NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Oct 7, 2010 -> 12:28 PM) This was suppose to be the strength of the team. They failed. If you need more offense, that means the staff is bad and in 2010 they were. Didn't the "ace" start 0-3? Despite losing their best pitcher (Peavy) for most of the season, the Sox staff compiled a team ERA of 4.06, around the middle of the league. They didn't fail, and they weren't bad - considering that major loss to the staff, being league average in the AL in ERA is actually a pretty decent accomplishment. Since Peavy had a few good outings and seemed on track again when he was injured, if he continued pitching, you probably would have seen the Sox be better than average. Now, even with Peavy, they weren't going to be best in the league or anything - but your "fail" and "bad" characterization is a laughable overstatement. The Sox won 88 games, so clearly their strengths outnumbered their flaws. The biggest areas where they clearly were "bad" were DH, and an ice cold April-May start for the offense in general. Then there were smaller factors, like Ozzie's coaching, Jenks' lousy pitching, Teahen's defense, AJ's s***ty hitting until late in the season, an awful decision to basically hand their chief rival a perfect fill-in for Morneau on a silver platter, and an apparent inability to get it done against a very good Twins team.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 7, 2010 -> 12:24 PM) IIRC correctly when the bill originated in the house the republicans were shut out of the meetings. Then, to try and save face, the senate offered up a bi-partisan meeting to discuss the various provisions of the bill, but basically stated out front that it was their way or the highway. The WH also chimed into the debate, again "inviting" the GOP to various meetings, but ultimately they were nothing more than "you can sit in the meeting but it's not like we're going to do anything you want." and IIRC, the stimulus was cut by moderate dems, not any concessions of the GOP. Even still, my point was the bi-partisan efforts aren't real 95% of the time, and it's not ONLY the GOP. Most of the time it's the party not in power, because the main selling point at election time is ALWAYS "they've screwed everything up and did everything wrong and we voted the opposite way so vote for us and we'll make it better." You're right that it's not ONLY the GOP. Its also true that when the time comes that the Republicans take control of both houses (probably won't in 2010, but will again at some point, assuredly), the Dems will probably do the same damn thing. But... right now, within the timeframe of the Obama administration, there is no doubt that the Republican Party has been far and away more likely to simply refuse any discussion and do nothing other than stand in the way. Part of that is the simple fact that they are the minority, and its hard to be obstructionist when you are the majority. And one could even make an argument that the Republicans should in fact do exactly that, because they don't have the seats to do anything else. No doubt in my mind though, the Congressional Dems AND Obama have done more to extend an olive branch that the GOP in Congress. Not that its saying much. Both parties could learn a lot by looking back to the 90's, and seeing that even highly opposite leaders like Clinton and Gingrich, despite their own huge flaws, both understood the concept of comprimise. No one in either party seems to excel at that right now.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 7, 2010 -> 10:22 AM) RS interviews Obama. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/209395 No surprise there, this has been the GOP tactic so far during Obama's administration. Block everything they can, offer nothing new and no solutions.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 7, 2010 -> 07:03 AM) Orlando Cabrera classy as ever: "he and the umpire pitched a no-hitter. He gave him every pitch. we had no chance." That dude does way too much whining for a guy being paid millions to play baseball.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 6, 2010 -> 11:27 PM) That's a different issue, but a serious one for the department if true. It puts the FD in an awful position - you are telling firefighters to stand there and watch a building burn down.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Oct 6, 2010 -> 12:59 PM) We will be looking for the LH bat this off season. I don't see Kotsay back and maybe Teahan becomes trade bait? No one is trading for Teahen, he's an overpaid utility guy. Only way he moves is a bad deal for bad deal scenario, because the Sox historically do not ship money out with players in trades. At this point, he's very useful as a utility player (RF, 1B, 3B, DH, maybe LF) with a decent LH bat, so you really just have to move on and use him in that role.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Oct 6, 2010 -> 10:46 AM) You don't trade your strength to fill some other need. There are other ways to improve the team rather than trade away our starting pitching or good talent like Quentin. I am not sure this team needs any major overhaul anyway as long as we can re sign the leaders that may go to free agency. The bullpen is where I see the major need There are only three ways to acquire talent: --Sign free agents --Trades --Develop internally Developing internally has been a weakness for the Sox for a while, though there has been recent improvement... but that takes years to get up to speed. Signing expensive free agents is problematic for a team with an already high committed payroll. That leaves trades. And how do you propose to improve the team without trading away some talent? You can't ship a dozen Lillibridge types and get one really good player, it doesn't work that way. Buehrle, Peavy, Floyd, Danks, Jackson, Sale... plus maybe Garcia, and maybe Pena... that's 6 to 8 major league starters. Most teams in baseball are happy to have 4 real major league quality starters, 5 is great. It makes absolute sense for the Sox to trade from a position of depth to improve in places where there isn't depth, or even anyone at all who is up to the level of play the need to be, I am all about trading one of Floyd or Danks for the right deal, and I think its the best way for the Sox to improve the team. Young, cheap, solid starting pitching is the most valuable general commodity in baseball. So when you have the rare chance to move one of those and still have a strong rotation, to get a major improvement at another position... you do it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 6, 2010 -> 08:14 AM) A guy that I think fits Kenny's M.O. very well and might be, at least under the radar, on the trade block...Billy Butler from the Royals. KW knows the Royals well, he's a guy who's beaten us before, he isn't hugely expensive, he has some limitations that would keep him from being a big cost guy, he tentatively fills one of those 1b/DH roles with a guy who should give around an .850 OPS, and he's blocking 2 of the Royals young guys (Kila Ka'aihue and Eric Hosmer, who has a shot to arrive this year). Good call, especially since the Royals have previously said Kila is unavailable and Hosmer is probably untouchable for anything other than a blockbuster offer.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 6, 2010 -> 07:39 AM) The complete sellout of the government in exchange for campaign finance contributions and the explosion of this system of legalized corruption that we currently have. I don't think any other problem is even close. If I had to pick a 2nd...I'd go with the decline of the 4th estate as a skeptical organization and the rise of cheap and easy "he-said, she-said" reporting or the rise of "here is verbatim what their press release said" reporting. The idea that there has been this decrease in comity from an era like the last decade or two where we had things like the Willie Horton ad, the Southern Strategy, machines like the Kennedys, a Congress loaded with legitimate racists...etc. strikes me as wrong. Campaign finance I'll give you as a rival for the hyperbole and extremism. The others, not in the same ballpark, IMO.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 05:58 PM) The single biggest current problem? I think that's hyperbole. Tell me a bigger problem in the current culture of politics. Not an issue - but a behavior, tendency, or method.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 05:21 PM) Because they can't win on the issues. Even when they have facts, they are so unconfident in those facts that they exagerate them to try and make their point even more and then end up looking foolish. QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 05:35 PM) lol, I could easily say this about virtually anyone running for office at any given time. Exactly, and I'd add that this hyperbole and run to the gutters we see from both parties in the past decade or two is the single biggest current problem in politics in this country.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 12:40 PM) are you saying 300 sucked, or the first Superman reboot I'll go with both, 300 being the more sucky.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 01:05 PM) A communal fireprotection service sounds like socialism and that's wrong. There are areas of the country without any fire protection services. I'm not certain who would write the law that fireprotection was required? Would the county write it for a town? The state for a county? The feds for the states for the county for the town? I'm guessing this isn't a legal issue. I highly doubt you can find an area in the lower 48 that does not have 911 coverage and police, fire and EMS service available to it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 12:59 PM) Why is fire-fighting even an optional service? How do you get homeowner's insurance without it, and what kind of bank wouldn't want the property securing the debt to be protected? I really cannot see any benefits from having this sort of system. There are so many levels where this sort of set-up is idiotic, and probably illegal.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 11:32 AM) t passed a rule after this incident allowing the rest of that county to set up similar opt-out systems. Court case to follow, and I doubt this will stand up.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 08:50 AM) They'd probably save people from the building but not attempt to put the fire out. This is another area where this becomes dicey. Each state has slightly different rules about Duty to Act - and its entirely possible that this ordinance is in violation of that, which means its going to be overruled in court if challenged. But The rules are different from state to state, so I don't know.

Also, Infante was at 15.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Oct 5, 2010 -> 08:00 AM) Santos Rodriguez was 20th for the Carolina League W-S didn't have any others? That kind of surprises me. I thought Brandon Short would be in there.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 4, 2010 -> 02:17 PM) i disagree. people didnt think ledger was a joker type actor, because they didnt know what type of joker that nolan was going to portray, but ledger played many different roles(comedy, drama, teeny bopper, hero adventure). david cross has pretty much played the same sort of character with little difference. i like it, i just dont think nolan would want him. the riddler is going to have an edge, of that im sure Robin Williams?

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Oct 4, 2010 -> 03:28 PM) Sorry, I should have specified that it's just single women who are engaging in FORNICATION. Nuns are probably ok. This is what I've been saying for a while, that while there is anger and stupidity on both sides of the aisle, the right half of the GOP in the past decade does have a serious monopoly on hate and bigotry. Or at least, the right half of the GOP politicians do - not sure that number applies to their voters.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 4, 2010 -> 02:50 PM) Jim Demint is a piece of s***. An absolute piece of s***. What did he do now?

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Oct 4, 2010 -> 01:09 PM) Same here. But your taxes do, at least, partially fund the cost of responders - if nothing else the 911 Dispatch center. The other thing I wonder about is what if you rent? Who is responsible for paying then? The tenant? The landlord? Yeah, I'd guess this model won't last. Way too many lawsuits could easily come from it.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 4, 2010 -> 12:38 PM) Using Trent Reznor for the music was awesome as well. Yeah, Reznor + Atticus Ross + Grieg = fantastic music for that scene, and the same goes for the movie generally (minus Grieg).

QUOTE (G&T @ Oct 4, 2010 -> 12:05 PM) Not from the county, only the city of South Fulton. Frankly though, it makes no sense. I have seen many shared services agreements, but nothing like this. It's incredibly dangerous. I've seen it come up in the EMS world, but not fire or police. Some municipalities moved to private EMS providers, and in some rare cases, people were denied care because of a lack of paid fees or managed care insurnace demands, etc. Privatized fire, police and EMS are, IMO, asking for trouble. This is an example of that.

Highly recommend Social Network. Casting, acting, and especially the writing, all fantastic. But the real kicker to me, and I think people might miss it, is the cinematography. Its the kind of film where you don't think much about that aspect, but it was just fantastic. You want to see a small example of a really great scene that ties together stellar cinematography, wonderful musical adaptation and putting two diametric emotions (competitive tension and monotony) at play in harmony - watch carefully the boat race scene (I'm not giving anything away here). Its 2 minutes of director awesomeness. I love me some Fincher.