party victories. Every single time, what has been the sin that has gotten a politician in trouble with the Tea Party? It wasn't supporting Bush's Massive expansion of Medicare in 2003, it wasn't earmarks, it wasn't anything like that...it has been people who voted with the Democrats too often. It has been being too centrist. The Races in Utah, Deleware, Florida, Alaska, New England, everywhere that there is a "tea party uprising!" candidate, the Tea Party candidate won because the Tea Party didn't want them ever working with Democrats. Mike Castle, Robert Bennett, Danny Tarkanian, Charlie Crist, and on and on. Hell, Lisa Murkowski is in the right-right wing of the Republican Party and she was replaced by a Tea Party candidate on the argument that she worked with the Democrats too often. I think you are interpereting something that isn't there. You are also, still, saying Tea Party = O'Donnell/Palin. That is only partly true. Those are the fringey, psychotic candidates who got endorsements (which is why its partially their own fault), but you are ignoring the endorsed candidates elsewhere. You are also putting those people as being the same as the followers. Are all catholics just like priests? Are you just like Harry Reid?

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:00 PM) there are actually some issues that the Dems could use to make inroads to get some tea party supporters away from the GOP. the current Democrat technique of accusing everyone of being a racist idiot doesn't seem to be working. That's an interesting point. While the GOP has chosen to thoroughly co-opt the movement, because the alignment is better... the Dems have decided to mock it. To me, that makes no sense, especially since the more libertarian aspects of the general movement actually fits better witht he Dems than the GOP. Seems like the smart thing would be to try to wedge between the candidates and the partiers. Try to appeal to the movement in areas like social issues where they would agree with the Dems at least in part, and then try to illustrate NOT how the TP-endorsed candidates are crazy because they are conservative, but that the are just plain crazy, and not actually defending liberty at all.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 03:24 PM) Great, ELF falls almost exclusively under the democratic platform. Therefore the Democrats are now militant environmentalists, using your standards. And again, read my prior post, the Tea Party isn't an organized coherent national movement. They aren't going to organize nationally to protest anything. The only place they are considered "one" is by the left-wing in this country who wants to label them as any derogatory stereotype that they can so that they can be diminished and silenced. I know this particular example fits into your narrative which you work so hard to push, so you won't agree, but this goes back to Kaps rant months ago, about what goes on in the buster. Hate is OK if it is directed at anything right wing. Even if it is the same stereotyping and offensive stuff that wouldn't be allowed to be directed towards other minority groups. Quite the opposite, it is encouraged and excused here. No one else gets away with it, and it irritates me to no end that a few here can. Mike, while I agree with your general point here... I think its overboard to call what Balta is doing "hate". He's not throwing "hate" at the Tea Party - he is looking at the sad examples of humanity that happen to be loudly tugging at the Tea Party flag, and characterizing the movement as part and parcel. But I see no hate here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 03:52 PM) Now look, no one is out arguing that the Tea Party is doing anything illegal. That breaks your argument right there; if you argued that there was no distinction between the ELF and the Democratic party, you're going to anger people because you're accusing everyone on the left of terrorism. No one is trying to hate you guys here. This is exactly my point. It vehemently offends the Tea Party when someone points out that their policy prescriptions fit entirely within the Republican Party and that they don't care about any issues that the Republican party doesn't care about. This is not a smear, this is not saying that all tea partiers burn down abortion clinics, this is a policy-based argument. You argue that the Tea Party is an advocate for liberty and is a totally independent organization from the Republican Party. Yet, the Tea Party only seems to appear when the National Republican Party takes a strong, well funded, TV and Radio supported position against an issue. The Tea Party surged against health care because the Republicans surged against it. The Tea Party surged against the Stimulus and the Republicans surged against it. The Tea Party was silent on Finreg and the Republicans didn't want to go out on TV arguing that the banks needed fewer restrictions. The Tea Party is silent on foreclosure fraud despite massive violations of property rights at the hands of the banks. You argue that there is no nationally organized Tea Party...yet the concept of a Nationally Organized tea party movement is exactly what we're seeing. When Mike Castle is on pace to win his election with ease, a single endorsement from Sarah Palin suddenly turns the race into a Tea Party race, until that candidate collapses after the primary and everyone suddenly doesn't want their hands dirty. You take strong offense at the notion that the Tea Party and the Republican Party are the same thing. I understand that...but it's not a smear unless you view the Tea Party the same way you view ELF. I'd say I'm equally frustrated here because...the fact that you guys are offended by the idea that we view the Tea Party as simply the activist segment of the Republican Party is declared practically hate speech and something that should be off limits. I agree that the ELF comparison is broken, as that is terrorism. But, I side with Mike on the fact that you are only choosing to see the aspects of the Tea Party that are led by the Palin crowd. Unfortunately for those who are not in that camp, their movement has been co-opted, and the top line voices are the ones the press can easily (and lazily) get to: Limbaugh, Palin, some of the crazy candidates they are running (O'Donnell, Angle, etc.). So while its true that the current people PULLING the Tea Party movement under their belt, that is not the same as saying they ARE the Tea Party movement.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 02:10 PM) How about their divorce records from 20 years ago. And her affadavit stating his wonderful behavior. Or maybe she was making it up ...Get real here would you guys... The press is a shill and you guys will find a way to defend their silence here too. I defended nothing. I was just wondering how you somehow learned, apparently by osmosis, that this even occurred. If you didn't witness it, and you didn't see it in the press, how could you know about it?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 02:12 PM) This is pretty much exactly what I've been doing for a while now, except I automatically dump money into my money market after every pay check and, if the checking account balance climbs, dump in more money manually or pay down some debt. Things will be a bit tighter over the next six or seven months if we get this house, though, because we're a one-income household while my fiance finishes up student teaching to get her certificate. Quicken was great for making accurate spending and budget projections based on what we actually spent in the past. I use my debit card for just about everything, so every purchase is tracked and categorized. I have automatic pulls for 401k and a brokerage as well, the money at end of month is the "extra" part for me. And yeah, Quicken is fantastic for seeing what you are doing. Using it the first month or two is a pain, but once it "learns" the categories for everything once, its a breeze. As long as you are paying with a credit or debit card, its recognizes everything.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 02:00 PM) I don't think there was ever intended to be some sort of big singular goal for the group, back to the original rant which started it all. I don't think they were supposed to be anything but a loud voice to Washington saying that people are upset and not happy about the way things were going in our nation, and in our political system. I honestly believe that they whole idea was to be divorced from the parties, because they didn't want their message to be subjugated and bastardized, just like it has been by a vocal few, and all too happily used against it to the detriment of the original ideals. Fair enough, but that just sounds like an angry mob. Its easy to say you don't like something, its harder to suggest or plan for an alternative.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 02:00 PM) Who enforces the MOVE ACT? The Feds are investigating, so they seem to be enforcing it. What blame does Holder or DOJ have here? They are pursuing it, as you'd expect them to.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 01:54 PM) Anyone know where i can find ANY news on Charlie Wilson beating his wife. Seems Google and any/all Ohio press have zilch on it. But unsealing divorce records all over it. No need to answer. Can't imagine why people use newspapers for their pets to s*** on... So if there is no news on it, what makes you think it happened? Did you witness it?

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 01:36 PM) NSS, I believe it was somewhere in this thread you mentioned "sweeping" money into savings each month. I started sweeping anything left in my account at the end of a pay cycle and it has resulted in many hundreds of dollars in additional savings. I suspect by the end of the year I will save a few thousand dollars extra. In the past it would have kind of accumulated and eventually I would have made a frivilous purchase without much thought. Now I find myself sticking to my spending plan a little better. Thanks. Yeah, I do all my finances in Quicken, and have nearly everything I do financially, automated. Only two things are manual, each happens once a month: Pay the credit card bill, and sweep to savings or investments. We pay for as much as possible via the credit card, because we get the miles/points, its easier, it has better fraud protections, and we pay it off every month. Once a month, when I get the credit card bill amount, I project out all the predicted payment and cash flow events for the next month (Quicken does most of this for me), which gives me a surplus number at the end of the month in checking. Then at that time, I sweep the surplus to savings and/or investments, depending on the balance in the savings account (you always want a cushion in there, but you don't want TOO much in it either because you are wasting opportunity).

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 01:32 PM) There is a major problem with my answer. I believe people should be compelled to act up to their comfort and skill level. That is impossible to quantify in a court of law. For example, someone may have taken a course in First Aid, but not feel comfortable coming to the aid of a car crash victim. It does seem criminal to me, and I use criminal specifically, for someone to stand by and watch someone suffer or die. So I'd agree with the law and hope that a jury would be able to sort out the marginal situations. I'd guess that any legal action taken using such a law would only prosecute in cases of obvious and gross negligence or abandonment. Like, you see someone get hit by a car, laying there bleeding to death, and you say "good luck with that" and walk away. If they at least try to get help or call 911, they'd be protected. That's the way Good Samaritan laws usually work out.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 12:53 PM) I'm not defining all Tea Party people as the same. That is the key difference between what is being portrayed here and in the media, and what I am trying to explain for the umpteenth time. There is no singular Tea Party movement. There isn't even anything knitting them together in any sort of a formal manner. This isn't like a national party. It is stereotyping at best to try to portray the Tea Party movement as some sort of defined group. I agree with this, but, that also begs a different question. If there is no cohesive set of beliefs or policy stances, no single movement, no party and nothing knitting them together... what purpose do they serve? Good, bad or otherwise, what are they going to accomplish if they don't stand for anything?

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 12:34 PM) http://www.theblaze.com/stories/military-b...nt-in-illinois/ So from the actual news source, the key graf: Looks like not all jurisdictions got the ballots out, at least not all of them. If this is any more than a few isolated situations, then I hope the feds go after them. It also, however, looks like its not IL SecState who handles this, its the 110 counties or jurisdictions that do it. So, the blog entry on "The Blaze" is clearly not actually a report of news, its an opinion going at times outside the facts. Still, looks like there could be fire there somewhere.

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 11:34 AM) Why exactly does this pitching staff make the farm system look better? I see a bunch of fringe guys and bullpen arms. Not a single blue chip pitching prospect. I'm a fan of Santos Rodriguez, Remenowsky, and Griffith, but the names on this list are not even close to a good example of an improving farm system. With Hudson gone and Dayan losing his rookie status, I'd wager that the White Sox farm system is at the absolute bottom of the league, somewhere in the bottom 3 for certain. I think AA is an important step - usually seen as a big jump from A+, and the year that often shows who the real prospects are. I consider everyone on that starting rotation as interesting. Shirek, last year before his injury, was looking like a guy who might be ready for a jump. Axelrod and Doyle are older, but still have been very successful and may turn into something. Griffith is still very talented and recovered nicely from his injury. Sauer is the only guy in the rotation who I would call weak, but he's not a guy I'd write off just yet. I agree that none of the 5 are "blue chip" in the sense of top 10 prospect at level for pitchers, but you have 4 arms that are all the types I'd say have a 25%+ chance of excelling at AA and becoming just that. The bullpen looks downright filthy to me, in terms of how they will perform numbers-wise. Rem is older but intriguing, Jones is a very toolsy pitcher who bears watching, Bellamy is also a guy who looks likely to be a major leaguer. That's a decent field in the pen. No one of those guys is Top 10 among AA pitchers going in, I'd say. But I'll make a wager with you - I'd bet at least one form the rotation and at least two from the pen will look like future major league serious contributors by the end of 2011. Few will actually reach the majors in 2011, but a number of them will look like 2012 deliveries.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 11:44 AM) Holder and the DOJ , doing a bang up job with the military ballots. Wonderful oversight boys. New York, Illinois...who's next? Somehow if it were an inner city precinct I believe the reaction from the AG would be different. I feel like I ask this every time you post something... what are you referring to? What is the story here?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 08:17 AM) I saw an article about that debate. Apparently, when asked to comment on a recent Supreme Court decision that she didn't like or agree with, she couldn't remember a recent USSC decision. At all. She was already behind by 19 points in the last poll, and apparently she struggled in the debate. I'd say she has basically no chance, which is good - one less crazy to worry about getting into office. Anyone know if Reid and Angle have a debate scheduled? Answering my own question... I just saw that Reid and Angle have their one and only debate tonight. Angle has been even more reclusive than O'Donnell, so this should be interesting.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 08:51 AM) Sarah Palin Part Deux O'Donnell isn't nearly as slick as Palin.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 08:15 AM) Christine O'Donnell needs to study science, constitutional law and Supreme Court decisions: I saw an article about that debate. Apparently, when asked to comment on a recent Supreme Court decision that she didn't like or agree with, she couldn't remember a recent USSC decision. At all. She was already behind by 19 points in the last poll, and apparently she struggled in the debate. I'd say she has basically no chance, which is good - one less crazy to worry about getting into office. Anyone know if Reid and Angle have a debate scheduled?