NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 08:04 AM) lol at the comments. I really need to stop doing that. No wonder I'm so arrogant. That's weird, I don't see any comments posted yet.

Obama is going.

No one outside the clubhouse knows who it was - this is all guesswork. So I'm not going to put in AJ. But I agree with Ozzie's reaction to it, no matter who it was, and I agree with his even better quotes the next day. Even if it was AJ, point still stands, and I'm glad he made it.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 11:36 AM) Most fans stopped caring about this season months ago......when the fans show apathy towards the team, the team shows apathy towards the game. I don't blame Ozzie for melting down (in fact, I'm glad he did)....however, I can't blame the players for "checking out" when the the majority of the "fan support" did so a few months ago. If we want a winning attitude throughout the organization, it has to exist within the fan base as well. Did you read the thread before posting? The Sox drew 35k last night, even though the team is out of it (some are DET fans I am sure, but not enough to make up 35k). Your idea of the fans not supporting the team is absurd and patently false. Also, are you seriously saying it is the job of the fans to motivate the players? Because I'm pretty sure it should be the other way around.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 07:33 PM) That's correct. A true story: had to do a strategic plan for a company in MBA (one of many presentations of course) - we did presentation on Ford, and no joke, a year before they did it, we pretty much NAILED what they would do, all the way down to the brands that they sold off. I must say that was one of the best parts of the program because looking back, we made the same decisions that the executives made. Yeah, I can't really blame Ford here anyway. GM and Chrysler got some serious competitive advantages via bankruptcy and the bailouts, while Ford managed to avoid that and are penalized essentially. Not a surprise they need to find an edge somewhere else.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 06:56 PM) Think tank report on the scale of government subsidies to various forms of energy generation over the past 6 years. These numbers of course don't include external subsidies, like building new highways, maintaining the current electricity grid, etc. Idiotic.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 08:54 AM) The French Have Big Plans for U.S. High-Speed Rail If a French company can do this, why the hell can't GE or a US company do it?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) I've been covering this in the Dem thread. Basically, the logic is this; In the 1880's, the Supreme Court declared that Corporations have all the same rights as people. In the 1960's, the Court ruled that money = speech, and thus buying ads and giving to politicians was a form of free speech. The logic of those decisions suggests that corporations should be able to spend whatever they want on political campaigns. And it sure looks like the Court is going to do exactly that; there is a case before them where a corporate-funded entity wanted to release an anti-Hillary movie before teh 2008 primaries, the FEC said no, and that case is now before the Court. Based on the oral arguments, it seems like the court is apt to overturn ALL campaign finance regulations for corporations. Basically, a corporation will be able to literally sponsor a candidate. Stephen Colbert's Doritos funded campaign in 2008 would be perfectly legal. The Obama Campaign, sponsored by Citigroup. Raytheon presents the Sarah Palin super-happy funtime hour. Literally. Furthermore, until someone brings a similar case regarding individual campaign contribution limits...it's also fairly likely that for a time, the individual contribution limits may exist while the corporate limits may be gone. So, therefore, corporations will actually count more than individual people. Well that is not good. But I understand why those decisions were made, I think. I guess my take is, the best way to address this is to legislate election reform so that businesses and citizens are on an even playing field - but take money out of the equation entirely. If a max contribution amount per person and per business at some flat rate won't work for that legally, then the only alternative is to go fully publically financed. This is one of those cases where I am 100% OK with the government taxing more - funding elections. Make people achieve bar levels by signatures and other non-financial methods to get on ballots, do layered run-offs if necessary, etc.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 03:03 PM) Just wait till the supreme court rules for Citizens United. Explain?

So we have 3 of the Top 20 in that league, plus a guy who just missed the cut (Shoemaker), and another guy who sounds like he has good potential (M Gonzalez). Pretty nice to see.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 03:17 PM) Sure that sounds great in theory but look at how it really turns out. Look at University Village as one example. That's still a heck of a lot better than, say, Robert Taylor, or Cabrini Green. Reality is, most of these folks will never get their feet under them. The idea is to try to set something up so that they have at least some better opportunities, and hopefully a percentage of them can claw their way out.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 03:07 PM) They haven't replaced but a small fraction of the housing in reality. Of course not - that wasn't the plan anyway. The plan was to build some new housing that was high grade enough to draw non-assisted buyers, but assisted buyers would be mixed in, and then to provide assistance with housing costs in the open market for most of them.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 02:50 PM) Even with the destruction and non-replacement of nearly every housing project in the city? Especially with that, in fact. They've destroyed all sorts of projects, which were awful for everyone involved, in favor of mixed income housing, which is a far better idea. Anything you do will have negatives of course, but there is no doubt in my mind that mixed housing is a better idea that piling all the poor people into projects.

No Brady Shoemaker.

Appy League is the first one to show up that the Sox have an affiliate for. They placed 3 of the Top 20: 6. David Holmberg, lhp, Bristol (White Sox) 11. Trayce Thompson, of, Bristol (White Sox) 15. Santos Rodriguez, lhp, Bristol (White Sox) Here are the detailed reports on each: 6. David Holmberg, lhp, Bristol (White Sox) B-T: R-L Ht.: 6-4 Wt.: 220 Age: 18 Drafted: White Sox '09 (2) The sixth prep lefty taken in the 2009 draft, Holmberg went to the White Sox in the second round. Brought along slowly as a pro, he won his final two starts for Bristol because they were the first two in which he completed five innings. Six-foot-4 and a bit soft-bodied, Holmberg has room to grow stronger and improve upon his present high-80s velocity. He sits at 86-88 mph and touches 90 from a straight overhand delivery, which aids him in getting good plane to the plate. Quick hand speed enables Holmberg to spin quality 12-to-6 curveballs with above-average break and depth. He mixes in a plus changeup and throws an occasional slider. His secondary stuff and precocious feel for locating his pitches and for changing speeds marks him as a future mid-rotation candidate, particularly if he adds a few ticks to his fastball. 11. Trayce Thompson, of, Bristol (White Sox) B-T: R-R Ht.: 6-3 Wt.: 195 Age: 18 Drafted: White Sox '09 (2) Though his average plummeted to .188 after he finished the season in an 0-for-18 skid, Thompson's athletic bloodlines were obvious. His father Mychal, a 6-foot-10 center, was the No. 1 overall pick in the 1978 NBA draft and spent 12 years in the league. The younger Thompson, a second-round pick in June, excited Appy League observers with raw physicality (he's 6-foot-3 and 195 pounds), tremendous bat speed and big-time power potential. As evidenced by Thompson's zero home runs, four walks and 33 strikeouts, those tools didn't translate into immediate results. Scouts questioned his baseball instincts as an amateur, and he struggled to identify and hit breaking balls with his long swing. Thompson did earn high marks for his intensity level, plus arm strength and above-average speed. In time, he could become an asset in center field. 15. Santos Rodriguez, lhp, Bristol (White Sox) B-T: L-L Ht.: 6-5 Wt.: 185 Age: 21 Signed: Dominican Republic '06 (Braves) The White Sox acquired Rodriguez and three other prospects when they traded Javier Vazquez to the Braves in December 2008. Though Chicago intended to try Rodriguez in the rotation, they instead assigned the 21-year-old to Bristol and kept him in a relief role, marking the third straight season in which he worked in a Rookie ball bullpen. He worked four scoreless innings with eight strikeouts at low Class A Kannapolis after the Appy season ended. Rodriguez features a plus-plus fastball during most outings, topping out at 97 mph and sitting at 95 with late movement. The pitch features incredible plane by virtue of his 6-foot-5 height, and Appy Leaguers struggled to lift the pitch, going homerless during his 27 innings. He throws a changeup with above-average arm speed that neutralizes righthanders. Despite his arm strength, Rodriguez still walks too many batters to rank as a surefire relief prospect, though his control improved as the season progressed. He also doesn't have a usable breaking ball at this point, as his slider doesn't consistently show enough tilt to be graded even as fringe-average.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 02:15 PM) I'm guessing that will be way less than what King Richie the Second has been doing for decades anyway... Richie II has been far better for the poor in Chicago than Richie I was.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 02:35 PM) When you say you can see Chicago what does that mean? A small speck of what looks like the Sears Willis Tower? Wind turbines are much smaller than that and probably wouldn't be as easy to spot 30 miles out in the water. And if they are then build them 40 or 50 miles out. Actually I'd think that's probably true - a 50 foot tall object, which is no taller than a large iron freighter, is probably only visible 10 or 15 miles out at best. Lake Superior may be more ideal being larger, but its further from a significant draw off the grid.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 01:40 PM) One thing I might get made fun of for, but it still surprised me. The sun times did a piece where they bought a bar/restaurant and were going to see how much corrupt dealings they'd find in Chicago. They didn't find any except a tip from a government worker about how to avoid paying taxes on things. I think at the alderman level there is obviously rampant corruption, as seen by the # of indictments., but it's possible that there is much less "greasing" than we realize. Granted had they opened up a fake hospital it might be different story. Its kind of like the steroids thing. People see that individual players/politicians do it, and they just assume "they all do it". But this is simply not the case. They don't all do it. Some do.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 01:24 PM) To some extent. I wouldn't paint with a broad brush but when you go to a rally and stand next to someone holding a sign like the one in that photo, I have to wonder what kind of person you are. Oh I agree with that.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) Really? I thought I said this: I meant the royal "you", but, do you agree with the writer here or not?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:54 PM) Not sure what that means. It means that you are taking the motivations of some % of a group, and applying it to all of them. Its called stereotyping, or if used against a specific class or race of people, its called bigotry. Something I'm pretty sure you'd say is bad. But the author, with your apparent agreement, is doing just that. Ironically, the very picture he used is a perfect illustration of stereotyping and unfounded categorization, the exact thing he is supposedly railing against. "the cause" is not racism or class warfare - it is simply the motivation for SOME of those people.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:51 PM) And what if we don't even break even? As has been illustrated before, let's again look at the layers here... --IOC and Chicago2016 say a net benefit of something like $16B is likely, plus long term stuff not measured --If they are wrong, this other group says only $4.4B, plus again, some other long term benefits --If even the most conservative folks are wrong, and we only make a little or break even, we still get the long term benefits --If everyone is horrifically wrong, like beyond what history says is remotely likely, there is a $1B insurance policy to go into --If the Olympics are an all-time unmitigated disaster and we exhaust the $1B of insurnace, we have the same private donors who have said they will have about a $500M safety net We would have to dive under ALL that, to end up footing a bill, and would STILL end up with the long term benefits in infrastructure and tourism. Asking "what if we don't break even" is like asking "what if a nuclear bomb is set off in Chicago"? Yes, its possible, and yes, it would be a disaster (different scale), but you cannot allow such a narrow possibility to prevent you from going after the likely large gains.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) Interesting reader email from Sullivan's blog... Those things are true, for SOME of the people complaining. Not sure what % the "some" is, and neither are you.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:47 PM) I'd be fine with the Olympics being abolished. Ah, now we've gotten to it. I figured there had to be some underlying reason you hadn't mentioned yet.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:34 PM) Poor people always get screwed. I've seen firsthand what's happened in Atlanta with the displaced. Please share about Atlanta. I do remember stories that they shipped homeless people out to Austin and Phoenix, which sucks. But these were vagrants in any case. Are you saying that poor people who were legally living somewhere somehow got screwed out of their homes? Because that is news to me.